Optika6 3-18x50 vs Ares ETR 3-18x50
- Thread starter strow
- Start date
oldsparky, I hope it’s as good with my eyes as yours. I know that Steve123 mentions that some Athlon scope (or scopes; I think it was the M-TAC was better than the Ares BTR for him) is better for his eyes than others that are on the higher end in Athlon’s lineup.
And I copy on what the scope and magnification can, and cannot do for you. I presently shoot at 40 yards and under, but I do look out to about 100 yards. As I mentioned in another thread, I mostly wanted a March 2-25x42 or x52, but none were on any sale to speak of. And we are talking bigger bucks here, as you would know.
You hit my biggest concern: weight. I bought the Crown MKII in synthetic trim due to its lower weight and was absolutely determined to put a very light scope on it, and now I went and got a good-glass clunker, which I would not have even considered a few weeks ago, even. I too am worried about the scope making the Crown feel off-balanced or top-heavy. How heavy is the Taipan? I think the synthetic Crown is 6.3 lbs., but have forgotten precisely. I did want to look through the ETR with my own eyes, so that I will get to do, God willing. The scope was coming between December 30 and January 4, but now the ETA is January 6, and who knows if that will stand. I have a week or so more to wait.
And one more thing to clarify: You had the Ares on your Taipan but may replace it?
Thanks for the input and for listening. S7
Upvote 0
the Taipan is 7.7 pounds. But more than a weight issue the way the bull pup seems made the scope sits pretty high. I don't know about a Crown but a traditional rifle seems like the scope sets lower. My Wolverine doesn't feel top heavy with the scope on it.
After weighting this I ordered another one to put on my AAA Paradigm. I planned to try the Helos gen 2 out on it but with Cameraland having the sale with 200 off the Aires.
I wanted to add that I have a hard time seeing thin reticles like the Midas. But the APLR6 is nice and I haven't found anywhere I can't see it.
After weighting this I ordered another one to put on my AAA Paradigm. I planned to try the Helos gen 2 out on it but with Cameraland having the sale with 200 off the Aires.
I wanted to add that I have a hard time seeing thin reticles like the Midas. But the APLR6 is nice and I haven't found anywhere I can't see it.
Upvote 0
Hey, oldsparky.
Got it. The Crown needs the scope set quite high because of the large high capacity magazine. So we might be experiencing something similar. I too was going for the Midas TAC on a great deal, but was worried about that well-known thin reticle and its small FoV.
Yes, a deal is hard to resist. I look forward to checking out the Ares reticle. And again, I am still March hunting. It may not come for a while, but I will wait. Thanks, and take care, or feel free to update. S7
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Not much help here but…
I have some 5 and 6’s but have not looked or tested them side by side so have no detailed answer for you.
My opinion is both have simular if not the same glass and coatings and neither is going to blow one or the other away in regards to low light clarity.
If I was after better low light performance and wanted a Meopta I would save up for a Meostar model with a 56mm objective but I am more quantity than quality currently and that scope was/is beyond my budget.
I own 5 and 6’s because they are so different in the features and specs while delivering the same optical performance I was now used to and preferred.
I own them as for me they are the best price for performance but I don’t own or have used that many other brands so…
I have some 5 and 6’s but have not looked or tested them side by side so have no detailed answer for you.
My opinion is both have simular if not the same glass and coatings and neither is going to blow one or the other away in regards to low light clarity.
If I was after better low light performance and wanted a Meopta I would save up for a Meostar model with a 56mm objective but I am more quantity than quality currently and that scope was/is beyond my budget.
I own 5 and 6’s because they are so different in the features and specs while delivering the same optical performance I was now used to and preferred.
I own them as for me they are the best price for performance but I don’t own or have used that many other brands so…
Upvote 0
No, that is helpful feedback. Thanks. I was really just wondering if there was a noticeable difference between the two series in terms of optical performance and it sounds like they’re practically the same. Much appreciated.
Upvote 0
Just need to clarify…
and say they are more optically similar to each other 5 vrs 6 but share that look and good performance across both optika lineups. (For the models I have at least).
This would make sense as I beleive all optika’s have the same glass quality and coatings applied minus the one ED version (5-30x).
With my limited use of them (and me with other brands of scopes or scopes im general) and nothing tested side by side
I would say the 5’s are clear and sharp throughout the zoom with good performance overall with the 50mm taking the cake for me as the look is less bright so more light helped it seem sharper and a touch brighter for a better than good clear view. All my models are consistently clear and sharp throughout the zoom range.
The 6’s have higher highs but lower lows, in terms of performance for me. Example 3-18 @3x is stunning. Bright-sharp-wow but at higher power the less bright image shows up and can make things look muddy (shaded woods test) but still clear and sharp enough.
More of a less bright and less contrast or sharpness look with purple fringing showing up around half way and most at that last x, when you find it.
Still sharp at full power and am not disliking it just was spoiled at 3x. ( Note when buy a scope turn to full power for first look so image quality can only get better,haha. my new rule like testing guns accuracy at 10m.
Across the board they all are sharp edge to edge but some or most have a narrower field of view compared to some other scopes.
A note about this less bright look that they share.
First off I like it and feel they are true to life with some form of sunglasses on at times. It is why I kept getting more. Could it be better, yes but that would cost more like upgrading to their top tier scopes and I don’t want to $$ yet or at the time and for my limited use cannot justify it.
