... any thoughts on the comparison between the 35mm and the XP50 ...
I take this back to the 35mm versus the 60mm ...
They are the same scope except for the magnification.
So, you can press 2x on the 35mm and you sort of have a 320 version of the 60mm ... So, same scope, less resolution.
==
... My dealer, his potential customers, and I give all the slight edge to the pulsar ...
I suppose there is some subjectivity to "best image" ... because what does "best" mean? (nothing)
I recall when the Apex first came out there was a lot of debate comparing the Apex images to the Armasight (FLIR cores).
To some extent the differences in the images between the core brands are "on purpose" due to "priority" decisions made by the software designers for the cores. For instance, I'm told the FLIR were emphasizing seeing the critters ... where as the Pulsars (and I think the Trijicons as well) have a smoother image that sees the terrain better. Is one of these really "better" ?? Depends on the definition. Also, again, core performance comparison is not a linear activity. One core might perform "better" in some (thermal) conditions and another might perform "better" in other thermal conditions.
When I first got my first Apex, my neighbors all thought the pulsar had "better" image ... but I thought that was an "illusion".
They compared them within the first 5m of start up when the pulsar auto nuc'd 5 times and the Zeus did not. They were comparing looking at items (like rats) 50yds away. Also, to the extent the difference is due to "contrast" well that can be adjusted, to minimize the differences.
And for me, when I compared them beyond 300yds ... looking at handwarmers on a targets at 500yds, then pulsar could not see the handwarmer, the Zeus 75mm 640 standard could.
So those old Apex had a certain "shock and awe" in their ability to "beat" the Zeus within the first 5 min of start up ... in a "no adjustment" scenario ... but with adjustments and equivalent nucing ... and comparing the images over a broader range of conditions and distances ... the Zeus was a clear winner for me.
==
So in summary ... if you (or others) like the Pulsar Cores over the OASYS ... I don't think I can say "you are wrong" ... similarly, I don't think you can say my liking the OASYS cores is "wrong" ... I might more properly say ... "For the range of conditions I've encountered ... the OASYS cores are more likely to give me the ability to more quickly PID smaller critters at greater distances, then the other cores I've tried". And, right now, I stand by that statement.
And again at any distance (over 100yds) I am almost ALWAYS using motion of the critter as well as shape to PID. The critter has not detected me and is doing its thing ... which usually does not involve not moving ... at distances over 100yds. That's the primary scenario. So I can watch it move for seconds if not longer, before making the PID call.