-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Arken Light Weight Hunting version
- Thread starter db2000
- Start date
you should try EP5 also to see how good it gets with arken. but, yeah, an epl4 is also nice.
unfortunately, they have ended annual sale, so, it should wait now until EP5s will be again back down to $450 area.
again, most typical line of discussion here is to speculate of how the longevity of those scopes will look like, how arken itself as a company will be providing services, repairs, etc.
as a product by itself some folks were reporting issues with glass alignment - chroma, distortions at edges, etc. i have now 4 scopes from them and none had any optical gremlins, and all have great turrets, so, it is all i can say.
i just dropped off vortex pst2 from my 6.5CM prs rig for an EP5 and like it this way so far. no issues with 6.5CM recoil there. SH4 is on 308 AR10, also no issues. it 'just works', for me.
it also did not help arken that they did a paid fake reviews campaign initially. it was discovered and did quite a backlash.
also, i kinda like bringing up that point of comparison - it is not that different from times when nikon started making those cheap D40 or so cameras and opened up whole line of DSLR glass made in china. some of those cheap plasticky lenses were surprisingly sharp and some - some - did outresolve older premium lenses. it did not make them better, as lenses, but you would be no longer able to tell from just looking at the picture of what lens was used there.
Last edited:
I think I got a good one assuming it tracks. I compared it at 120 yards to my PMII 5-25 and kahles 6-24 and below 16x I was shocked how good the Arken looked. No weird crap so far with CA or alignment though I haven’t looked through it in different lighting conditions. I put it on a 308 so all I need it for is out to 700-800 yards. I’ll zero it and shoot at different ranges in a couple week. Fingers crossed
they all track well, i think. turrets on most are also good.
i think what was reported would be some aberrations or other optical artifacts at max magnification, or a severe deterioration of contrast at max magnification - it was i think the issue with early EP5 and some SH4. i do not have any of such issues with my scope, like i said - they just work.
so far.
i love the turrets and love the reticle, and it makes sense to do some annual upgrades as long as it goes on sale. will see how will epl4 behave through the year, if it will not show up any issues - will get 2-3 of them next black friday sale, may be. i got 11 rifles now, it would be ok to set them all on a same scope.
i think i wrote it above - or not - to make the parallax match the markings - unwide the eyepiece magnifier 2-3 revolutions.
it has to be done anyway as when it comes from factory it is screwed all the way in and at 100yds you cannot get both reticle and target in proper focus.
once it is all in proper focus - the markings on parallax start matching.
Cool, I double check it. The only thing I’m not certain of is why the parallax goes from 0-200 then to infinity. No 300-400-500 etc.
i think some argued it is not a true parallax at all, dunno. you can also notice that at different magnifications the parallax may change, like, jumping from 25x to 16x to 12x etc.
anyway, it is a CHEAP scope, it is not a razor nor a nightforce. would be silly to ask a $400 scope to do what a $4k one does.
i still think it is am amazing optic for the price, a new generation. it is good for what it is.
when i can afford to buy either a one razor/nightforce or 10 arkens - i choose 10 arkens.
I'm waiting to see comparisons to the Bushnell Match Pro. I've looked through the SH4 and wasn't impressed, but the EP5 is definitely a nice scope. I don't usually pay attention to the parallax numbers but I think Arken got away from specific numbers because it wasn't lining up for a lot of people. I figure it was one way for them to reduce cost and in the end it just falls into the "nice-to-have" category.
Last month I would have laughed at your comment about preferring 10 of these cheap scopes vs 1 premium one but now I think you may be on to something
i do not say i would not prefer to have 10 nightforces instead of 10 arkens, though.
but arken is doing its job good enough - if you do not have too many complexes and not afraid of other people at the range sneering and calling you a skinflint.
i personally hate having very expensive optics on so-so midrange rifles, as it becomes a constant point of concern - if you scratch it, if you drop it, if someone looks at it funny way... and with this arken shit, it is just there, and if it turns to shit - you can swap it out for a spare one.