Less bright look is what I said but this I believe is due to a taming of the highlights that has overall added to a “less bright look”. Darker highlights and image but it still has nice shadows and midtones. It serves well and most likely were designed for all conditions hunting as low light or late season good clarity and bright summer or water/ sun decrease of highlights good performance like sun glasses. I edit my photos the same way to increase dynamic range.
Again this is just me with very little time behind them giving my thoughts. My previous scopes are discovery and a japenese crimson trace with a vector too.
So again I like them but they are also been my most expensive and do or have not compared them to others .
If I could pull off scope surgury I would take my 6 apart stripping the FFP, recitle and elevation turret and plot it all on the 5 I would do it and if it worked out I would stop scope shopping.
Happy will all but my 6’s are really too big for my current pcp’s and the use or type of shooting I do. I got them with hopes of long range slug type target type fun or someday ground squirrel hunting.
To see kinda what I was talking about as to the look of “less bright” a video review is on youtube I think his handle is C_does and he compaired the 3-18 optika6 to a vortex not sure what model but overall I say and liked the vortex at the gun range where he had a paper target in the shot, nice bright and contrasty but for shadows I liked the optika and even though the optika has narrower field of view.
He does good videos. I was not put off by anything that I saw of the optika in the video but for target all day shooting maybe something like that vortex that had a brighter target with more contrast to see the holes might be nice or better.
I dont shoot much either.
Other might chime in with a different option and I might need to re look through all mine but I am happy with them and for me that is all that counts.
Happy shopping!
and say they are more optically similar to each other 5 vrs 6 but share that look and good performance across both optika lineups. (For the models I have at least).
This would make sense as I beleive all optika’s have the same glass quality and coatings applied minus the one ED version (5-30x).
With my limited use of them (and me with other brands of scopes or scopes im general) and nothing tested side by side
I would say the 5’s are clear and sharp throughout the zoom with good performance overall with the 50mm taking the cake for me as the look is less bright so more light helped it seem sharper and a touch brighter for a better than good clear view. All my models are consistently clear and sharp throughout the zoom range.
The 6’s have higher highs but lower lows, in terms of performance for me. Example 3-18 @3x is stunning. Bright-sharp-wow but at higher power the less bright image shows up and can make things look muddy (shaded woods test) but still clear and sharp enough.
More of a less bright and less contrast or sharpness look with purple fringing showing up around half way and most at that last x, when you find it.
Still sharp at full power and am not disliking it just was spoiled at 3x. ( Note when buy a scope turn to full power for first look so image quality can only get better,haha. my new rule like testing guns accuracy at 10m.
Across the board they all are sharp edge to edge but some or most have a narrower field of view compared to some other scopes.
A note about this less bright look that they share.
First off I like it and feel they are true to life with some form of sunglasses on at times. It is why I kept getting more. Could it be better, yes but that would cost more like upgrading to their top tier scopes and I don’t want to $$ yet or at the time and for my limited use cannot justify it.
Less bright look is what I said but this I believe is due to a taming of the highlights that has overall added to a “less bright look”. Darker highlights and image but it still has nice shadows and midtones. It serves well and most likely were designed for all conditions hunting as low light or late season good clarity and bright summer or water/ sun decrease of highlights good performance like sun glasses. I edit my photos the same way to increase dynamic range.
Again this is just me with very little time behind them giving my thoughts. My previous scopes are discovery and a japenese crimson trace with a vector too.
So again I like them but they are also been my most expensive and do or have not compared them to others .
If I could pull off scope surgury I would take my 6 apart stripping the FFP, recitle and elevation turret and plot it all on the 5 I would do it and if it worked out I would stop scope shopping.
Happy will all but my 6’s are really too big for my current pcp’s and the use or type of shooting I do. I got them with hopes of long range slug type target type fun or someday ground squirrel hunting.
To see kinda what I was talking about as to the look of “less bright” a video review is on youtube I think his handle is C_does and he compaired the 3-18 optika6 to a vortex not sure what model but overall I say and liked the vortex at the gun range where he had a paper target in the shot, nice bright and contrasty but for shadows I liked the optika and even though the optika has narrower field of view.
He does good videos. I was not put off by anything that I saw of the optika in the video but for target all day shooting maybe something like that vortex that had a brighter target with more contrast to see the holes might be nice or better.
I dont shoot much either.
Other might chime in with a different option and I might need to re look through all mine but I am happy with them and for me that is all that counts.
Happy shopping!
Upvote 0
@ 1shooter gives a good description of the Optika6 3-18x50 FFP IQ imo.
Frankly, for a universal precision hunting scope it’s the best I’ve found.
At this point the only better(?) less expensive glass than the Optika6 that I’ve personally used is the Athlon Midas scopes…and it’s really close.
Frankly, for a universal precision hunting scope it’s the best I’ve found.
At this point the only better(?) less expensive glass than the Optika6 that I’ve personally used is the Athlon Midas scopes…and it’s really close.
Upvote 0
Sorry coming back so late. It's hard to say as I don't have them in similar focal ranges. I can say that my Optica5 4-20x 50mm SFP appears slightly brighter and easier to line up the box/reticle than the Optika6 4.5-27x at all magnification settings. Once I discovered this I bought two more of the Optika5 4-20x!
I also have the Optika5 3-15. It's great, but I still like the reticle view of the 4-20x better. Not sure why.
In essence, as you've already deduced from previous answers, optically, they are so close as to make no difference. The only real difference IMHO is the 5 is only availble in SFP.
Upvote 0
