Review of Athlon Optics 6-24x50 Argos BTR FFP Tactical Rifle Scope

[Gear_Junkie]

I bought the Athlon Optics 6-24x50 Argos BTR FFP Tactical Rifle Scope in hopes of using it for Field Target.  This is a great scope that is built like a tank.  It is noticeably more sturdy feeling than the Hawke Airmax 30 SF and Sidewinder 30 scopes that I've used - it feels very dense like you could use it as a club.  The glass was clear throughout the magnification range.  The turrets feel extremely sturdy and have no play in them, but have the same clicking quality as Hawke/UTG.  The zoom ring and PA knob rotated at the perfect firmness.  The FFP reticle on this scope, and the lighting of the reticle, is ABSOLUTELY OUTSANDING!  It is the highlight of this scope.  Unfortunately, this scope has a very wide depth of field and does not range well.  It absolutely does not snap into focus.  Something at 20 yds was also crisply in focus at 35 yds.  Although this would be a plus for hunters, it is a huge negative for field target use.  The only other negative is that this scope does not include a sidewheel (nor is one made for it).   I was able to modify the rubber and add shims to a UTG sidewheel and it fit PERFECT with absolutely zero rotational play.  If these 2 negatives don't affect your type of shooting, the Argos BTR is a spectacular scope (especially in it's price class).  The build quality, clarity, and reticle are all exceptional.  I have also heard that Athlons customer service is outstanding.

[Harpoon1]

...Unfortunately, this scope has a very wide depth of field and does not range well......

Zack,

Not entirely sure what you meant by this comment? Using the parallax to range, or using the reticle?

Anyway, I have the same scope, in the mil version. And mine is way off when trying to use the reticle to range the target or correct the point of impact. The turret adjustments don't coincide with what is measured by the reticle, at any power or at any yardage I've tried.  I didn't expect a whole lot at this price point, and while I would generally agree with the rest of your "glowing" review, its disappointing that the ability to range and correct bullet impact doesnt work as one would expect with a supposedly FFP scope! As a data point,  I've got half a dozen SWFA Super Snipers and with everyone of those, the reticle ranging, measuring point of impact and turrets corrections are spot on and they track like they're on rails.

Haven't spent much time with it trouble shooting after discovering this fault. And it's certainly possible I just got a lemon.............I dunno?

[Gear_Junkie]

...Unfortunately, this scope has a very wide depth of field and does not range well......

Zack,

Not entirely sure what you meant by this comment? Using the parallax to range, or using the reticle?

Anyway, I have the same scope, in the mil version. And mine is way off when trying to use the reticle to range the target or correct the point of impact. The turret adjustments don't coincide with what is measured by the reticle, at any power or at any yardage I've tried.  I didn't expect a whole lot at this price point, and while I would generally agree with the rest of your "glowing" review, its disappointing that the ability to range and correct bullet impact doesnt work as one would expect with a supposedly FFP scope! As a data point,  I've got half a dozen SWFA Super Snipers and with everyone of those, the reticle ranging, measuring point of impact and turrets corrections are spot on and they track like they're on rails.

Haven't spent much time with it trouble shooting after discovering this fault. And it's certainly possible I just got a lemon.............I dunno?

I was talking about using the PA to range the target.  This is the preferred method for quickly ranging field targets.  Also, using the reticle to range a target would make my head hurt!   

[Harpoon1]

...Unfortunately, this scope has a very wide depth of field and does not range well......

Zack,

Not entirely sure what you meant by this comment? Using the parallax to range, or using the reticle?

Anyway, I have the same scope, in the mil version. And mine is way off when trying to use the reticle to range the target or correct the point of impact. The turret adjustments don't coincide with what is measured by the reticle, at any power or at any yardage I've tried.  I didn't expect a whole lot at this price point, and while I would generally agree with the rest of your "glowing" review, its disappointing that the ability to range and correct bullet impact doesnt work as one would expect with a supposedly FFP scope! As a data point,  I've got half a dozen SWFA Super Snipers and with everyone of those, the reticle ranging, measuring point of impact and turrets corrections are spot on and they track like they're on rails.

Haven't spent much time with it trouble shooting after discovering this fault. And it's certainly possible I just got a lemon.............I dunno?

I was talking about using the PA to range the target.  This is the preferred method for quickly ranging field targets.  Also, using the reticle to range a target would make my head hurt!   

Thinking about it some more after posting, thats the way I was leaning! Agreed, at closer ranges, typical airgunning yardages, that seems the most practical. And accurate!