Well, I can tell you for sure I’m going to the range THIS damn weekend (probably tomorrow & Sunday), after the last 2 weeks of BS with them randomly closing early without notice, or not being open at all… 
Then I’ll be able to give a real review on mine.
Then I’ll be able to give a real review on mine.Any more updates on EPL4's? I'm a glass snob but I've been looking at these really hard for some rifles that won't be used for the reach. One is my 17 Rem which i don't shoot past 300yds anyhow and my son's 6GT which he doesn't shoot out past about 800yds with, I'll give it a few years for him. Primarily shoot NF at coyotes and steel.
Thanks,
Deano
Thanks,
Deano
Finally got to go to the range today and zero and spend some time behind the new EPL4...
Ok... So, what I had initially reported was that the scope appeared to get cloudy/tinted/darker when going above 16x magnification. This is SOMEWHAT true. It is not so much that it is getting darker, as it is a bluish/purple tinting that gets much worse above 16x... This is chromatic aberration. That being said, the glass is still VERY clear from 6x all the way up to 24x. You can very easily see .22LR holes at 100, and impacts at 200 without any issues at 24x. The edge-to-edge clarity is great. And the scope is light, the turrets feel great, and track true. The only real issue I see with the scope is the heavy CA above 16x that creates a very bluish/purple tint that seems to darken the image quality, but does NOT impact clarity. So, it's still very functional, and for $379 I paid for it on sale, I'm defiantly not complaining, but if the CA keeps bugging me, I might contact Arken and see if they'll shoot me out a replacement scope that has been checked for CA up to 24x. Other than that, for $400, it's a damn-nice scope. I really like the VHR reticle for hunting, and .22LR shooting, as well.
Here's a few shitty pics through my iPhone 14 Pro Max... Picture quality is high, image quality is low. This is what happens when you're attempting to take a picture with a camera, basically looking through the lenses of another camera (essentially how a scope is designed).
Like I said, it's still a VERY useable scope, and to the untrained eye, it might look amazing, but to someone who also owns alpha-tier glass, it's quite apparent the short-comings. But, it's also a $400 scope with features that were really only found on much higher-priced optics in the past. For a budget-friendly hunting scope, I could see it being a very viable option, especially for a precision .22LR or .17 HMR squirrel gun or LR rimfire target plinking or groundhogs, or varmints.
Here's 6x, 16x, and 24x... (Notice how the colors go from natural light, to slightly washed at 16x, and then the bluish/purple CA at 24x.)
Ok... So, what I had initially reported was that the scope appeared to get cloudy/tinted/darker when going above 16x magnification. This is SOMEWHAT true. It is not so much that it is getting darker, as it is a bluish/purple tinting that gets much worse above 16x... This is chromatic aberration. That being said, the glass is still VERY clear from 6x all the way up to 24x. You can very easily see .22LR holes at 100, and impacts at 200 without any issues at 24x. The edge-to-edge clarity is great. And the scope is light, the turrets feel great, and track true. The only real issue I see with the scope is the heavy CA above 16x that creates a very bluish/purple tint that seems to darken the image quality, but does NOT impact clarity. So, it's still very functional, and for $379 I paid for it on sale, I'm defiantly not complaining, but if the CA keeps bugging me, I might contact Arken and see if they'll shoot me out a replacement scope that has been checked for CA up to 24x. Other than that, for $400, it's a damn-nice scope. I really like the VHR reticle for hunting, and .22LR shooting, as well.
Here's a few shitty pics through my iPhone 14 Pro Max... Picture quality is high, image quality is low. This is what happens when you're attempting to take a picture with a camera, basically looking through the lenses of another camera (essentially how a scope is designed).
Like I said, it's still a VERY useable scope, and to the untrained eye, it might look amazing, but to someone who also owns alpha-tier glass, it's quite apparent the short-comings. But, it's also a $400 scope with features that were really only found on much higher-priced optics in the past. For a budget-friendly hunting scope, I could see it being a very viable option, especially for a precision .22LR or .17 HMR squirrel gun or LR rimfire target plinking or groundhogs, or varmints.Here's 6x, 16x, and 24x... (Notice how the colors go from natural light, to slightly washed at 16x, and then the bluish/purple CA at 24x.)
