Yo, you must have gotten a Sightron that was made on second shift Friday night. I have 3 sightrons that are clear up to the full 50X.
Upvote 0
Scope Debate. Which will you choose?
- Thread starter Redick
- Start date
Yo, you must have gotten a Sightron that was made on second shift Friday night. I have 3 sightrons that are clear up to the full 50X.
I just looked through the Alpha 6 at the Columbus airgun event. Chuck was kind enough to allow me to check it out. The glass is clear is it clearer then the Vortex idk about even. My concern is are the turrets repeatable and true? If so it's a good buy
Upvote 0
I own 26 of the SIIIs because I just recently bought ALL of the ILLUMINATED SIII 10-50X60 Mil Hash 13 yard focus that were on clearance just recently. I just received a 40 yard focus 8-32x56 SIII and its a little clearer than all of my 10-50x60s but its RIDICULOUSLY HUGE Mildots look like ANAL BEADS (REALLY) Even worse than the Weaver V24 Mildot.
Might want to have your prescription checked.
Edit! Lucky Liberty Optics sold the last 100 of the $599 Mildot 10-50x60 versions (I ordered 20-40 of those asked him to at least hold 20 while I paid off my CC for the 20 ILLUMINATED ones I had just bought which he agreed but lucky they sold all from under me he remembers it if you ask to verify if someone cleaned out ALL ILLUMINATED ONES mention did that guy reserve 20-40 more? YEP THAT WAS ME) I didn't yet put them through their paces till just recently. The JAPAN BUSHNELL TAC 4.5-30x50 is another disappointment side by side comparing it to the Alpha6 as well. Just bought 12 of those. Should have bought 43 of these Alpha6s when they were $165 instead and have almost $100 change. Now the cheapest "in stock" place is $249.
Upvote 0
I REALLY think you need glasses. Especially from the time you told me the $250 Athlon Argos 6-24x50 was pretty damn clear according to YOUR EYES. Then noticed that pretty damn clear scope posted on the classifieds for a trade AFTER I replied ARE YOU SURE???. Interesting that new Vortex Diamondback Tactical 6-24x50 you just asked about is on the classifieds now up for a trade AFTER I TOLD YOU IT BELONGS IN THE TRASH. I wouldn't worry about whatever trade you manage to get for it. You probably won't know the difference according to YOUR EYES.
Upvote 0
Yo, you're right, the SIII mildots are pretty crude, that's why I don't use them. I use the fine cross hair for BR and MOA-2 for long range. Regarding Nightforce, I don't like their reticles nor the very tight eybox, but that's just me. I bought an Athlon Ares scope. I don't care for FFP scopes nor their reticles. They are heavy and you could use them for a hammer. This is a dumb discussion because all of us have our own opinions. That's why there are so many scope manufacturers out there. I doubt that any two of us would agree to anything here.
Upvote 0
I REALLY think you need glasses. Especially from the time you told me the $250 Athlon Argos 6-24x50 was pretty damn clear according to YOUR EYES. Then noticed that pretty damn clear scope posted on the classifieds for a trade AFTER I replied ARE YOU SURE???. Interesting that new Vortex Diamondback Tactical 6-24x50 you just asked about is on the classifieds now up for a trade AFTER I TOLD YOU IT BELONGS IN THE TRASH. I wouldn't worry about whatever trade you manage to get for it. You probably won't know the difference according to YOUR EYES.
Nothing wrong with the Athlon or the Diamondback! Maybe your eyes are the ones that need some checking have you ever thought of that? You thought discovery scopes were the best out now your riding these Alpha scopes no one has ever heard of. I keep asking about the turrets which must be trash because you refuse to comment on that part of the scope or did you even know turrets were a part of the scope? Glass isn't the only factor in determining what is a good scope. Also, who said your word was the Master key? I'll be the judge of what is good to my eyes and what I send my dollars on! So if you say your $200 dollar scope is better then my $500 scope then that's your opinion! I don't see anyone raving about a Alpha scope or a JSAR scope! I actually seen a few of those JSAR scopes for sale on the forum and not one mention of how excellent the glass was or compared to a Sightron but it matches a Leupold stop it! Your going way to far now
Upvote 0
I have to honestly and humbly admit that my eyes have already been spoiled by Swarovsky Nightforce Zeiss High End Bushnell and Vortex Razors and High end Leupold glass among many many many countless others just off the top off my head. I must have looked through AT LEAST 1000 scopes SO FAR in my lifetime Just trying to beat this cheap A$$ Alpha6 is REALLY driving me NUTS! So I have a MARCH incoming.
