Re: Another Vortex Viper review 4-16X50
Okay, here are some more pics, I hope my poor photography skills and my crappy camera can at least give you guys some idea of how these optics compare. I mounted all scopes shown on a tripod, and all photos are taken of the same ridgeline above my home approx. 2.5 miles away.
I decided I would use several different scopes both because on this thread and a few others like it, the quality of PST glass is being discussed. So, for the record, I've got pics here from; Mk4 6-20X50 TMR, Mk4 4.5-14X5 MD, Viper PST 4-16X50 EBR-1, and the Falcon menace 5-25X50 ML16. the last one is because a couple people are wondering about the comparison between the Falcon and the PST.
Since the magnification varies between the scopes, I thought I would show pictures from all the scopes at the same mag. A picture of 6 power from each scope, and a picture of 16X from each scope, except the Mk4 4-14 as it max's out at 14. I hope the comparison is noticable.
1st up, the Mk4 6-20X50 @ 6X
Then again at 16X
Then we move on to the Mk4 4-14X50 @6X
And now at 14X
Now for the scope in question, The Viper PST @ 6x
And then at 16X
And Lastly the Falcon menace at 6X
and then 16X
We all know how hard it is to do justice to quality optics through a camera, and trust that all shady spots are from my bad camerawork, so it may be hard to tell. It is a good experience looking through all these scope one after another, first, it makes me appreciate even having four scopes of this kind to look through. And second, it is easy to tell differences when they are all so close together.
After looking through these scopes in the hot afternoon sun, I was happy to see that both my Mk4's were all that I had expected them to be, the Viper, when at 14X or less seemed to be just as good as the others, but when turned up to 16 it started to distort a little(very little). and even the Falcon was pleasing to they eye, to my surprise, at 16X it seemed to be just as clear as the PST. That said, when I cranked it up to 25 you could definately notice a little more "fuzzieness" than the PST even at 16X.
All four of the scopes meet my "ridgid"
standards for different applications. The Mk4's are my die hard go to scopes that keep my confidence up. The PST I would say is a less expensive option that I feel could for the most part fill those shoes, and while yet unproven to me in the hard field conditions I plan on taking it to, I am confident that it will do well. The Falcon is a great buy, and though I probably wouldn't want it in a life and death situation, it certainly is a very useful optic, and I'm sure it will fill the position well. The beauty of all four scopes is that I hopefully(knock on wood) will never have to BUY another, while they may fail, or become inconsistent, they all have a great warranty.