Last edited:
Oh, and forgot to mention, the eye box is WAY better on the EPL4, than it was when I looked through it the other day. I'm thinking it was just the way I was having to bend my neck and head the other day shooting off a 4-wheeler seat just to get steady, because I didn't know we were going to be redneck'ing it that bad, or I would have brought some of my actual shooting equipment to make life easier. I'll know next time, incase they ask me to go over there again. This is why I like the range...They have huge benches, sandbags, and metal folding chairs already there... Makes life simpler when you don't have to drag 1,000 lbs. of equipment with you every time you want to go shoot.
I just was looking and comparing mine again to look for CA. I found a dark rooftop at 270 yards to look at with very high contrast to the bright sky. CA doesn’t really show itself until after I go higher than 16-18. It’s barely noticeable even at max magnification if my head is in it’s perfect place but if I’m off a little bit I can see some purple on the edges of the roof at 270 yards. I used to have an eotech 5-25 and a sig tango 6 3-18 (34mm made in Japan) and I think my Arken might control CA a little better or at least very similar to the eotech but way better than the sig. I couldn’t detect CA with my S&B on the same roof no matter my head position or magnification.
FuhQ, that last picture would make me worry a little because I don’t think my copy is nearly that bad. (Assuming it looks that dark and purple with your actual eyes)
FuhQ, that last picture would make me worry a little because I don’t think my copy is nearly that bad. (Assuming it looks that dark and purple with your actual eyes)
I’ll probably end up sending it back, just like I had to do with my first EP5. And yes, the CA does look exactly like that picture with my eyes, above 16x. Very washed-out and bluish/purple CA throughout the entire image.
Update:
I was able to shoot with it at ranges between 100-800 yards. I cranked the turret up and down shooting as fast as possible at targets at different ranges. The turrets tracked accurately at all ranges out to 800 yards. I had a S&B 5-25 right next to it to shoot with and compare. I had them out all day for 2 days so i was able to see different lighting conditions. In cloudy overcast weather the difference between the two wasn't even that much at the magnifications I use. (I almost never go above 16X). When it got super bright my S&B looked a little better. I can't see CA in my S&B but can see a little with the arken when it was really bright. In low light the arken was outclassed but it definitely held its own. Overall, I'm shocked how well this cheap optic performed. The turrets feel awesome, the eyebox is nice and the clarity looks just like japanese scopes that I've used including razors and an eotech 5-25 I had on the same rifle. I'm definitly interested in their 4-16 version now.
Only cons that I've noticed is turret screws come loose after shooting and super stiff mag ring.
I was able to shoot with it at ranges between 100-800 yards. I cranked the turret up and down shooting as fast as possible at targets at different ranges. The turrets tracked accurately at all ranges out to 800 yards. I had a S&B 5-25 right next to it to shoot with and compare. I had them out all day for 2 days so i was able to see different lighting conditions. In cloudy overcast weather the difference between the two wasn't even that much at the magnifications I use. (I almost never go above 16X). When it got super bright my S&B looked a little better. I can't see CA in my S&B but can see a little with the arken when it was really bright. In low light the arken was outclassed but it definitely held its own. Overall, I'm shocked how well this cheap optic performed. The turrets feel awesome, the eyebox is nice and the clarity looks just like japanese scopes that I've used including razors and an eotech 5-25 I had on the same rifle. I'm definitly interested in their 4-16 version now.
Only cons that I've noticed is turret screws come loose after shooting and super stiff mag ring.
That happened to me, too with my Arkens. And we are not the only ones. I had emailed Arken for technical support and they suggested using Vibra Tite VC-3 or 122. It is designed to work with scopes and such. I have not had the screws let go after that.
Amazon product ASIN B07BFBMRS4
I had never thought of or heard of it. The person at Arken said you should avoid loctite blue, which will harden and crack, which has been my experience, as well. However, the Vibra Tite will let you remove the screws or back them out later, if you need to adjust zero stop, later.
