GTA
Support Equipment For PCP/HPA/CO2 and springers ,rams => Scopes And Optics Gate => Topic started by: JungleShooter on November 18, 2018, 04:52:59 PM
-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
COMPREHENSIVE Scope Model Comparison
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Have you been searching for just the right scope for you – and has the truckload full of features and specifications left you with more confusion and less clarity to decide?
Well, this happened to me – so I started listing the scopes in a model comparison table.
And as I kept adding more scopes to it, I also added more features/ specifications to the table – because I realized what value they had for me.
Your scope needs are your individual needs – but the scope model comparison table can help you figure out what is out there – within the parameters of the table: roughly 6-24x magnification, $300-500 more or less.
Here are the features and specifications that the table lists:
● Price: Between $300 and $500.
The price was the cheapest I found clicking the first 20 links. The price range has been chosen to obtain a certain level of glass quality and mechanical precision, without braking the bank (of course there are 6-24x50 scopes for $100, though often they do not have side parallax). Scopes of any price range can be bought for much less during special offers from www.DVOR.com (http://www.DVOR.com). Buying a used scope, especially from trusted people at gun forums, is another way to cut down on the price.
● Top end magnification: 20x or more
● Bottom end magnification: 6x or less
For a discussion of magnification ranges and the field of view, cf.: https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150721 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150721)
● Objective diameter: 50mm or more
Reason: For a magnification of 24x the exit pupil is already very small, thus the shooter has to position his/her eye almost perfectly. The smaller the objective diameter, the less tolerance there is for the shooter for eye placement.
● Exit pupil: should not be too small.
This relates directly to the eye box, the small area where your eye has to be in order to see the full scope image. Bob Sterne recommends 3 mm, 2 mm is marginal. [Calculation: objective lens diameter / magnification = exit pupil]
● Turret adjustment range
50 MOA (15 MIL) seems to me an absolute minimum for any type of long range shooting or heavy pellets/slugs, but 70 MOA (21 MIL) would be already much better.
This is important if (a) the gun is a drooper, and (b) for dialing the elevation turret for long range shooting (for 100 yards with heavy pellets/ slugs adjustable scope mounts are still necessary, even with 70 MOA)
● The reticle should have plenty of horizontal and vertical hash lines/ dots, for windage and elevation hold offs.
In the table sufficient dots are indicated by “D” = “Dots”
● The hash lines/ dots in the reticle can be numbered, for quicker hold overs.
In the table this is abbreviated with N = “Numbers”
● Both turrets and reticle should “speak” the same language, either both “speak” MOA, or the speak MIL (MRAD).
Mixing makes no sense; discrepancies are indicated in the table with ≠
● First focal plane (FFP) – or – second focal plane (SFP)
● Field of view (FoV): The larger the easier the target acquisition
For how this relates to scope magnification ranges, cf.: https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150721 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150721)
● Calibration of the turret clicks
How much does the reticle move for 1 click (at 100y), e.g., 1/4" or 1/8" per click, or 0.1mrad per click.
● Amount of clicks per one turret revolution.
Uneven numbers like 6 mils, or 14 moa, are not helpful when making large adjustments of two or more revolutions; an additional feature for that is a turret turn counter as it shows how many revolutions the turret has been turned up; some have it.
● Tube diameter 30mm only (not 1", nor 33mm, 34mm, etc.) All on the list have it.
● Illuminated reticle
For dark woods, low light, and night hunting helpful
● Weight
(I ask myself: How important is it that my gun-scope combo is light? Have I ever complained on a hunting trip that the can of soda I was carrying weighted 14oz instead of 10? Were those 4oz really that important?)
● Parallax adjustment distance: from 10/11y or less on to infinity All on the list have it.
● Side parallax adjustment (vs. front parallax adjustment) All on the list have it.
● Exposed turrets
Unlike capped turrets, exposed turrets allow you see the turret settings (the numbers) from behind the gun at all times, and you can change them without taking off caps and screws: This is needed if you are a clicker, and don’t just always use hold over: All on the list have it.
● Turrets with zero reset All on the list have it.
This list of features/ specifications and the actual comparison table are in the attached PDF. Hope it’ll be helpful to our GTA community.
