Opticsthoughts vs Precision Rifle

I'm saving for my next purchase (aren't we all).  Every time I about make my mind up, something throws me off.  I've read Ilaya's (sorry if that's spelled wrong) article on the heavyweights a silly number of times.  I made my mind up, for the most part, to go with March.  Then I find that extensive comparison on precisionrifleblog.com and a lot of the information doesn't match, or, at least to me it seems conflicting.

I was surprised to see how high the Nightforce scopes ranked.  I was even more surprised to see how low March ranked...Kahles also was noted as poor optically.  I do recall Ilaya had issues with the Kahles in his test...  so, I'm getting pretty gun shy about ordering Kahles. 

I may be wrong in assuming the regulars here have read that article, and probably discussed it here before, but what do you all think of that comparison?

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/

If I spend $3k+ on a scope and it's nothing short of perfect, I will be very disappointed.

I don't know what they did wrong on the comparison, but when I bring the Precisionrifleblog tests up on another sight (well known) they shred it to pieces.


Maybe someone can enlighten us.

hope so.  thanks for responding.  steiner got low marks too.  I wouldn't expect to see nf above any of these.

I like allot of the testing, would have done some differently, but overall like the methodology.

I will also point out that Koshkin's reviews tend more toward the optical clarity over other factors.

Having extensive experience with most of these optics, I would make a simplistic point: what is most important - optic vs mechanical - depends on how you use the optic. The Kahles, which I have many, many hours behind and love/hate, is rated high because it does every thing well but optical quality. Look at the sliding scales, see where they do well (by testing methodology) and determine what works for you based on how you use the optic. If you spin turrets, mechanical reliability/repeatability should be a very high priority; however, if you dope the reticle, optical quality is more important since once you zero, mechanical precision is mostly out of the equation.

I agree the S&B is great, I disagree that the Kahles is that good, and allot of the other I would move +/- a spot or two, but mostly agree.

Everything comes down to usage and "value."

All that said, I don't own March so cannot say much there. I do own many of the others and have used almost all the others.

Before you drop coin, take a look at vortex hd2, or you'll wish you had!

Thanks RC. Duly noted. Its in the running also.   I remember reading that it has a difficult eyebox... That and the small zoom tame and weight detract. Can you speak to how easy it is in regards to eyebox and eyestrain? That's partly how I justify the coin.

....zoom range...not zoom tame...lol

As a general rule, I hate everything, even the best stuff, over 20X - the same holds true of my gen2 Kahles K624i. Eye box gets cramped, FOV constricts, and in anything but bench shooting, it is all but worthless. I've played with the gen3, they made a few improvements, I just got sick of spending what they want, only to find several optical shortcomings, then have the value of the scope drop by half when they come out with a new gen that addresses - with varying degrees of success - the generation's issues.
I keep my gen2 only because I like the parallax adjustment, and I refuse to take the hit selling it. Truth be told, the parallax is a pain in the ass, way more picky than comparable scopes, but I love the design since I shoot lefty as much as righty.

My go to rifle right now wears the Kahles, but I have a backup, and it wears a 3-18 gen2 vortex HD and I really almost everything about that scope (minor annoyances, nothing as bad as some of my Kahles gripes.) If I could, for even money, today, I might swap my gen2 Kahles for the gen2 vortex, though there is a $1000 list price difference. Yes, it is that good.

Aside from those, my next in line is a SFP Hensoldt 3-12 that I really might never sell. It is almost impossible to get anything but an amazing sight picture with that scope, and at 12X, eye box is humorously generous. I shoot better with that inside 800 yards than anything else of higher power, simply because I focus on target and basics rather than get distracted by my heartbeat in the reticle or by those tiny muscle movements that only a 20X let you see.

We're it my money, I'd look hard at the gen2 Vortex HD and at the S&B. The Beast is okay, the Kahles is getting close to what it costs, and a few others will work just fine; but in that price range, get something you can shoot well for 10 years - or sell next year without losing your shirt.

Been a while since I looked at Vortex and holy leaded glass! How can you make a scope 46.5 oz when comparables are in the 28-38 oz range?

My name is spelled I L Y A

Aside from that, I think I'll stay out of this one.

ILya

I went through a similar search that ended up with me buying a March 3-24X scope.  Whether we are talking about optics, trucks or toothpaste, there are informed and uninformed reviews on the internet, which is what I found in my search.  The reviews were helpful in narrowing the field.

Edited by Marine24 - February/15/2016 at 13:58

About the only head-scratcher for me on the PRB elite scope comparison was the Bushnell rankings on clarity, and that was a purely subjective.  Oh, and the elevation adjustment was a little off.