I emailed them this morning and then sent the same pictures, and they sent me a link to fill out a RMA, so I did. Hopefully they'll get me a pre-paid return label tomorrow and I can mail it out by Thursday.
Yes. The glass on the 4-16 is close to the EP5. The EP5 may be a touch more clear. Mine doesn't have any CA issues until you get to 15x magnification. I haven't shot it so I can't speak to the tracking. It is substantially smaller than other Arken models. I have a PST gen 2 FFP on another rifle and was looking at them side by side and the PST looked kinda junky. I know it's not top tier glass by no means but I didn't pay a lot more for it than the Arken. I think it is a great value. I wish they maalde something in a 2-10.
a vortex pst2 5-25x is a $1000 glass, with a recent ebr-7c reticle.
the fact that arken beats it optically - and ep5 does beat it optically - is not a small feat. i am not so sure if that epl4 is better than the pst2, though.
turrets and zero stop are still better, though. if only ep5 was at least half pound lighter.
The EPL4 is almost a full pound litter than the EP5.a vortex pst2 5-25x is a $1000 glass, with a recent ebr-7c reticle.
the fact that arken beats it optically - and ep5 does beat it optically - is not a small feat. i am not so sure if that epl4 is better than the pst2, though.
turrets and zero stop are still better, though. if only ep5 was at least half pound lighter.
Alright... So I shipped-off my new EPL4 6-24x50 VHR MIL scope last week. They got it yesterday, and shipped out the replacement scope today. Hopefully this one will be perfect like my EP5's glass, with no CA, or else it will also be getting sent back, and I will just be buying something else for it. Maybe a Primary Arms GLx 6-24x50 FFP Athena BPR MIL with their premium glass in it.
New scope has shipped, but no ETA from USPS as of yet... And the world holds it's breath...
Also, I want to give a huge shout-out to the awesome CS guys at Arken. No questions asked when I told them I wanted to swap it for another one, and their response was "If you're not happy with it, then we're not happy with it..." That's the kind of CS that will take a company far.
New scope has shipped, but no ETA from USPS as of yet... And the world holds it's breath...
Also, I want to give a huge shout-out to the awesome CS guys at Arken. No questions asked when I told them I wanted to swap it for another one, and their response was "If you're not happy with it, then we're not happy with it..." That's the kind of CS that will take a company far.
Well, the replacement EPL4 showed up today... Mounted it up, took it outside, and the glass appears to be much better. But I won't know for sure until I get to the range and start looking at targets, and spend some real time behind it. Looking at the lakehouse towards the end of the slough that's about 700 yards away looks pretty decent from 6-24x. So, I have high-hopes.
Still looking forward to hearing more about the Arken EPL4 but I ended up picking up a Bushnell Match Pro for $400(on sale right now, I believe non-illum is $50 cheaper) and all I can say is wow! If that EPL4 doesn't work out for you, I'd highly recommend the Match Pro. I got it so my CZ457 will stay in Base class, so expectations weren't too high, but I am pretty impressed with this. I'm looking to comparing it to my 56mm Obj EP5 and Midas TAC later today(probably not a fair comparison, but those are the only other scopes I have right now that are closest in price), but from what I can recall about looking through the PA GLX and SH4, it has those beat. Noticeably forgiving eyebox. I remember everyone saying Arken will push other mfgs to compete at lower price points, and I think this is it!
I will say this, Arken tends to have a tight eyebox. I have not tried the new EP5, so I am not sure how that is.
So, looks like my Arken has to go back anyways. I was just checking the eyebox/relief and realized I never looked through this fully zoomed out, and noticed what I thought was a marker smudge on the glass. Turns out it looks like it's sealant or something smudged on the inside.
That sucks, but at least their CS is very good, and they don’t give you a hard time about a replacement like some uptight top-tier companies I’ve dealt with in the past.
Let me see if I’ve got this right so far.
4 reviews
1. As good as his Schmidt up to 16x
2. Ok but a few things he doesn’t like and probably will wait a year before looking at getting another.
3. Debris in lens. Sent back
4. Horrible CA. Sent back
Doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence in purchasing one of these. I’ve owned a SH4(lack luster, got rid of it) have shot with a EP5(was really impressed for the cost). Guess I’ll just stick with ordering an Athlon Helos.