Use the table, don’t depend with your life on the data, because I make errors (more often than my wife...., according to her), don’t blame me when your spouse asks you with that edge in her voice “Another scope?” :o
If you find errors or have suggestions or additions, post or PM me. I’ll update the table when I can. ;D
Happy shooting!!
Matthias
Attached PDF file
-
No Sightron, Vortex, bunch of others.
FWIW-I have 3 Optisan scopes.
-Y
-
I evaluated four scopes that fit right in (all 6-24x50 FFP MOA/MOA). The only one on your list is the Argos. I eliminated the Argos from consideration quickly. Did not like the reticle. The other three:
https://monstrumtactical.com/collections/first-focal-plane/products/6-24x-first-focal-plane-rifle-scope-adjustable-objective-range-finder-reticle (https://monstrumtactical.com/collections/first-focal-plane/products/6-24x-first-focal-plane-rifle-scope-adjustable-objective-range-finder-reticle)
I used the Monstrum for all of last season. Glass not as good as the others, but seemed to range find a little better then the rest. I liked it enough so that I now own two of them. Locking turrets.
https://www.acmemachine.com/products/6-24x50mm-first-focal-plane-tactical-rifle-scope-tr-moa-reticle?variant=48619427654 (https://www.acmemachine.com/products/6-24x50mm-first-focal-plane-tactical-rifle-scope-tr-moa-reticle?variant=48619427654)
This scope had better glass and a better reticle than the Monstrum, but it cost more. No locking turrets. Better overall than the Monstrum but if I was going to switch from the Monstrum (already proven successful in competition), their might be even better.
https://athlonoptics.com/product/rifle-scopes-helos-btr-3/ (https://athlonoptics.com/product/rifle-scopes-helos-btr-3/)
This is what I'm currently shooting and evaluating for the next year. Good glass like the ACME ands Argos. Best MOA reticle I have seen/used.
The Monstrum is below your price range but I think it deserves inclusion in your list.
The Helos is above your price rage.
The ACME is usually in your price range, though the price varies month to month. It's currently at $300. Deserves inclusion.
-
Thank you, Yogi and Scotchmo, for your comments and suggestion. I'll let them build up some and go at it again.
Just to mention: I did have a Vortex, the Diamondback Tactical, which I considered one of my favorites (though I'd like to have IR for hunting).
There was also a Sightron, the S-TAC. Stellar elevation adjustment range (80MOA). But SFP, and I do like MIL rather than MOA.
I liked Optisan a lot, but their consistently low elevation adjustment range (50MOA) just won't do for my long range shooting.
For example, yesterday I shot to 100 yards for the first time, and it was exciting to make an out-of-the-box springer go that far. But the JSB 16 grainer .22cal needed 54 MOA up from my usual zero to get on paper. Even with fully adjustable scope mounts I barely made it – I was very close to the turret stop, which means the scope could loose its zero very easily as the springs that hold the reticle are too relaxed to hold it steady.
ACME scopes: Well, the webpage says this: "Parallax Setting 100" -- in my book that's not usable for airgunning... unless they mean 100ft, but still, 30 yards would not be acceptable to most airgunners....
➔ [Author’s EDIT, 19Nov18:]
Monstrum scopes. They are an interesting option since they are FFP.
I listed them in my personal list, but not on the table, since I had some concerns. One was a bad review. But as Scotchmo has pointed out in the following post, this seemed hardly a fair review (therefore I deleted the link, no need to pass along lings to inaccurate information). [End of edit]
The other concern was that Monstrum does not publish any minimum parallax distances. This tell me (I take it that way) that they do not understand airgunners, and that their scopes are not made for them. Thanks, Scotchmoto, for sending me the data on the FFP G-1 scope last month!
Maybe some others con chime in and comment on minimum parallax distance and elevation adjustment range of Monstrum 6-24x50 scopes: FFP-G2, FFP-G3, and FFP-GH models.
I will include Monstrum in the next edition.
-
...
ACME scopes: Well, the webpage says this: "Parallax Setting 100" -- in my book that's not usable for airgunning... unless they mean 100ft, but still, 30 yards would not be acceptable to most airgunners....
Monstrum scopes. They are an interesting option since they are FFP.
I listed them in my personal list, but not on the table, because there was a devastating review by John Rhea this year...