Thanks.

[Motorhead]

...Unfortunately, this scope has a very wide depth of field and does not range well......

Zack,

Not entirely sure what you meant by this comment? Using the parallax to range, or using the reticle?

Anyway, I have the same scope, in the mil version. And mine is way off when trying to use the reticle to range the target or correct the point of impact. The turret adjustments don't coincide with what is measured by the reticle, at any power or at any yardage I've tried.  I didn't expect a whole lot at this price point, and while I would generally agree with the rest of your "glowing" review, its disappointing that the ability to range and correct bullet impact doesnt work as one would expect with a supposedly FFP scope! As a data point,  I've got half a dozen SWFA Super Snipers and with everyone of those, the reticle ranging, measuring point of impact and turrets corrections are spot on and they track like they're on rails.

Haven't spent much time with it trouble shooting after discovering this fault. And it's certainly possible I just got a lemon.............I dunno?

I was talking about using the PA to range the target.  This is the preferred method for quickly ranging field targets.  Also, using the reticle to range a target would make my head hurt!   

Thinking about it some more after posting, thats the way I was leaning! Agreed, at closer ranges, typical airgunning yardages, that seems the most practical. And accurate!

Thanks.

What Zack is saying to word it another way ...

* Depth of Field is BROAD and as viewed at any 10 to 55 yard distance as adjusted on Parallax is still in focus somewhat Plus & Minus adjusted distance.  IT IS NOT DEFINITIVE !
In Field target WE WANT a scope that has a VERY SHALLOW Depth of Field via Parallax focusing so subtle distance differences can be seen, adjusted for and calibrated onto the side wheel attached to parallax knob.   

SADLY this Type of "shallow" depth Of field attribute is TERRIBLE !!! for a field hunting scope because the focus position on parallax becomes critical or image / target as viewed is blurry ... BAD !!
Only in the last few years are manufacturers listening to air gunners in there want & need for this "Non Normal" shallow DOF requirements.  Thus the search for those scope brand/models that Trend toward the Shallow DOF.

[Gear_Junkie]

Thanks for the assist on the explanation, Scott!

With photography lenses (my other hobby), lenses that can produce a shallow depth of field (a thin plane of focus) typically require a very clear, precision ground, large glass elements.  These inherent qualities (typically called "fast glass") cost significantly more than consumer lenses that produce a larger depth of field.  Although fast lenses can produce a larger depth of field (by stopping down the aperture), the slower lenses don't have the capability to produce as shallow a depth field.

[TunedAccuracy]

Thanks for the assist on the explanation, Scott!

With photography lenses (my other hobby), lenses that can produce a shallow depth of field (a thin plane of focus) typically require a very clear, precision ground, large glass elements.  These inherent qualities (typically called "fast glass") cost significantly more than consumer lenses that produce a larger depth of field.  Although fast lenses can produce a larger depth of field (by stopping down the aperture), the slower lenses don't have the capability to produce as shallow a depth field.

By slower lenses I assume you mean aperture capabilities.
Fast Lens ,F 1.8..........slow lens f4 and up.
If you want to see shallow depth of field look at a macro lens with added extension tubes.
The larger the objective end of the scope, the more shallow the depth of field.
This is why you see scopes with large objectives in field target. They will range far better than a scope with say, a 32mm objective, due to a much more shallow DOF.
As said by another poster, this is not so great for hunting. At least not by factory configuration standards.
A butler creek end cap can be drilled out to however large you want your aperture thus creating a much more hunter friendly depth of field, on a scope with a large objective and should you have the need to range something precisely, simply flip the cap open.

[JungleShooter]

So, what you are saying is, if I want to have a wider field of depth, I should rather buy a 6-24x50 scope, than a 6-24x56, right?

How significant is the difference between the two?

[Motorhead]

So, what you are saying is, if I want to have a wider field of depth, I should rather buy a 6-24x50 scope, than a 6-24x56, right?

How significant is the difference between the two?

Simply stated .. yes larger Objective glass has the potential for a shallower DOF being tube diameter and over all length is similar to a different scope.
What really seems the issue is what amount of parallax knob rotation in degrees is calibrated to fall within what distance

In high power center fire 100 yards is VERY close and 500+ yards is still shy of infinity on the parallax dial.

In Air Guns we need 10 yards to 60+/-  yards ideally 270* or 3/4's of the dials rotation and not much beyond 100 yards to be infinity.