Pulsar HD19S 384X288 Thermal Monocular

Reviews, comments, and information on current thermal imaging devices.
Post Reply
Ken
Site Admin
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:11 pm

Pulsar HD19S 384X288 Thermal Monocular

Post by Ken » Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:10 pm

This is my little review of the Pulsar HD19S after owning it for a few weeks. I've since sold the unit (regrettably) so I have no pics to offer. I sold it because I thought the ATN OTS-HD 384X288 would be an upgrade. It turns out the Pulsar had many options that made it stand out above the ATN unit.

Both units had a microbolometer resolution of 384X288 and a refresh rate of 30hz, but the Pulsar offered a better viewing experience, was lighter, and didn't have all of these extra bells and whistles that really just got in the way. The viewing experience bested the ATN unit because the ATN unit had this strange auto exposure feature that kept blowing out the highlights when I would pan around. The Pulsar didn't suffer from any strange exposure issues and simply worked beautifully.

The nicest feature of the Pulsar HD19S is the auto calibration. You don't need to do anything, it just works. If you want manual calibration you can do that as well and the unit will still close the aperture automatically so there's no need to place something like a lens cap over the front during calibration. This makes a world of difference when you're out in the field trying to juggle multiple devices. And speaking of lens caps, the Pulsar's is built in and covers the front lens with a simple turn, iris style. What more could you ask for? I highly recommend the Pulsar units. There are a few different versions to choose from based on your needs and they all vary in price. The Pulsar HD19S is the one I tested but there is also an HD19a, a lower end LD version, and higher end XD versions. These have difference refresh rates and microbolometer resolutions depending on what you want to spend, but they all have auto calibration which I'm finding to be pretty crucial. Just make sure you're reading the microbolometer resolution and not the viewing screen resolution. I've seen some sellers listing the resolution as 640, which happens to be the microbolometer resolution of much more expensive units, and they're not stating that it's the screen resolution and not the microbolometer resolution.

Post Reply