Upvote 0
LegIt concerns about the turrets Geoff, and I have yet to give the Alpha a run through to check the repeatability, so the question remains up in the air for now.
IF I get a chance to wring it out, I will update you.
I never actually noticed the stiffness of the side focus turret until you called it out at the range today, now it has me wondering if it needs a little lube on the O ring or something along those lines. It bugs me now that you pointed it out LOL!
IF I get a chance to wring it out, I will update you.
I never actually noticed the stiffness of the side focus turret until you called it out at the range today, now it has me wondering if it needs a little lube on the O ring or something along those lines. It bugs me now that you pointed it out LOL!
Upvote 0
The glass quality is only one aspect of a scope's utility.
1. Stay zeroed under recoil and vibration.
2. Zero doesn't change when zoomed in or out.
3. After the eyepiece focus is set the target image and reticle are focused on the same plane.
4. Reticle graduations are correct.
5. Clicks don't have any hysteresis or play. That is you can click one up or one down and it works correctly all the time.
6. Clicks match the specification and spacing on the reticles.
After all these conditions are met we can discuss the glass quality, brightness, trueness of color, resolution and contrast in the center and edge of field, flatness of field, aberrations, resistant to flare, etc. The more you pay the better the glass quality usually is. The best glass at the expense of 1 to 6 doesn't matter you will see very clearly but miss the target! Much like mounting a high end telescope on you rifle, you can see great but no clue of where to aim.
Personally I don't care for the high magnification that is popular. I prefer a large exit pupil for ease of use and brightness. To me pretty worthless to have a 30x scope with an exit pupil < 2mm. Dimmer and harder to acquire the sight picture. If you want to or have to use your scope to range I can see the merit of a high magnification to reduce the DOF to get a better estimate by using the parallax setting. I use a laser rangefinder. If you want to see .22 holes at > 100 yards get a spotting scope or use a remote video cam.
1. Stay zeroed under recoil and vibration.
2. Zero doesn't change when zoomed in or out.
3. After the eyepiece focus is set the target image and reticle are focused on the same plane.
4. Reticle graduations are correct.
5. Clicks don't have any hysteresis or play. That is you can click one up or one down and it works correctly all the time.
6. Clicks match the specification and spacing on the reticles.
After all these conditions are met we can discuss the glass quality, brightness, trueness of color, resolution and contrast in the center and edge of field, flatness of field, aberrations, resistant to flare, etc. The more you pay the better the glass quality usually is. The best glass at the expense of 1 to 6 doesn't matter you will see very clearly but miss the target! Much like mounting a high end telescope on you rifle, you can see great but no clue of where to aim.
Personally I don't care for the high magnification that is popular. I prefer a large exit pupil for ease of use and brightness. To me pretty worthless to have a 30x scope with an exit pupil < 2mm. Dimmer and harder to acquire the sight picture. If you want to or have to use your scope to range I can see the merit of a high magnification to reduce the DOF to get a better estimate by using the parallax setting. I use a laser rangefinder. If you want to see .22 holes at > 100 yards get a spotting scope or use a remote video cam.
Upvote 0
Mostly good points but I was at Extreme Benchrest in Mesa Arizona last year and I saw a LOT of high power scopes when shooting the 100 yard finals but I didn't see anyone using a spotting scope or a laser range finder or a remote camera. But the higher mag scopes were everywhere. Oh, I forgot. There were also quite a few wind flags too.
Upvote 0
30harry,
You looked at the Swampfox 5-30x56 FFP with Xmas reticle? (parallax 15y)
Or the Hi-Lux Phenom 5-30x56 FFP, Xmas reticle, parallax 10y?
