Aeon Athlon Aztec Delta Hawke Leupold March MTC Optisan Sightron SWFA UTG Vortex
- Thread starter mmahoney
- Start date
@ jps2486
Ironically, I am thinking of keeping my Daystate Mk4iS and am currently shopping for a scope for it if I do decide to keep it. I'm looking at 4 different scopes and the Sightron STAC 4-20x50 is one of them. In fact, it is the one I'm leaning towards. Do you own the scope and have an opinion on it?
Ironically, I am thinking of keeping my Daystate Mk4iS and am currently shopping for a scope for it if I do decide to keep it. I'm looking at 4 different scopes and the Sightron STAC 4-20x50 is one of them. In fact, it is the one I'm leaning towards. Do you own the scope and have an opinion on it?
Upvote 0
@rwsmike
I purchased the scope a couple of weeks ago and wrote a review on it that I have been dragging my feet on posting. I like the scope better than the rating I am currently giving it in my review. The problem, I think, is that I weigh the reticle as 15% of the review weight when I have adjustied my shooting style to almost exclusively use the turrets to dial in my point of aim. I only really use hash marks on the reticle to help me estimate how many clicks I need to adjust the turrets to fine tune the scope. Besides that, reticles are probably the most subjective part of rifle scopes and opinions differ greatly. I've been debating a change in my evaluation criteria before posting it. I'll go ahead and post my opinion, but please realize that I really like the adjustment range of the scope and that isn't reflected in the current rating. Also, the plain duplex reticle of the scope I bought lowers the score artificially in my view.
I purchased the scope a couple of weeks ago and wrote a review on it that I have been dragging my feet on posting. I like the scope better than the rating I am currently giving it in my review. The problem, I think, is that I weigh the reticle as 15% of the review weight when I have adjustied my shooting style to almost exclusively use the turrets to dial in my point of aim. I only really use hash marks on the reticle to help me estimate how many clicks I need to adjust the turrets to fine tune the scope. Besides that, reticles are probably the most subjective part of rifle scopes and opinions differ greatly. I've been debating a change in my evaluation criteria before posting it. I'll go ahead and post my opinion, but please realize that I really like the adjustment range of the scope and that isn't reflected in the current rating. Also, the plain duplex reticle of the scope I bought lowers the score artificially in my view.
Upvote 0
I actually owned the sightron stac moa in 3x16x?? I forgot the front size and it was a nice scope but I hated to keep taking torrent caps off plus the reticle was almost to fine. When I you finally get the reticle clear it seemed ok but very tough looking up into a low lighted tree.
Upvote 0
I agree with the turret caps. I just leave them off now and store them in the scope's case to keep me from losing them. I like a nice fine reticle for the target shooting I do 95% of the time, but really hate them when pesting in thick foliage, too. Thanks for adding your opinion.
Upvote 0
Well, the low ranking of the Sightron was bothering me so I fixed my rating criteria to better emphasize the features important to me as an airgunner. I feel much better about the rankings now.
Upvote 0
I just replaced an Aeon 10-40X56 with a Hawke Sidewinder 8-32X56 (thanks Vu), and it would be difficult to overstate the improvement. Guess I just got lucky, but this Hawke compares favorably with a Leupold 8.5-25X50 LTR I had back in my powder burning days, and that scope was near twice the price in 2009 dollars.
Upvote 0
That doesn't surprise me. I was not at all impressed with the Aeon and won't be buying another of the brand. I suspect something was broken inside the turrets of the Sidewinder I owned. I really like the lower cost Vantage series from Hawke and think they are the best budget scope money can buy. I'm still on the fence with Hawke's more expensive scopes. I'd like to take a gander at their new Sidewinder 6-24x56 FFP. I'm hoping to hear good things about the brightness of the image at 24x since the objective is 56mm compared to most other companies 50mm. I also wonder if it is worth the extra size and weight.
Upvote 0
Added my opinion on the Delta Optical 5-50x56 SFP Illuminated scope. I was a bit disappointed. Although it would make a great Field Target scope, it was larger than described and the glass not quite as clear as my March.
Upvote 0
First: thank you for your time and efforts reviewing these scopes and sharing your ratings and impressions, etc with the community.
Regarding the comments in the quoted post: I’m assuming you have read my comparison of the FFP Hawke to the Athlon and Airmax scope-I cover a bit of what you were discussing regarding brightness in my review. If not, here’s the link to it: https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/scope-review-hawke-sidewinder-ffp-6-24-x-56mm-vs-argos-airmax-30/
I don’t recall if you have reviewed the Airmax or Athlon scopes but, if you have, my review may give you some comparison between something you know to get an idea of where the Hawke FFP lands. In short, I do think the 56mm bell helps draw in more light.
