Best thermal scope in the $3k-$3.5K range?

Lots of good things posted on here about the Bering hogster line by Kirsch. I have a super hogster showing up tomorrow. Fits right in your price range. Look up kirschs videos he’s posted on here
 
I really like my hogster 35..Only draw back is if one wants to record..Have to purchase a recorder to do so and that adds extra weight to the rifle..I have not got the SH yet but I believe it's going to be a great thermal. But I would look at the Hogsters and I did and I purchased..Dan

The SH has record but no audio..
 
Last edited:
My neighbor just got the ATN Thor4 and I have used it some and it is in that price range. We used it on several hogs the other night. He has that another cheaper FLIR.

The ATN is a lot better than the flir, but the other night I right after shooting at a hog the screen went white and we had to turn it off and back on get it back where you could see. Don't know that it has done that before, but don't know what caused it.

If I spend $3K+ I want to be able to record.

I was surprised that a guy on my lease had a Trijicon that was about $8500 and it would not record?
 
Last edited:
Just got my super hogster this morning and havent spent alot of time with it yet but i can tell you at first glance its way better than the flir pts233 i sold. Very reasonable on pricing also for everything it does
 
The answer depends on the terrain you are hunting. What is the best for hunting in the heavy cover of Maine vs the wide open plains of ND is different. The needs for hunting over a feeder is different than wide open calling, etc.

In general, I would have to say the Super Hogster from Bering Optics. For this price, your main three choices would be:

Bering Optics Super Hogster
Bering Optics Hogster R35
Pulsar Thermion XQ38

Without knowing more, I would go with the Super Hogster. Here is a chart comparing these 3 models:
thermion2.jpg


If you want to record without having an external DVR, then I would recommend the Super Hogster or the Thermion. The Hogster 35 has video out but requires a DVR.

The Hogsters are smaller, more versatile as they can be used as scanners and scopes, and have a longer warranty, and come with a mount. The Hogsters have been so reliable it is hard to not go that route. The Thermion's shape will work better on a bolt gun than the Hogsters. The rest is mostly preference. You can always give me a call and we can discuss over the phone. If you are interested, send me a PM, and can send my cell number.
 
I have the Thermion XQ50 and really like it. I have killed about 10 coyotes with it so far and done quite a bit of calling with it out in really open country. Have also killed half a dozen or so pigs with it and a lot of raccoons. It is to me a very capable optic, and easily does everything I need. That would be pushing $4k though and maybe more than you want. It is also a base mag of 3.5x which might be higher than you would like if you do much pig hunting at closer ranges in the brush.

You could go down to the Thermion XQ38 though. $500 cheaper and less base mag would help you out on the closer stuff and should still be very capable. On board recording is good with the Thermions too. Really the only drawback to the Thermions is the batteries, but so far they have not been an issue for me.

Hogster 35 would be good too. Very capable, but no recording and it uses CR-123 batteries.
 
Last edited:
Korey,

I have been watching a few of your videos with the super hogster. Is the video more grainy than what you actually see through the scope? I previously had a Pulsar Trail XQ50 and ended up selling it. Now that I am looking to get back in the thermal game many of the previous units that I was looking at are discontinued.

I would like to know how this scope compares to the Trail XQ50?

Recording is not important to me, what are the differences in the 35 VS Super when it actually comes to clarity?
 
I will give you my two cents. The picture is better than the video. I've got a Trijicon IR Hunter MK3 60mm that is sitting in my safe because I like the super Hogster so much...
 
Originally Posted By: Rookietjx2I will give you my two cents. The picture is better than the video. I've got a Trijicon IR Hunter MK3 60mm that is sitting in my safe because I like the super Hogster so much...

And I have a HALO LR sitting in mine LOL I love the Super Hogster so much..
 
That is also good to know because before talking with you guys the best scope I have looked through was a Halo LR.

Any issues with the super hogster holding a zero? Out of the 3 Pulsars we had in the group 2 of them would not hold zeros.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bhallowsKorey, I would like to know how this scope compares to the Trail XQ50? From a spec standpoint the FOV and Base Mag are virtually identical. Bering achieved this with a 35mm lens by using the 12 µm core. From an image standpoint it really depends on humidity. I believe they will be close. Background detail probably a slight edge to the Pulsar. Animal detail edge to the Super Hogster in my opinion.

Originally Posted By: bhallowsI have been watching a few of your videos with the super hogster. Is the video more grainy than what you actually see through the scope? You tend to loose quality with recording on most thermal scopes. Bering may be more than most because they use so much compression in their recordings. The second factor is humidity. The higher the humidity the more grainy the image gets. Most of my nighttime videos are 80-100% humidity. However, with that said, I have never seen a thermal that handles humidity as well as all of the Hogsters.

Originally Posted By: bhallowsRecording is not important to me, what are the differences in the 35 VS Super when it actually comes to clarity? 35 will have a little better background detail, while the Super will have better animal detail. Also, the Super Hogster's PIP is much clearer and it handles digital zoom much better. One of the other big factors, besides recording, is I really like the Super Hogster's reticles better. The reason to recommend the 35 would be if a person is hunting tighter fields and needs more FOV and less mag.
 
Originally Posted By: bhallowsThat is also good to know because before talking with you guys the best scope I have looked through was a Halo LR.

Any issues with the super hogster holding a zero? Out of the 3 Pulsars we had in the group 2 of them would not hold zeros.

Don't get me wrong the HALO LR has an amazing picture for sure.. The super Hogster does also.

