Brand comparison
Thermion 3 XR60 vs HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 SQ50L: Which 640 Thermal Is Better?
If you're choosing between the Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60 and the HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 SQ50L, you're looking at two 640 thermal riflescopes in the same price class, each with a 1,200 m rangefinder and a 30 mm tube. The XR60 suits hunters who shoot from a vehicle or rest, past about 200 m or with heavier calibres: its 60 mm lens reaches further, and it has more eye relief and a longer battery rating. The SQ50L suits hunters who carry the rifle: it's about 300 g lighter, with a wider view and a lower quoted NETD.
Side by side
Both use 12 µm sensor pixels and a fast F1.0 lens, and both put a ballistic calculator behind the rangefinder. The diagram below shows where they differ, with the practical advantage outlined in red.
Run times are rated at slightly different temperatures, 22 °C for Pulsar and 25 °C for HIKMICRO, so treat the comparison as a guide. Even so, the Thermion 3's built-in plus removable APS5 batteries give it a clear lead on long nights.
Reach: the longer lens wins
With the same pixel size on both, the lens decides how much detail lands on an animal. The XR60's 60 mm lens gives each pixel about 2.0 cm at 100 m; the SQ50L's 50 mm lens gives about 2.4 cm, by our estimate from the lens and sensor specs. That's roughly 20% more reach for the Pulsar, as the chart below shows.
In practice, the SQ50L already recognises a fox at roughly 180–240 m, which covers most night fox shooting. The XR60's extra 40–50 m matters most for pigs, dogs and deer across open country, where shots stretch further. Our full working for each scope is in how far the Pulsar Thermion 3 can identify a fox, pig or deer and how far the Stellar 4.0 can identify a fox, pig or deer.
The flip side of the longer lens is a narrower view. At base magnification, the SQ50L takes in about 15.4 m at 100 m against 12.8 m for the XR60, and starts at 3.5× against 4×. Close in, that makes the Stellar a little easier to scan with.
On a humid summer night
Say it's a still February night after a hot day, and the paddock is barely cooler than the foxes in it. Everything in the scene sits close to the same temperature, so the picture loses contrast, and sensitivity matters more than usual.
HIKMICRO quotes the SQ50L at under 12 mK; Pulsar quotes the XR60's whole system at under 18 mK. The makers measure NETD in their own ways, so the numbers don't line up directly, but on paper the Stellar is the more sensitive scope. We explain the measure in how NETD affects the thermal picture.
The two also handle calibration differently. The Thermion 3 uses an internal shutter, and Pulsar's manual notes the picture can pause for up to a second while it calibrates. HIKMICRO's HSIS keeps the Stellar's view running continuously, so you don't lose the animal mid-calibration.
Weight, eye relief and power
This is where the XR60's size shows. It weighs 1.3 kg with its battery and measures 391 mm long, against 1,008 g for the SQ50L. On a light sporter carried all night, the Stellar balances better. On a heavy-barrelled rifle on a bipod or a vehicle rest, the difference hardly registers.
The Thermion 3 counters with 65 mm of eye relief against 55 mm, and a 6,000 J recoil rating, which gives more margin on heavier calibres. Both sit in standard 30 mm rings, and the Thermion 3 comes without a mount, so budget for rings. For ring height and eye relief on the Stellar, see our Stellar 4.0 setup guide.
On power, the XR60 runs from a built-in and a removable APS5 battery, rated together at up to 14 hours. The SQ50L pairs built-in cells with a removable 18650, rated at up to 9.5 hours. For a single evening, both are plenty; for all-night work, the Pulsar is less likely to need a swap.
Which one we'd buy
The chart below follows the questions we'd ask at the counter.
Our pick: for most fox shooters who walk paddocks or use a standard sporter, the Stellar 4.0 SQ50L is the better all-round scope. It's lighter, wider and more sensitive on paper, and its reach covers normal fox distances. For pig and deer hunters who shoot from the ute or a rest across open country, or run a heavier calibre, the Thermion 3 XR60 is the one we'd choose for its extra reach, eye relief and battery life.
For more on each scope, see our Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF review and HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 review.
Compare the XR60 and SQ50L
Check the current price and availability on each product page.
Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60 HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 SQ50LThermion 3 XR60 vs Stellar SQ50L FAQ
Does the Thermion 3 XR60 see further than the Stellar 4.0 SQ50L?
Yes, by about 20%. The Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60's 60 mm lens gives each pixel about 2.0 cm at 100 m, against about 2.4 cm on the 50 mm HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 SQ50L, by our estimate. That puts fox recognition at roughly 220–290 m on the XR60 and 180–240 m on the SQ50L.
Which has more eye relief, the Thermion 3 XR60 or Stellar SQ50L?
The Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60, with 65 mm against 55 mm on the HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 SQ50L. Both are comfortable on most centrefire hunting calibres, but the extra 10 mm on the Pulsar gives more margin with heavier recoil. Set eye relief when mounting so you see the whole display in your normal shooting position.
Which is lighter, the Thermion 3 XR60 or Stellar SQ50L?
The HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 SQ50L, by about 300 g. It weighs 1,008 g with its battery fitted, against 1.3 kg for the Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60, which is also 391 mm long. On a light sporter carried on foot that difference is noticeable; on a heavy rifle shot from a rest it matters much less.
Which has the longer battery life, the Thermion 3 XR60 or Stellar SQ50L?
The Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60. Pulsar rates it at up to 14 hours at 22 °C using its built-in and removable APS5 batteries. HIKMICRO rates the Stellar 4.0 SQ50L at up to 9.5 hours at 25 °C. Both will cover an evening's spotlighting; the XR60 is less likely to need a swap on an all-night session.
How do the Thermion 3 XR60 and Stellar SQ50L NETD figures compare?
HIKMICRO quotes the Stellar 4.0 SQ50L at under 12 mK, while Pulsar quotes the Thermion 3 LRF XR60's whole-system NETD at under 18 mK. Makers measure NETD under their own conditions, so the figures don't compare directly. On paper the Stellar is more sensitive, which helps most on humid nights when contrast is low.
Do the Thermion 3 XR60 and Stellar SQ50L have the same rangefinder?
Both are rated to measure up to 1,200 m and both feed a built-in ballistic calculator. The Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60 builds its laser into the scope body and adds single, scan and true horizontal distance modes. The HIKMICRO Stellar 4.0 SQ50L builds its rangefinder into the scope too. Either reaches well past normal night shooting distances.
Which suits heavy calibres better, the Thermion 3 XR60 or Stellar SQ50L?
The Pulsar Thermion 3 LRF XR60. It has 65 mm of eye relief against 55 mm on the Stellar SQ50L, and Pulsar rates it for recoil up to 6,000 J on rifled firearms. Its 1.3 kg weight also helps soak up recoil on a heavy rifle. For standard fox and pig calibres, both scopes are comfortable.
What else competes with the Thermion 3 XR60 and Stellar SQ50L?
The Nocpix ACE 2 H50R is the other 640 thermal riflescope in this class. It pairs a 640×512 sensor with a 50 mm F0.9 lens, a 60 Hz refresh rate and 60 mm of eye relief. We compare it with the Stellar 4.0 and Pulsar's previous Thermion 2 in our Stellar 4.0 vs Thermion 2 vs Nocpix ACE 2 guide.
This comparison is based on Pulsar's and HIKMICRO's published specifications; recognition distances are our estimates from those specs.