Sub £1000 thermal scope

I know it has been covered before but thermal imaging equipment seems to have become a lot more popular recently and, in the hope travel returns to something like normal, I am pondering thermal imaging equipment. This is below the big psychological barrier of  £1000 and looks like it may be good enough to be a useful bit of kit. Anyone any thoughts?




  • John Wright

    Hello Steve, Richard Webb mentioned this new model to me last week and since then I’ve been reading on-line reviews. I’m seriously thinking about getting the XM22 on what I’ve read so far but I just can’t get hold of one in the UK! They just aren’t available in the UK at the moment as far as I can see, with one company saying they won’t be available from them until March. I’m not sure if the difficulty in the UK is because it is a new product or Brexit ‘teething’ problems!

  • Stephen Babbs

    Since I submitted this, I’ve had the same problem. I’ve had quotes of 4-5 months.

  • Morgan Churchill

    Whoever does get this first, I hope you folks post a review! This device sounds intriguing to me as well, as I could actually afford this model vs all the other ones I have seen people talk about so far!


    There is a new smartphone called Cat S60 with in-built thermal imager. No idea how useful it is for mammalwatching.


    Also, there is a thermal imager called Hikvision for about $500. It has wider angle but poorer resolution; reportedly you can see a vole at 20 m and a rabbit at 50 m. It is used in connection with smartphone and has wi-fi.

  • stevebabbs

    The best I could get is Scott country who are expected it in March so I have ordered from them.

  • Murray Kirkland Lord

    Any updates from anyone who has tried this model yet?

  • Murray Lord

    Adding a comment to this old thread for the benefit of anyone searching on this topic in future.

    I recently purchased the Pulsar Axion XM30F, Pulsar’s current model (early 2023) in this price range. I paid AUD 1600. I’ve not used other thermal scopes more than briefly so I can’t compare how well it picks up mammals with other models, beyond saying it seems to do the job exactly how I hoped it would. Having only seen pygmy possums twice before I got it, I’ve now seen them five times in the last six weeks. The inbuilt camera / video works OK, albeit at low resolution, and you can stream to a phone or tablet which could be useful in some situations.

    So what’s the catch in getting this model compared to ones that cost twice as much? I think it is the field of view. The lens is described as 3x, whereas many other Pulsar models are 2.5x. It has a relatively small sensor which probably amplifies the effect of a longer lens. The field of view is only 7.8 x 5.9 degrees, or 13.7m at 100m. The XG35 delivers 12.5 x 9.4 degrees, or 21.9 metres at 100m. How much this matters will depend a bit on the habitat you’re in, but scanning the canopy from within a forested area can take a while.


Leave a Reply