In no way is the Halo LR 2 to 3 times Better..

I enjoy all the features that the super Hogster has that the Halo does not have..

I have the Super Hogster sighted in for 4 different rifles and move back and forth between all 4 and have never had any issue with it not holding zero.. I love it..
 
Preface....I’m a little long winded so just skip if you don’t want to read. This is my opinion alone and I am no expert in the field of thermals.

I will give you my two cents on some of the thermals in the 2.5k to 3.5k range. I have been hunting with night vision for well over 10 years and thermal going on 4 years. My first thermal was a Pulsar Apex XQ50. I sold it, thinking I was upgrading to the next level, for a Flir PTS536. The PTS536 was a very incredible optic. I used it for several months then picked up a Pulsar XP50. What a huge difference the XP50 was…..at first. I sold the XP50 and had a Trijicon for a short while. Then had buyer’s remorse and moved back to another XP50. Everything is about resolution, magnification and FOV. The XP50 at 640x480 had a native mag at 1.6x…..at 3.2x it would resolute to 320x240. My preference for native mag is between 2.5x and 3.0x. The Apex would resolute to 336x252 and The SH would resolute to 348x261 at the same 3.2x mag for the XP50.

In the end I sold both the Flir and the XP50 and bought another Apex XQ50. This thermal did everything I wanted at the time. All the features I wanted and needed and nothing more. I used that scope until just recently as I made the decision to upgrade again. Now remember, I’m “upgrading” but that really doesn’t mean much if I’m staying in the 384x288 resolution. I simply thought the new Thermion was the real deal. I purchased a Thermion XQ50. I was pretty pumped up when I got the scope. I have a Nightforce 5-25x50 that was off a rifle at the time. The Thermion was actually BIGGER. It was huge on the rifle. I did some field test between the Apex XQ50 and the Thermion XQ50. The Apex was simply better. It was brighter and provided more detail. Sad thing was I had sold the Apex to a friend of mine and was in the process of getting it to him. Kicking myself now as I should have kept that scope……………….Then comes the Super Hogster. I made the jump and purchased one. The size alone was a huge reason. I also compared the Super Hogster to the Thermion XQ50. And again the new SH thermal to me to provide more detail overall. I was very disappointed in the Thermion. Please, don’t get me wrong it is a great thermal, but…..

I had a chance to view side by side my old Apex XQ50 and the SH last weekend. Both were pretty good with some things going to the Apex and some going to the SH. What I found most interesting is both scopes have very close native magnifications in the specs. 2.8 for the Apex and 2.9 for the SH. Looking through the scopes there was a significant difference. One or the other isn’t as it seems. The magnification was significantly higher in the SH or significantly lower in the Apex. This also gave the Apex a better FOV. The detail was an edge to the SH to me though. My eyes preferred the SH while my friends eyes preferred the Apex…..go figure.

So for what it comes down to for me is size, price, quality, ease of use, size….did I mention size? Without getting in 5k range and having an awesome 640x480 that has a native mag of 1.6 or 2.0…..when the optic is doubled it isn’t much different than the SH. I am really liking the SH for the price point. It may not be everyone’s cup of tea though. There are a few things I really don’t like about it. 1. The startup time is closer to 15sec. 2. Even though it stated there is a manual NUC option and you can even change it to manual NUC it will still auto NUC. 3. The picture is grainy overall compared to some other thermals in the same class and there is definitely more pixelization than other thermals in the same class. Neither is bad at all but it is there. 4. The app is rather weak but works even though only on Android at this time. You Apple folks are SOL. 6. You cannot site the scope while zooming in. 7. The menu is simple….very simple. This is good and bad. I do wish it had some more user control for environment. 8. Background detail is rather weak. I've been told by Bering Optics that it relates to the 12 micron core.

What I like about the SH. 1. Did I mention the size?!? Seriously! Probably the best 35mm 384x288 thermal out there. I have only compared it to 50mm objectives. 2. Battery options. In the menu you can chose from 3v to rechargeable 3.7v and use any 5v usb battery pack. Very versatile. 3. QD mount is effective. 4. On board inclinometer. This is awesome! 5. Picture in Picture. Personally I like Pulsar’s better but this one works. 6. Only 3 buttons. And last but not least did I mention the size?






 
nortac, thank you for your comments and welcome to PM. I did want to mention about Manual NUC. Yes, when you set it to Manual, it does still do some early NUCing. I was told by Bering this is necessary. I don't have the exact technical reason. However, I was told after the scope settles in, it will stop NUCing when on this setting. I haven't tested it as I actually prefer auto-NUC. I will say on auto-NUC there are times I still manually NUC the SH. I rarely ever had to do this on the 35, but on the Super Hogster I find that a few times a night I may have to manually NUC the scope to get a better image. I am sure this algorithm will improve over time.

As for the startup time, it is a little slow. If this is an issue, put the scope on standby, and it will be virtually instantaneous when you need it on.

My comments on image are what I have said since the first time I looked through the SH. The background detail is OK, not the best I have ever seen and not the worst. However, the animal detail for a 384 scope is very good. I don't shoot at backgrounds, I kill coyotes. I prefer the better background detail on my scanner not my weapon's sight. In my opinion it is the best value in the thermal industry for anyone needing around 3x mag in a coyote weapon's sight.
 

Nortac, I personally think Pulsar messed up big time when they dropped the Apex line of scopes. I have the Apex XQ38 and find it is all I need. Given the fact that the Apex scopes held up very well, held zero and at a lower price point, they were hard to beat.
 
Back
Top