I would very much like to hear your opinion of the Hawke FFP scope if you get a chance. I am personally interested to see how the new Athlon Midas TAC scope performs (though I wish it had a lighted reticle, and a 56mm bell) as well as the new FFP Aztec scope (again: I wish it had a larger bell.
Again: thank you for your efforts. +1 to you for this thread.
Sean
Upvote 0
I agree with what you said about the pros and cons on the MTC Viper Pro... But I also see that you gave the turrets a 10!? I am not sure how the turrets are on current models, but I have one that is a few years old (and possibly a pre-production model, which would explain a lot), and the turrets are not that great. I mean, they are not bad, but definitely not a 10.
Anyhow, nice post and thanks for sharing!
Kmd
Anyhow, nice post and thanks for sharing!
Kmd
Upvote 0
@KMD1984
Yeah, I hear you about the MTC pro turrets. I haven't owned the MTC Pro for a while, but I liked the novelty of the geared turrets and that probably led to my inflated rating on the turrets. They were repeatable and that is the biggest thing for me.
@SMH77
I had seen your very thorough review and am on the lookout for a good deal on the Hawke FFP. I'm not very interested in the Aztec FFP. The limited elevation adjustment doesn't suit the longer distance shooting I like to do.
One of the biggest drawbacks to my comparisons is that I usually only own one or two other scopes to compare with. I'd love to sit the Athlon, Optisan, Aztec, MTC Pro, Hawke FFP, SIghtron, and SWFA next to each other and compare them side-by-side in different light conditions. As is, I have to rely on old impressions when comparing a new scope. Those impressions become less accurate as time goes by. It's better than nothing, but not as ideal as a direct comparison.
Yeah, I hear you about the MTC pro turrets. I haven't owned the MTC Pro for a while, but I liked the novelty of the geared turrets and that probably led to my inflated rating on the turrets. They were repeatable and that is the biggest thing for me.
@SMH77
I had seen your very thorough review and am on the lookout for a good deal on the Hawke FFP. I'm not very interested in the Aztec FFP. The limited elevation adjustment doesn't suit the longer distance shooting I like to do.
One of the biggest drawbacks to my comparisons is that I usually only own one or two other scopes to compare with. I'd love to sit the Athlon, Optisan, Aztec, MTC Pro, Hawke FFP, SIghtron, and SWFA next to each other and compare them side-by-side in different light conditions. As is, I have to rely on old impressions when comparing a new scope. Those impressions become less accurate as time goes by. It's better than nothing, but not as ideal as a direct comparison.
Upvote 0
nice comparison!
One remark on the Aztec if you ask me, the image quality drops really hard when the lighting conditions become less ideal. In bright daylight there's not much to complain for the price but as soon as the sun starts to set or when used on a not too bright lighted range the image quality really suffers. The image becomes harder to sharpen and details become hard to see and also the clarity goes down faster than a lot of other scopes I've used or seen. None of my other scopes, or scopes I used to have, are suffering from this (which are a Sightron STAC 3-16x42, Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 4.5-14, Vortex Viper PST Gen II 5-25 FFP and a sightron SII 36x42, compared it to more scopes but forgot all the models
). I've compared this over a couple of Aztecs from different people to keep it fair. However, I do really liked the reticle 
One remark on the Aztec if you ask me, the image quality drops really hard when the lighting conditions become less ideal. In bright daylight there's not much to complain for the price but as soon as the sun starts to set or when used on a not too bright lighted range the image quality really suffers. The image becomes harder to sharpen and details become hard to see and also the clarity goes down faster than a lot of other scopes I've used or seen. None of my other scopes, or scopes I used to have, are suffering from this (which are a Sightron STAC 3-16x42, Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 4.5-14, Vortex Viper PST Gen II 5-25 FFP and a sightron SII 36x42, compared it to more scopes but forgot all the models
). I've compared this over a couple of Aztecs from different people to keep it fair. However, I do really liked the reticle Upvote 0
Great post. Curious, why was the vortex warranty a 9 vs 10, with a lifetime transferable? Mistake? It didnt seem consistant with the others getting a 10 with lifetimes. I had a 10 y/o 6-24 viper pst thats parallax was a bit off. Called them for adjustment they just sent me a brand new one (2 models newer), no charge.
Upvote 0