Aeon Athlon Aztec Delta Hawke Leupold March MTC Optisan Sightron SWFA UTG Vortex

Forums Optics, Scopes, Rings, & Mounts Aeon Athlon Aztec Delta Hawke Leupold March MTC Optisan Sightron SWFA UTG Vortex

  • Views : 7675
  • Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    I just noticed that the eyepiece of the SWFA is quite a bit larger than the eyepiece of the Aztec Emerald. I discovered this when looking at my receipts for covers for each. The 42mm objective SWFA has an eyepiece that is around 3mm wider in diameter than the 50mm objective Aztec Emerald. Anyone know what effect (if any) this would have on clarity or eye relief?

    Link

    Metalmaniac
    Participant
    Member

    The larger ocular ( eyepiece ) gives you more exit pupil (larger area of light transmission) that equates to more light transmission. Brighter and clearer sight picture. At one time I was really in to astronomy and studied about optics.  Every time you double the power you reduce the brightness by 4x . Seeing things big is a good thing especially for old eyes like mine but it comes at a price of brightness and clairity. I own two SWFA 12 x mil mil scopes and for the money they can’t be beat.

    Link

    Centercut
    Participant
    Member

    I did a similar comparison last weekend with three scopes, but really just wanted to see clarity and contrast, and didn’t compare turrets, reticles, weight, etc. All three reticles are sufficient for hunting up to 100 yards, or further, so I wasn’t too concerned about that, or about MIL – MOA, since using Strelok Pro it doesn’t really matter. And yes, the Hawke is quite porky compared to the other two.
    So, the three scopes were the Hawke Sidewinder 6.5-20×42, the Vortex Razor HD LH 3-15×42, and the Sightron Big Sky 4-16×42. I set all three lined up on a table on a clear morning in San Diego, and looked across the canyon area at houses approx. 700 yards away. I initially set all three scopes to 8x, and looked at all three one after the other, while looking at houses that provided good contrast.  It was apparent that the Hawke and Vortex were better than the Sightron, so I removed the Sightron (the Sightron was good, just not great). 
    Next, with the remaining two scopes, I set the magnification to 15x, since that’s as high as the Vortex goes. I looked from one to the other, over and over, looking at various houses, and I have to say, they were VERY close in clarity. However, in contrast, the Vortex was slightly better.
    That shouldn’t be too surprising, since the Vortex MSRP is twice that of the two other scopes, and it uses HD glass. What was surprising is that prior to doing this, I thought the Hawke and Sightron would be about the same, and the Vortex would be significantly better. The results didn’t support my presumption.
    Mike

    Link

    NL-Law
    Participant
    Member

    Very nice comparison. Thanks for the time and effort!

    Link

    Bigalex
    Participant
    Member

    см. это сравнение оптических прицелов, в России популярным был marcool 6-24 × 50

    Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    I made a slight change to the original post. My father decided he liked the Aeon better than the Aztec Emerald and put it back on his RAW TM1000. He says he prefers the reticle on the Emerald but was having trouble looking through the scope the same way each time and getting less accuracy due to parallax.

    Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    I added a scope to the list. I recently acquired a Leupold 6.5-20×40 EFR Air Rifle Target. It would be my ideal scope if it had a side focus and target dot reticle.

    Link

    Brian.in.MI
    Participant
    Member

    @mmahoney What a GREAT post. Very helpful, as I’m in the market for another scope and am considering 2 of the ones you ranked. This is the reason people gather on online forums! + to you. 

    Brian

    Link

    looknup
    Participant
    Member

    Nice comparison and I had the same opinion of the MTC optics and most of the other scopes.  Thank you for your write up.

    Link

    AirSupply
    Participant
    Member

    “mmahoney”I just noticed that the eyepiece of the SWFA is quite a bit larger than the eyepiece of the Aztec Emerald. I discovered this when looking at my receipts for covers for each. The 42mm objective SWFA has an eyepiece that is around 3mm wider in diameter than the 50mm objective Aztec Emerald. Anyone know what effect (if any) this would have on clarity or eye relief?