4 reviews
1. As good as his Schmidt up to 16x
2. Ok but a few things he doesn’t like and probably will wait a year before looking at getting another.
3. Debris in lens. Sent back
4. Horrible CA. Sent back
Doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence in purchasing one of these. I’ve owned a SH4(lack luster, got rid of it) have shot with a EP5(was really impressed for the cost). Guess I’ll just stick with ordering an Athlon Helos.
I used to have the Athlon Helos BTR GenII 2-12x. I liked it better than the SH4 but the eyebox was a little tight and the dots were too big for what I was using it for(forgot which reticle though). Replaced it with a 4-16x GLX for the reticle; regrets, sold that and bought a Bushnell Match Pro....extremely happy with it!Let me see if I’ve got this right so far.
4 reviews
1. As good as his Schmidt up to 16x
2. Ok but a few things he doesn’t like and probably will wait a year before looking at getting another.
3. Debris in lens. Sent back
4. Horrible CA. Sent back
Doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence in purchasing one of these. I’ve owned a SH4(lack luster, got rid of it) have shot with a EP5(was really impressed for the cost). Guess I’ll just stick with ordering an Athlon Helos.
I’ve owned 2 Helos 2-12 and 6-24 and yes eyebox is in the tight side, center dot on the big side and a hint of CA but that’s pretty common with any low end made Chinese scope. I guess after shooting with my friends EP5 I had higher hopes for this one.
JackassLet me see if I’ve got this right so far.
4 reviews
1. As good as his Schmidt up to 16x
2. Ok but a few things he doesn’t like and probably will wait a year before looking at getting another.
3. Debris in lens. Sent back
4. Horrible CA. Sent back
Doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence in purchasing one of these. I’ve owned a SH4(lack luster, got rid of it) have shot with a EP5(was really impressed for the cost). Guess I’ll just stick with ordering an Athlon Helos.
I was on board with your comment until you brought up the athlon
Lol until I see you shooting an Arken on your 6GT at a match then you have no say.
I never said it was just AS good as my S&B below 16x but that the Arken didn't look like a piece of shit when comparing/shooting side by side with them. It was surprisingly close but of course the S&B is the better scope.Let me see if I’ve got this right so far.
4 reviews
1. As good as his Schmidt up to 16x
2. Ok but a few things he doesn’t like and probably will wait a year before looking at getting another.
3. Debris in lens. Sent back
4. Horrible CA. Sent back
Doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence in purchasing one of these. I’ve owned a SH4(lack luster, got rid of it) have shot with a EP5(was really impressed for the cost). Guess I’ll just stick with ordering an Athlon Helos.
Looks like Arken has shitty QC but great customer service. I'd have no problem returning my cheap ass 400 scope over and over until I got a good one like the one I have. Is there anything on the market that is even comparable? (23oz, 6-24, great glass, zero stop, accurate turrets, great illuminated reticle)
A little heavier at 29oz but Bushnell Match Pro Illuminated was on sale for $400. I picked mine up because of how popular they were in NRL22(which was what I was looking at the EPL4 for). I was hoping to compare it to the EP5 today but that has to be sent back.
Shit, I'm still tryna wrap my head around the fact that guys are ok with having to use vibrator glue
On their optics.
On their optics.
My bad, almost as good and just as good as other Japanese glass(Razors, Eotech and such).
Per your quotes:
I had them out all day for 2 days so i was able to see different lighting conditions. In cloudy overcast weather the difference between the two wasn't even that much at the magnifications I use.
When it got super bright my S&B looked a little better
I can't see CA in my S&B but can see a little with the arken when it was really bright.
Overall, I'm shocked how well this cheap optic performed. The turrets feel awesome, the eyebox is nice and the clarity looks just like japanese scopes that I've used including razors and an eotech 5-25 I had on the same rifle.
So does that mean it’s almost as good as Nightforce scopes as well.
Similar threads