My Steiner Military leaves my 2 Bushnell  HDMR's in the dust when it comes to glass.

I edited my previous post. Obvious screw up in my FOV comments. KB was nice enough to correct me quietly.

Looked like a very thorough test. Only thing I would have an issue with is there seems to be a good bit of weight taken to the "zoom range". Which I care very little about. 

You know, it's just everything I've read thus far would not make me think a NSX would be a better low light scope (the low contrast test) than Hendsolt, NF Beast, S&B, March, Steiner, or Kahles; much less all of them.

I am trying not to get too much into the "help me pick my scope"(which is why I started that other thread) but, I've spent the most time reading on optical comparisons and these findings just seem off.  I remember looking through an ATACR and thinking how glad I was that I didn't fall for the hype.  Their test has it ranking better than almost everything out there.

I also found it very strange that the hundreds of people out there reviewing their tracking failed to notice all the error apparently in all but a couple brands according to that test.

A few follow-up thoughts.

ballshrinker wrote: You know, it's just everything I've read thus far would not make me think a NSX would be a better low light scope (the low contrast test) than Hendsolt, NF Beast, S&B, March, Steiner, or Kahles; much less all of them. I am trying not to get too much into the "help me pick my scope"(which is why I started that other thread) but, I've spent the most time reading on optical comparisons and these findings just seem off.  I remember looking through an ATACR and thinking how glad I was that I didn't fall for the hype.  Their test has it ranking better than almost everything out there. I also found it very strange that the hundreds of people out there reviewing their tracking failed to notice all the error apparently in all but a couple brands according to that test.

I agree.  I have looked through many NSX's, and never been impressed by them.   This sounds crazy, but I would take my 5-20HD over them every time.

If SWFA made a zero stop on the 5-20HD, it would be damn near perfect.

the light grey is the low contrast test with the following description:

Contrast is especially important in low light conditions, so hunters or long-range shooters that find themselves in low light conditions frequently may want to pay special attention to these results. Although I didn’t specifically test in low light conditions, the results of the low contrast test should be indicative of the performance you can reasonable expect in that scenario.

Thanks for the follow up comments RC.  Let me know if I'm reading this wrong.  I think you were right about the overall optical scores but this was a component test that weighted 30% of the overall optical score.

Bottom line is if you are going to spend $3 thousand dollars on a scope you probably should look at it and get the feel of the knobs because there are a lot of little things that can tip the scale one way or another and all of the $2000+ optics are pretty darn good or they wouldnt be makeing them very long because its not that big of a market once you take the military out of the market and only look at civilian and LE use.  LE use often being a factor of what the guy in charge of the department will allow spent so not always a reliable guide. Of these I only have good access to the Nightforce ATACR 5-25x56 and it seems quite suitable but lacks the HORUS reticle I would like to have.  Personally my first choice would be Heinsoldt and second choice would be U.S. Optics and I really wouldnt care what anyone esle said about them in some article. I dont need to be convinced I just know what I prefer.

For what it worth, I've got time behind 3 of your group.

S&B 5-25X56
Valdada 4-28X50
Nightforce NXS

For my eyes, not much difference to matter. I actually like the IOR better.  I'm not crawling around in the weeds or sitting out on a rock ledge shooting bad guys so when it's all said and done its just what you're will to pay for at that point.

I disagree with the numbers, and have questions about how the numbers were generated.

Having owned and used a few Hennys and NXS, I know how each works in low light and darkness.

Anyone who says numbers don't lie hasn't spent much time with numbers.

Wait...can I buy a hensoldt? I thought they weren't available in the us?

http://swfa.com/Zeiss-6-24x72-Victory-Diavari-FL-34mm-Rifle-Scope-P45613.aspx

I've found a few hensoldts on the web that look available.   Is that possible? Any catch?

Call SWFA and Talk to Chris(topher) He will help you select a scope to meet your needs.

338LAPUASLAP wrote: http://swfa.com/Zeiss-6-24x72-Victory-Diavari-FL-34mm-Rifle-Scope-P45613.aspx Is this the closest to the Zeiss Henny they had used to sell under the Henny name? uploads/11019/Zeiss-ZF-6-24x72-SAM-330285-0000-000-manual.zip

As far as I know, the manual you linked to is the same scope (Hensoldt).  The coatings are different (depending on your thought processes and intended use, better on the Hensoldt) on the Zeiss and the mechanicals on the Hensoldt were "beefed up". 

ZF6-24x72 is the designation for the Hensoldt.  SAM is the ballistics calculator.  I wish the Barrett BORS would fit the Hensoldt...

Edited by Kickboxer - February/17/2016 at 05:56