Why is nobody talking about the Sightron 4-20x50

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Z

zebra

Member
Sep 29, 2015
1,779
70
New York
So... I've been wanting to buy a scope that goes down to 4x for fast point and shoot hunting and one that also has higher power settings for long range target practice.i.e. I can't live with a 6x minimum for close range hunting / pesting.

Just as I was about to order the Clearidge XP5 (which almost had what I wanted), I noticed this Sightron. The Sightron looks better on paper and it's also a respected brand.

It looks ideal for air gunners that like to hunt and target shoot. It focuses down to 9 yards. It's side focus. 30mm tubes with plenty of adjustment range. A holdover reticle and large objective lens for additional brightness etc. it's less than $500 too.

This is the scope I am talking about:

Sightron STAC 4-20×50, MOA-2, Matte – 26015[/QUOTE]https://theopticzone.com/product/sightron-stac-4-20x50-moa-2-matte-26015/embed/

It's just my luck that the two scopes I am interested in are the only two without a single credible review on the entire internet... 

So why aren't airgunners all over this one? Is there something wrong with it and everyone else already knows apart from me? 

Is anyone here using one on an air rifle? If so, how is it?

The guy from optics planet compared the Clearidge XP5 to a Zeiss which somehow gave me less confidence in his opinion. 

 
  • Like
Reactions: Nueces
As I mentioned in another thread, I currently have the SIII 3.5-10x and tried the STAC 4-16. The glass on the III, IMO, is sharper edge to edge with a bit better contrast. The STAC actually appeared brighter with more accurate color rendition, but the reticle was just too fine for me. I bought the gun to shoot rats that appear in my yard at dusk and later, and the STAC reticle was just a bit to fine. Plus I prefer mil/mil. 

The scope, however, is very nice glass and if I had not had the III, I would definitely have kept it. Shop around, you can find the STACs at really nice prices. 
 
Upvote 0
"DellaDog"As I mentioned in another thread, I currently have the SIII 3.5-10x and tried the STAC 4-16. The glass on the III, IMO, is sharper edge to edge with a bit better contrast. The STAC actually appeared brighter with more accurate color rendition, but the reticle was just too fine for me. I bought the gun to shoot rats that appear in my yard at dusk and later, and the STAC reticle was just a bit to fine. Plus I prefer mil/mil. 

The scope, however, is very nice glass and if I had not had the III, I would definitely have kept it. Shop around, you can find the STACs at really nice prices.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the 3 range will be sharper just looking at the price alone. There is a lot more competition once you get above $1000 though. 

The STAC line has a few models with features I can't seem to find in many other brands at a similar price. 

I found some reviews of other models like the 4-16x42 but none on the 4-20x50 that I'm interested in. I think this is one area where I can't extrapolate the findings. Once you change the magnification range and the size of the objective lens, it is no longer the same scope.

It doesn't surprise me that the 4-16x42 is brighter than the 2.5-10x32, even though the 2.5-10 is in the range that is 3x the price. As long as the glass is decent, the larger objective lens will let more light in. 

I can't find any other scope with a 4-20 or 5-25 range that focuses down below 10yards and cost less than $500. The Clearidge XP5 is the closest but it goes down to 25 yards.

I don't like being the first to buy and review something.... I guess I can return it if it's no good though....

 
Upvote 0
The 3.5-10 is 44, the 4-16 is 42mm, the opposite of what you're saying. The 3-10 has a 2mm larger objective, yet the STAC appears brighter. When I focused both scopes on a pure white surface, the STAC showed true white, like looking through a window. The SIII, while "cleaner" showed a hue other than pure white.

i don't think you'll be disappointed with either Sightron. 
 
Upvote 0
Also, some Sightron reps claim the STAC glass is the same as the SIII, just that the III series is manufactured in Japan and the STAC in the Philippines, thus accounting for the price difference. Having looked through both, IMO, they are not the same glass - though they are both quite nice. 

If if you are former military or LEO, Sightons discount is quite nice. 
Ive been told, the best in the business. If they had a III series in the 3-16 range focusing to 10, I'd buy it a heartbeat. 

Im awaiting a 2.5-16x50 Bushnell Elite 6500 to try, I just have a higher mag itch that I need to scratch. 
 
Upvote 0
"DellaDog"The 3.5-10 is 44, the 4-16 is 42mm, the opposite of what you're saying. The 3-10 has a 2mm larger objective, yet the STAC appears brighter. When I focused both scopes on a pure white surface, the STAC showed true white, like looking through a window. The SIII, while "cleaner" showed a hue other than pure white.

i don't think you'll be disappointed with either Sightron.
Click to expand...
I couldn't find that one. I thought you meant the 2.5-10 but I guess you would know your scope better than me :)

I wonder why it's brighter. Maybe they added a darker contrast enhancing coating to the more expensive one. You'd lose some light transmission like that but gain some performance in bright conditions by reducing glare and flare etc. 
 
Upvote 0
"DellaDog"Also, some Sightron reps claim the STAC glass is the same as the SIII, just that the III series is manufactured in Japan and the STAC in the Philippines, thus accounting for the price difference. Having looked through both, IMO, they are not the same glass - though they are both quite nice. 

If if you are former military or LEO, Sightons discount is quite nice. 
Ive been told, the best in the business. If they had a III series in the 3-16 range focusing to 10, I'd buy it a heartbeat. 

Im awaiting a 2.5-16x50 Bushnell Elite 6500 to try, I just have a higher mag itch that I need to scratch.
Click to expand...
People say a lot of things about scopes. The most common thing I read in reviews is people claiming the glass on their $300 scope is up there with the $1,000+ scope their friend has etc. I think it's fair to say that has never been true. The other one is "this scope has a lot of features you normally only find on high dollar optics" even though the cheaper scopes have the most features these days.

I'm not sure what "the same glass" even means if the lenses aren't made in the same place. I guess it could mean the lenses are sourced from the same place but the scope is assembled in a cheaper location for one. 

Either way, I decided this week (after looking through a lot of scopes) that I am no longer going to make assumptions on quality based on the country of manufacture. I am sure Japanese optics have the edge (over China and the Philippines) at the top end of the market but I couldn't see it at the sub $500 level (when comparing similar priced product). 

I am not worried about the Sightron 4-20x50 being a bad scope. I am fairly confident it will work fine at the very least. I am more worried about it not being the best scope for me at that price range. 

For similar money, there is the Clearidge XP5 mil dot 4.5-25x50 and the Leupold 4-12x40ao. The Clearidge specs are similar, the Leupold is obviously different but a more respected brand.

Ideally, I would want someone to say "I own or have used all three and this one is the clearest and best overall". For some reason, reviewers don't do that anymore, even though that is what we all want to know. I.e. I have x amount to spend, which is the best way to part with it because scopes aren't good or bad unless you have something to compare them to.

looks like I'm going to be the first penguin in the water on this one hopefully I won't get eaten by the seal.

 
Upvote 0
"Ginuwine1969"I am looking at the new MTC Viper Pro, just enter in the distance and shot not more cheat cards, hold over, or math.
Click to expand...
I don't think I'll ever be a turret user as it's too slow for huning but that scope does look interesting. Good power range (even better than the Sightron and the Clearidge). Good price too. That 5-30x50 could probably cover most people's needs.

I wonder which has better glass between that and the Sightron.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu