Sightron S-tac FFP Problem

With great excitement and anticipation, I just recently purchased the new model Sightron S-tac 4-20x50 FFP. I had been looking at Sightron scopes for quite a while now. I have a number of other brand scopes, but this is my first Sightron, so I was really looking forward to using it. There have not been any reviews yet on the airgun forums yet. I chose the S-tac because it was now FFP and offered illuminated reticle. I chose this scope over the 10-50x60 mainly due to the size and the cost. My main uses were planned to be field target and Benchrest.



Unfortunately, I found that the S-tac was just not up to par with other scopes in this class (like Athlon and Bushnell). There are a number of what I would consider design flaws. The first big issue is that the reticle is way too thick over about 12 power. You can not have any accuracy with such a thick reticle for either Benchrest or field target - it just gets in the way of the POA. The thickness is similar to the old wire reticle UTGs.



The next big issue is that the side parallax adjustment is way too coarse for any accuracy. When adjusting for 50yard Benchrest, it is too difficult to get an accurate parallax adjustment. That is there is only 1 to 2 degrees rotation diffence between 40 and 55 yards. This is obviously a big problem for range finding in field target.

I know quite a few people like this brand, but overall, I am very disappointed with my investment in this scope. I have not even mounted it on a rifle yet - just went through a number of optical checks on a tripod on my home range.



Since there are no other reviews on this scope yet, I thought that I would pass on my experience to help others make a knowledgeable purchase.

Dan

 
This is a review I made of the scope last year (but in SFP). Like you, I was less than impressed.

The comparison to other scopes can be found here: Scope Comparison/Review



#10 Sightron STAC 4-20×50 Duplex

ShpRhGvCJEPovUWLW1vINfX76UHKsgT-WWv3tlm5xo-QuoW03bxxLdqXkBeGhDRkohEkg57BkaQjqM9G4ETAVpyE0O0tryisq7TJusdA4NagEjy1e462VzoW1w2ReIMLTW-TqRWR


Pro:

  • Great Turrets: The scope passed the box test with no trouble and turrets are repeatable. This is particularly important on my scope because I got the duplex reticle (it was cheaper). SInce the reticle does not have any markings to keep track of holdover, I used Strelok and the turrets to adjust my point of aim. I've personally gotten to where I prefer to dial the turrets instead of use reticle markings. The turrets are tactical style, which I personally prefer. If you prefer to use holdover over dialing turrets, spend the extra on the MOA-2 reticle.
  • Lots of adjustment Range: The scope allows 80 MOA of elevation adjustment. This is a great range of adjustment and allows the scope to reach out to 100+ yards with ease. Each revolution of the turret is 15 MOA. This is probably my favorite feature of the scope because I have been doing a lot of shooting at 100+ yards lately.

  • Zeroed Turrets: Turrets are resettable to zero. I like this feature as it makes remembering the zero a no-brainer.

  • Outstanding focus range: The scope focuses down to an absurd level. It claims 9 yards, but if you are willing to adjust the magnification down to 4x (which is plenty of magnification at super close ranges), then the scope focuses down to BugBuster levels.

  • Lifetime warranty!

Con:

  • Glass: The glass is lackluster. It is as clear as any scope I've looked through at the lower magnifications, but at 20x the image is noticeably darker than my Leupold 6.5-20. The image of the Sightron is also not nearly as sharp and I can see some chromatic aberration in the image. On top of that, I had trouble with the image being drowned out when shooting in bright sunlight. I'm sure a sunshade would help with this, but it didn't come with one and I didn't buy one. The image quality is a deal breaker for me since I shoot at max magnification 99% of the time and I've been spoiled with excellent glass.
  • The magnification ring has a flip-up lever that is supposed to make adjusting the magnification easier in cold weather. I can't say I've tried it in cold weather with gloves on, but it sure feels gimmicky to me. I never really used it.

Other:

  • There are no numbers on the markings of the side parallax knob. I personally didn't find this to be too big a deal as I have been guilty in the past of trusting the parallax numbers blindly on scopes and not verifying them with the head bob test to ensure parallax is indeed gone. You could argue this as a pro, I guess.
  • There is nothing fancy about the duplex reticle which is located on the second focal plane. Since the scope has a duplex reticle and I almost always use the max magnification, the second focal plane is not an issue. Being second focal plane is a con only if you use holdovers and like to use a variety of magnifications when you shoot.
  • The turrets are capped. Not really a con since it is easy to do what I did and just take the caps off and leave them in the box. It keeps me from losing them. Those who use the turrets to zero the scope and use holdovers will probably consider the caps a pro.

Status: Returned to Amazon. Neither my father or I liked the Sightron more than the Leupold we were considering it as a replacement for. The Leupold's superior glass clarity and ligher weight in a similarly sized package trumped a side parallax adjustment and increased elevation adjustment.
 
Yup, the S-TAC line is a significant step down from the SIII's, which is the scope line that really gave Sightron their name are best suited to FT. The SIII's are fantastic scopes in every way. The STAC line is produced in a factory in the Philippines and the glass, and probably several other components used are completely different. Lower cost, different purpose I guess.

The newer SV is their new flagship and is an exceptional but expensive piece of kit. The parallax adjustment on both the SIII and SV are better than the STAC, but the SV is probably the best in the world at this point. It has both coarse and fine adjustment, much like a microscope. Hopefully that filters down their lines with time!