Matthias
I didn't like the upper half of the reticle on the Hi-Lux but the Swampfox seems a lot better. The only problem with the reticle is there is no hash marks smaller than 2 moa. The vortex I like has 1 moa graduations. I'm not sure how much of a problem that is though. I'm too new at this game. If there were only some place you could go and see ALL the scopes and spend a day or two there. That would probably be a couple hundred thousand dollars worth there.
Upvote 0
You make a good point when choosing a holdoff reticle: One has to consider the distances between the hash lines, i.e., how fine the subdivisions are. 
It seems like these subdivisions should be as granular as the holdoffs the shooter is planning to use. If I usually employ coarse holdoffs for wind of 0.5mil or 2moa, then the subdivisions are fine enough if I get a half-mil-dot reticle or 2-moa reticle.
However, if I employ much finer holdoffs of say 0.2mil or 1moa, then yeah, you'll need a reticle that gives you those subdivisions.
I find myself using coarse holdoffs at closer ranges, and for longer ranges dialing the turrets for finer adjustments.
About finding additional scopes: In my scope search for my Scope Specs Lists I only consider scopes with at least 6x or less on the bottom end.
Therefore, I have no knowledge of some of the higher magnification ranges, like: 7-30x | 8-32x | 8-34x | 8-40x | 10-40x | 10-50x | etc.
Here is a shooter that has assembled ALL long range FFP scopes available in the US, with some basic specs, and with pictures of all the reticles available.He has assembled a variety of lists, the starter page is here:
https://sageratsafaris.com/the-optics-database/
Matthias
Upvote 0
It seems like these subdivisions should be as granular as the holdoffs the shooter is planning to use. If I usually employ coarse holdoffs for wind of 0.5mil or 2moa, then the subdivisions are fine enough if I get a half-mil-dot reticle or 2-moa reticle.
However, if I employ much finer holdoffs of say 0.2mil or 1moa, then yeah, you'll need a reticle that gives you those subdivisions.
I find myself using coarse holdoffs at closer ranges, and for longer ranges dialing the turrets for finer adjustments.
In my scope search for my Scope Specs Lists I only consider scopes with at least 6x or less on the bottom end.
Therefore, I have no knowledge of some of the higher magnification ranges, like: 7-30x | 8-32x | 8-34x | 8-40x | 10-40x | 10-50x | etc.
He has assembled a variety of lists, the starter pages is here:
https://sageratsafaris.com/the-optics-database/
Matthias
Wow, I'm going to spend some time reviewing that. Thank you. I'm going to be following that from now on too.
I'll see if his data changes what I'm looking for but I'm beginning to think I may have to switch to mils. There seem to be a lot better selection of reticles available with mils.
Upvote 0
Set budget.
FFP or SFP.
MOA, IPHY, or MRAD.
Magnification range. The more the ratio, the greater the optical compromises.
Complete a list of prefered features with plenty of thought put into "desired intent".
Turrets - Consider how much elevation travel you need? How much travel per revolution do you need? Do you want a zero stop? Are there revolution lines on the housing? Are the turrets nice feeling, are the clicks distinct, is the spacing between lines evenly spaced, do they line up well centered with the line on the housing? Are the numbers big enough to read? Are the turrets too thin or too tall? Are they the splined type? How are they fastened to the stem? Finally and most importantly do they track within a reasonable amount of error, like 2% or less? I accessed a popular brand of 5-25x50 scope a few weeks ago, most of this riflescope was acceptable for the price, except the turrets, which were a HUGE fail! These literally ruined the scope!
Reticle - is it well thought out? Too thick or too thin lines? Moa or Mil numbers directly off the vertical crosshair in the way of holdoffs? .2 mil or .5 mil hashes, or both mixed? 1 moa or 2 moa hashes, or mixed. Horus type, or complex tree, or more standard type, etc? IMO there are a bunch of funky reticles out there so think before you leap!