    
Please someone correct me for I got this wrong but the way it was explained to me is. 
    Larger ocular gives better eye relief as in further back ‘but’ smaller field of view. 
    So small ocular you will need your eye closer but you will get a better field of view. 
    Size of the tube has a large bearing on this also. 
    The 40mm tubes on the ior scopes are reported to be in a whole different league to the 30mm tubes. 
    Would love to have a look through one of those!

    Link

    rwsmike
    Participant
    Member

    I was thinking of buying a Athlon midas from midway for $389 on sale…..what reticle should I pick?  I do target and pesting. ….nothing real serious.

    Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    If I were to buy one again, I’d go with the MOA reticle because I measure my shooting distance in yards instead of meters. I purposely bought the mil reticle when I owned mine because I thought I’d use the Christmas tree style dots. I never did because adjusting the crosshairs was so easy when shooting targets. If targets is the priority, I’d vote MOA. If pesting is a priority, I’d still consider the Mil reticle for the windage and holdover dots but still lean toward the MOA for ranging purposes.
     

    Link

    rwsmike
    Participant
    Member

    Optic planet even has them cheaper. ..extra 13% $350 shipped midas 4.5x27x50

    Link

    Scotchmo
    Participant
    Member

    “mmahoney”If I were to buy one again, I’d go with the MOA reticle because I measure my shooting distance in yards instead of meters. I purposely bought the mil reticle when I owned mine because I thought I’d use the Christmas tree style dots. I never did because adjusting the crosshairs was so easy when shooting targets. If targets is the priority, I’d vote MOA. If pesting is a priority, I’d still consider the Mil reticle for the windage and holdover dots but still lean toward the MOA for ranging purposes.

     

    
MIL spacing is generally preferred for lower power scopes (under 16x?). MOA is better for higher power scopes. Though manufactures often use 1/2 MIL subtensions on MIL reticles or 2x subtensions on MOA reticles. In which case they are about the same as long as the reticle layout is easy to read. Enough cues without too much clutter.

    The Aztec MOA reticle looks OK. Same for Athlon Helos BTR. But if I was getting the Athlon Argos BTR, I’d probably get the MIL reticle.

    Link

    Brian10956
    Participant
    Member

    “Imold”Should add that I hope Aztec in the future comes out with a FFP scope, that would be nice.

    
I think the 1 scope model Aztec is a contract scope meaning a distributor in the us went to a large manufacturer that will put any label on its scopes. I doubt the the distributor has R&D to design a FFP they need to get curren manufacturing to make it or go elseware.im not knocking it’s quality only the supply chain.

    Link

    Virginian
    Participant
    Member

    A very helpful comprehensive review and I appreciate you taking the time to post. Thank you!

    Eric

    Link

    nitrowoodtic
    Participant
    Member

     My Athlon Argos 6X24X50 has a different retical, but is MOA turrets and retical.  I’m having a problem with focus and aim point shift (parallax).

    Link

    JoeWayneRhea
    Participant
    Member

    Nitro that is a VERY common problem with side focus scopes . I haven’t been filming that till my last 3 scope reviews but I am from now on …There are a TON of scopes that won’t hold POI under this test . Lotta guys may not wanna hear this shit , but I’m filming and showing it anyway . 
    As a matter of fact I sold one of my favorite scopes locally after testing it and realizing that was where the weird left at one distance – right at another thing was coming from 

    Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    That’s exactly the shit I want to hear, Joe! I love the new POI parallax test you are doing. Any reason that the problem is tied to side-focus scopes? 

    Please name names. What scope did you get rid of?

    Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    I’ve had a couple requests about more budget friendly scopes. I haven’t tried many (2 actually) but I added the two I do have experience with to the list. They are at the bottom in quality but would probably be at the top if price was factored in as values for the money.

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 85 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.