The other concern was that Monstrum does not publish any minimum parallax distances. This tell me (I take it that way) that they do not understand airgunners, and that their scopes are not made for them.
About that "devastating review" - those reviews are entertaining but might very well be tongue-in-cheek. The scope in question looks like an older model that appears to have been used/abused long before someone "donated" it to the the reviewer. It's well banged up, and notice the turrets appear to have been removed and reinstalled with pliers or vice grips. An honest review would have involved a new scope.
The "runout" test is bogus, as I can make any 6-24x50 scope fail that test simply by offsetting the camera slightly. My Helos scope suffers more from runout than the Monstrum. He makes fun of the scope because it includes a honeycomb "flash hider", but other scopes that he has reviewed favorably have the same sunshade and he seems OK with them.
The Monstrum is a low end scope but it is hardly "worthless". Based on it's design, it's probably from the same factory as the Tac-Vector FFP scopes. The first ones I ordered I did send back because of artifacts around one reticle and slightly off center on another. The replacements were done quickly and Monstrum paid shipping both ways. They only give a one year warranty, but their customer service seems good. I only used the later G1 model. I have not personally handled their newer GH or G2 versions. Those newer models have slightly different features, some of which I like and some I don't.
I used one on a Umarex Gauntlet at a couple of matches and another for the last year on a piston gun. I won quite a few matches with that scope and gun. The final was winning the AAFTA National Open Piston Championship, the AAFTA Nationals Open Piston GP series, and the Diana Open Piston FT match (plus a certificate for $500 on Pyramyd Air orders). That scope was definitely worth the $230 that I paid for it.:
(http://www.scotthull.us/photos/Misc/100_5388.JPG)
You are correct in that Monstrum does not seem to be looking at the airgun market, neither is ACME, but their scope specs are well suited to airguns. Both the Monstrum and the ACME scopes focus down to 10yds.
When I evaluated the ACME scope, I noticed that it was very similar to the Argos and Helos. Except for the styling of the knobs, the scope body looked identical to the Argos and Helos. The retical control was like the Helos (on the end of focus knob), but the turrets were like the Argos (non-locking). I was so confident that they were from the same factory/design, that when I needed a sunshade for the Helos, I ordered one from ACME. It was half the price of the Argos/Helos sunshade at the time and ended up fitting perfectly. The ACME focused down to 10yds, same as Argos and Helos.
-
Scott,
Congratulations on your hardware! :-* Well deserved!
Could you briefly explain how you "range" with a FFP scope?
Thanks,
-Yogi
-
Scott,
Congratulations on your hardware! :-* Well deserved!
Could you briefly explain how you "range" with a FFP scope?
Thanks,
-Yogi
There are two ways to range find in Field Taget through the scope. The simplest and most common is by parallax (focusing), and the second way is the stadia method (bracketing). After a year of using the Monstrum and just now starting to use the Helos, the Monstrum seems to win out initially on focus ranging. Though the Helos seems to have better glass. I spent a lot of time setting up the practicing with the Monstrum. After more setup and practice with the Helos, I'm hoping to close/eliminate that gap. For bracketing, it's all about the reticle, and the Helos wins there.
Focus range finding can work well, but if you want accurate results, your maximum distance is limited. For airgun distances and Field Target (10-55yds), focus ranging can work very well, but for good accuracy out to 55 yard, it typically requires very high magnification (32x-80x) and good/big glass which also typically means high $$$. A 24x scope can work but is marginal for focus range finding on far targets. Your ranging precision will depend a lot on the scope, and your ability to discern parallax variation.
Bracketing can work at any distance, but requires a proper sized target feature where you already know that features approximate size. Bracketing does not require expensive glass but a well designed reticle helps (usually MIL or MOA). Your ranging precision will depend on your knowledge of the particular target features, and your ability to get a good read from the reticle.
A drawback to bracketing with an SFP scope is that any dope generated for ranging and holdover, only works at one specific magnification. With an FFP scope, you can adjust to any magnification to best suite the conditions, and the dope is the same.
-
Scotchmo, thanks for the correction, I edited the post and deleted the link, no need for misleading info. Thanks!
I congratulate you on your shooting successes! Awesome! Maybe some day I’ll get into that as well. Of course, I first need to gather my equipment. And here in Peru.... I’m not sure how many people actually do airgunning competitions.