Glass - Not all eyes see the same! We can "SEE" this here in this thread can't we, lol. Also there are unit to unit variances, pick one scope up of the same model and the glass os good, the next so-so. BUT typically you get what you pay for. Keep in mind that the scope Co's pay for upgrades so they pick and choose which things they have prioritized. Take the new Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25, it offers a ton of great features but it's likely the glass quality was compromised to achieve its price point. SFP scopes usually have better glass than FFP scopes within price points. Whatever you do don't buy a scope solely on what someone else says about it's glass, especially the less expensive scopes, there's so much more to a optical sight system than glass.
Warranty - the better a scope Co has the less painful it'll be come repair time.
Find "your" best compromise because that's what it comes down to since there is no perfect scope.
The Athlon Ares was mentioned, well the Gen2 is the best compromise "I" could find for the price. Why? because I'd have to spend 3 times the price to get the features I want in a scope so it fits into my budget! It's FFP, has good glass, tracks well, has a superb .2 mil reticle, is illuminated, it's not long or heavy, has excellent turrets, and a zero stop. Honestly all I can imagine I'd get for 3 times the price is superior glass???
That's coming from a S&B PM2 5-25x56 owner which so far is my favorite scope.
FFP or SFP.
MOA, IPHY, or MRAD.
Magnification range. The more the ratio, the greater the optical compromises.
Complete a list of prefered features with plenty of thought put into "desired intent".
Turrets - Consider how much elevation travel you need? How much travel per revolution do you need? Do you want a zero stop? Are there revolution lines on the housing? Are the turrets nice feeling, are the clicks distinct, is the spacing between lines evenly spaced, do they line up well centered with the line on the housing? Are the numbers big enough to read? Are the turrets too thin or too tall? Are they the splined type? How are they fastened to the stem? Finally and most importantly do they track within a reasonable amount of error, like 2% or less? I accessed a popular brand of 5-25x50 scope a few weeks ago, most of this riflescope was acceptable for the price, except the turrets, which were a HUGE fail! These literally ruined the scope!
Reticle - is it well thought out? Too thick or too thin lines? Moa or Mil numbers directly off the vertical crosshair in the way of holdoffs? .2 mil or .5 mil hashes, or both mixed? 1 moa or 2 moa hashes, or mixed. Horus type, or complex tree, or more standard type, etc? IMO there are a bunch of funky reticles out there so think before you leap!
Glass - Not all eyes see the same! We can "SEE" this here in this thread can't we, lol. Also there are unit to unit variances, pick one scope up of the same model and the glass os good, the next so-so. BUT typically you get what you pay for. Keep in mind that the scope Co's pay for upgrades so they pick and choose which things they have prioritized. Take the new Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25, it offers a ton of great features but it's likely the glass quality was compromised to achieve its price point. SFP scopes usually have better glass than FFP scopes within price points. Whatever you do don't buy a scope solely on what someone else says about it's glass, especially the less expensive scopes, there's so much more to a optical sight system than glass.
Warranty - the better a scope Co has the less painful it'll be come repair time.
Find "your" best compromise because that's what it comes down to since there is no perfect scope.
The Athlon Ares was mentioned, well the Gen2 is the best compromise "I" could find for the price. Why? because I'd have to spend 3 times the price to get the features I want in a scope so it fits into my budget! It's FFP, has good glass, tracks well, has a superb .2 mil reticle, is illuminated, it's not long or heavy, has excellent turrets, and a zero stop. Honestly all I can imagine I'd get for 3 times the price is superior glass???
That's coming from a S&B PM2 5-25x56 owner which so far is my favorite scope.
Upvote 0
Gotta GO with YO !! Last week when Yo mentioned this scope I jumped on it and got it from BUDK for $195.00 All I can say, it is much better than my Aztec Emerald SFP, which I sold today. Great scope for the bucks!
Upvote 0
Gotta GO with YO !! Last week when Yo mentioned this scope I jumped on it and got it from BUDK for $195.00 All I can say, it is much better than my Aztec Emerald SFP, which I sold today. Great scope for the bucks!
Get back with how well the turrets track
Upvote 0