My 2 cents on range finding – well, it’s the Godfather of Airguns’ 2 cents, that are worth like 2000 bucks.... :D
Tom Gaylord:
For ranging 30y – get 18x: “A 6-18x scope stops working for rangefinding at about 30 yards.”1
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2009/02/scopes-for-field-target-part-3/ (https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2009/02/scopes-for-field-target-part-3/)
For 35-40y – get 30x: “With 30x, I can do that out to 35-40 yards, depending on the light.”3
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2007/09/introduction-to-field-target-part-7-the-scopes-part-1/ (https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2007/09/introduction-to-field-target-part-7-the-scopes-part-1/)
For 55y – get 40x: “To determine range using the scope’s parallax adjustment takes at least 40x to go out to 55 yards successfully. So, use nothing less than an 8-32x with a 56mm objective lens and a 30mm tube if you want to win.”2
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2008/01/scopes-part-2scope-mounts-how-well-do-they-need-to-fit/ (https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2008/01/scopes-part-2scope-mounts-how-well-do-they-need-to-fit/)
But, of course, this is for winning a field target competition. As Tom says: “A varmint hunter can miss his mark by a half-inch and never be the wiser. But a field target competitor has to hit within hundredths of an inch of where he aims at all times. So it matters to him whether the target is 44 yards or 47 yards away.”4
https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2009/02/scopes-for-field-target-part-2/ (https://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2009/02/scopes-for-field-target-part-2/)
OK, now I do add my own 2 cents about distance ranging:
At 55 yards a .22 Baracuda (Kodiak) will be over an inch off target, if my ranging is off by only 3 yards, which is real easy to do.
That’s a whole inch off target in addition to:
–wind drift
–inaccuracies inherent in the gun
–inaccuracies inherent in the pellet
–my shooter’s error (yes, there’s that)
I really can’t afford another inch off target.... – so, I’m going with a laser range finder (a good used one runs for less than a custom side wheel). 8)
And for short distance, quick come up targets I’m practicing with the range finder to estimate distances accurate enough to do the correct hold overs. With the trajectory quite flat during the first 30 or 40 yards, that’s very doable.
And to not complicate my aim in life any further, I prefer a FFP over a SFP, so that the memorized or charted holdovers are true for any magnification that I happen to use.
-
A drawback to bracketing with an SFP scope is that any dope generated for ranging and holdover, only works at one specific magnification. With an FFP scope, you can adjust to any magnification to best suite the conditions, and the dope is the same.
Thanks for the explanation. For HFT, where you can not change the magnification, I still do not see an advantage of FFP over SFP. What am I missing? ???
-Y
-
JungleShooter,
A lot of people whose opinion I respect really recommend the Discovery line of scopes.
Since they come directly from China, it might be easier to procure in Peru.
-Y
-
I have the discovery 3-18x50 34mm HD, and its mostly a good scope. The focus snaps well and the glass is nice. The turrets on mine only adjust to every 3rd spot so its the week link.The Athlon argos I have I really like allot, the turrets are mushy, but work properly. It doesnt snap into focus, but is very clear.
-
Yogi, I'm looking into the Discovery again. And I keep having doubts whether to include this:
Watched a review on YouTube on the ED 3-15x50 (the top of the line with glass from Japan), and the elevation turret was numbered like it was a windage turret 2 -- 1 -- 0 -- 1 -- 2 etc.
Here, at around 11 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdlDJIPEUtE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdlDJIPEUtE)
Dave, thanks for telling us what you did:
I have the discovery 3-18x50 34mm HD, and its mostly a good scope. The focus snaps well and the glass is nice. The turrets on mine only adjust to every 3rd spot so its the week link. The Athlon Argos I have I really like allot, the turrets are mushy, but work properly. It doesnt snap into focus, but is very clear.
Since I am a clicker, this is a deal breaker.
Thanks for all your comments. Keep them coming!
-
I had the Discovery 4-16x50 ED scope and I didnt like that it didnt have any anti reflective coating, and the windage turret got stuck, elevation knob is labeled backwards . The 3-15x50 might be better, but Idk.
-
It’s a touch above your price range but look at an athlon Midas TAC the adjustments are very good and so is the glass. But it does not have an illuminated reticle. I think I got mine for around $540-$570, I think it’s really good for the $$
-
Thanks, Cranky1, for the advice. I checked into it, and found this:
Athlon Optics Midas BTR 2.5-15x50 - APLR1 SFP IR MIL
(MIL reticle, with lots of markings, numbered)
Not for $600 or $700 regular price.
But for $250. 8)
Here: https://cameralandny.com/product_description.html?catalog (https://cameralandny.com/product_description.html?catalog)[product_guids][0]=64a0bbf0-9f98-0135-0380-00163ecd2826
And here:
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/13294302/athlon-midas-btr-2-5-15x50-reduced-to-only-249-99-black-friday-blowout (https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/13294302/athlon-midas-btr-2-5-15x50-reduced-to-only-249-99-black-friday-blowout)
:-\ Unfortunately, it has SFP, and it only has 60 MOA elevation adjustment range.*
Now I'm trying to follow the often repeated advice, "Buy once, cry once" = buy what you really need, when you can afford it, don't just buy what happens to be on sale just now. Because then you'll have to keep buying, because it wasn't exactly what you needed.... ;D
*discussion on elevation adjustment range on another thread https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=149364 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=149364)
-
They are not the same scope, the TAC has 25 mil of elevation and focus to 10yards on a 6-24x50. It also has a zero stop and 10 mil per turn plus a ffp reticle. That would be close to 85moa
I did a lot of research and it’s nice then any of my other scopes costing double what it did.
I’m not sure if it would hold up to a Springer, I’m shooting pcp. But I take my 4-16 athlon talos from 35yrd zero to 100yrds and back fairly often or hold 5mils at 100.
-
Yes, Justin, the scope I stumbled upon wasn't the one you suggested, I am sure it is a notch above most on the list. No wonder the Midas TAC is out of the price range.
But through you I found another good addition to my list of scopes with a range starting not with 6x but with 3x. Thanks for that! :D
Because, since assembling the list of 6-24x scopes, I have been in several shooting situations where the 6x was just too much magnification.
At the same time I kept reading about people shooting long range with much less than 24x.
So, I thought about this some more, field of view and magnification, and how they realate, and what each offers me.
I came up with a field of view and magnification table that shows how the magnification by “1” in the lower magnification range makes much more of a difference to the field of view than reducing the magnification by “1” in the upper magnification range.
Here: https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150721 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150721)
This helped me to see for my type of shooting I'd need something less than 6x, rather a 3x -- while still having higher magnification on the top end (18x or 16x, 15x).
I imagine there are others that have similar shooting needs. So, the scope comparison table 3-16x that I made for myself will be helpful to them as well. I'll post it soon.
Matthias
-
JungleShooter-
Glad you are finally talking some sense. ;)
-Y
-
A drawback to bracketing with an SFP scope is that any dope generated for ranging and holdover, only works at one specific magnification. With an FFP scope, you can adjust to any magnification to best suite the conditions, and the dope is the same.
Thanks for the explanation. For HFT, where you can not change the magnification, I still do not see an advantage of FFP over SFP. What am I missing? ???
-Y
If you never plan on changing the magnification, not much advantage.
In HFT, you can set the magnification to anything that you want, but cannot change it once the match starts. So if you plan on trying different magnifications for different matches, there is still some advantage.
Very few areas in the USA shoot HFT (only one that I'm aware of). Lots of AAFTA Hunter Division though, where if you have a 16x max scope, you are allowed to change magnification during the match.
If I intended to only shoot AAFTA Hunter Division, or only shoot traditional HFT, I don't think I'd gain much from FFP.
-
Thank you for starting this thread Matthias, good info.
-
Yes, good information and job at all!
-
I had the Discovery 4-16x50 ED scope and I didnt like that it didnt have any anti reflective coating, and the windage turret got stuck, elevation knob is labeled backwards . The 3-15x50 might be better, but Idk.
I got the ED 3-15x50 in (sold out already, will order more) and it doesn't have the backwards turret label and the glass is coated with green anti-reflective coatings like the HD models, so it seems to be for some reason they did something different with the ED 4-16x50. Not sure why! I liked the 4-16x50 for how compact and light it was, and the glass was very crisp and bright. Anyway the ED 3-15x50 is super clear as well, without the reflection issues.