Night Vision Best scopes with clip ons?

[deersniper]

What scopes have given you the best image with clip on thermals?
I know mx8 2.5-20 works great

one if you hoodlums said a vortex 1-10 works very well?

 

[TheHorta]

Razor 1-10 is great. SB 3-20US if you need more mag. Leup 3.8-18x44 is surprisingly good as second fiddle to the SB.

 

[GreenMushroom]

Everyone seems to love the razor gen3.

Minor hijack but since you guys have owned pretty much every clip-on hopefully I can avoid posting another dumb thread. I'm getting ready to order a g3 and have to decide on a mount. Was looking at the badger 1.7 for a little more heads up. Are clip-ons all pretty much 1.5 making that a no go?

 

[CSTactical]

A few of our customers including Licentia Arms who is an NV dealer absolutely loves the ZC420 with clip ons

 

[Choid]

With thermals glass quality is pretty unimportant. You are just looking at a tv screen a couple inches ahead of you, and if you need brightness, you can turn it up. It isn't nearly as important as with NV. Horta is right, basically just something of moderate length with a good reticle.

 

[deersniper]

A few of our customers including Licentia Arms who is an NV dealer absolutely loves the ZC420 with clip ons

A ZCO 2-16 would probably work awesome

I need to try out my 420 more

 

[Choid]

Everyone seems to love the razor gen3.

Minor hijack but since you guys have owned pretty much every clip-on hopefully I can avoid posting another dumb thread. I'm getting ready to order a g3 and have to decide on a mount. Was looking at the badger 1.7 for a little more heads up. Are clip-ons all pretty much 1.5 making that a no go?

1.7 works fine. Only the UTC line is lower than 1.5 and you aren't going to lose anything in translation.

 

[deersniper]

With thermals glass quality is pretty unimportant. You are just looking at a tv screen a couple inches ahead of you, and if you need brightness, you can turn it up. It isn't nearly as important as with NV. Horta is right, basically just something of moderate length with a good reticle.

Nah it’s more than that. Some scopes give you a much better image than other. It’s some combination of factors

 

[Choid]

Nah it’s more than that. Some scopes give you a much better image than other. It’s some combination of factors

Well, if you are not looking at $199 scopes, you are pretty much fine with a thermal imo.

 

[TheHorta]

Road trip to Bama. Play with them all. Decide for yourself.

 

[rlsmith1]

Was literally going to start a thread on this. I've got a MK5 3.8-18 that I really like but the PST 3-15 is surprisingly bright. I found the brightness doesn't offset the resolution lost and I actually naturally dial to a higher mag with the MK5 before getting uncomfortable. I will say the larger FOV on the low end of the PST is immediately noticeable.

The fisheye/distortion on the PST is so disorienting I want to pick up a spotlight. End of the day, I definitely prefer the MK5 even with the $ saved.

Is the juice worth the squeeze on the SB, TT, ZCO, NF and others? I could almost buy 3 MK5's for one of those scopes.

ETA: this is for I2 use only. Seems like the MK5 may be good enough for the I2 stuff and do great on the thermals?

 

[jstokes1]

The king is the Vortex Razor Gen III 1-10x24. NF ATACR LPVO also works, but not better than the Vortex. Also have tried my super yoter and TigIR with an NSX 2.5-20x50 that works quite nicely.

For DMR/LR setups, I you'd be best served with the NF 2.5-20. For about everything else, that Gen III Razor is hard to beat.

 

[The King]

The G3 razor does something magical. We tried a SB 3-20 and a Leupold MK5 3-18 as well.

The Razor's image behind both thermal clip ons and to some lesser extent I2 clip ons is EXTREMELY flat. The SB was decent/workable. When held up next to the 1-10, the MK5 sucked badly.

No fish eye, no artifacts, just a nice and flat representation of whats happening in the optic.

It makes a difference, and its MUCH larger than you think its going to make until you do it.

 

[CSTactical]

Anyone looking for Vortex Razor Gen III's in MRAD hit us up, we have a stack of them yet they are moving constantly

 

[foxkilr89]

I ran a 3.6-18 mark 5, and a Atacr. The image looked pretty similar. Currently running a athlon ares etr 3-18 and Its a nice scope for the money. I may have to try a gen 3 razor with everyone liking them so much.

 

[rlsmith1]

Love the razor gen iii especially on an AR 16” or shorter. It’s the other guns I’m thinking about.

These thermals are so good with their digital zoom it turns a 1-10 into a legit 1-15 or even 1-20 it seems like.

But what about the rifles I want daytime mag of more than 10x? sounds like the SB 3-20 is the winner here with the MK5 or any other optic being the option for the budget constrained.

ZCO 2-16 would fit this role perfectly if they could design it faster

 

[The King]

zco 4-20 was quite acceptable.

Oddly the lrtsi isn’t too bad.

 

[rlsmith1]

March 3-24?

 

[The King]

March 3-24?

Not handled a march yet.

 

[Killswitch Engage]

medium or short stature good glass optics perform by far better than long tube/long objective optics in my experience. ive owned or used about everything.

 

[TacticalPlinker]

How does the 4.5-18 LRHS handle clip-on's ?

 

[The King]

medium or short stature good glass optics perform by far better than long tube/long objective optics in my experience. ive owned or used about everything.

I think it has to do with the limited amount of light that is striking the front lens. This is what I'm going to call a "weak" theory.

Specifically, you are being dealt an outsized blow the larger the intake lens is. The output window on most tubes is 18mm. Then it typically is increased in size to 25-40mm. Dilution of photonic density occurs when you do this, and then if you take it in through a 50mm lens you are giving the optic more chance to degrade the image.

There isn't a single additional photon being presented to the intake lens beyond the diameter of the output window in the NODS, so it being larger and thicker is all loss.

THe 36mm Bushnell LRTSI objective lens had quite a bit more issue than the 28mm lens in the Vortex which was well matched to the output lens of many units I'm using.

Our issue with the MK5 was obvious distortion in the image flatness. Clarity was good, but it had a distinct fishbowl effect.

 

[rlsmith1]

I think it has to do with the limited amount of light that is striking the front lens. This is what I'm going to call a "weak" theory.

Specifically, you are being dealt an outsized blow the larger the intake lens is. The output window on most tubes is 18mm. Then it typically is increased in size to 25-40mm. Dilution of photonic density occurs when you do this, and then if you take it in through a 50mm lens you are giving the optic more chance to degrade the image.

There isn't a single additional photon being presented to the intake lens beyond the diameter of the output window in the NODS, so it being larger and thicker is all loss.

THe 36mm Bushnell LRTSI objective lens had quite a bit more issue than the 28mm lens in the Vortex which was well matched to the output lens of many units I'm using.

Our issue with the MK5 was obvious distortion in the image flatness. Clarity was good, but it had a distinct fishbowl effect.

Interesting theory and I think it makes sense. If it were true, it seems like the image would be more distorted the further down the rail the clip on is mounted. I've not noticed anything noticeable but I haven't tested this to the extreme.

 

[The King]

Interesting theory and I think it makes sense. If it were true, it seems like the image would be more distorted the further down the rail the clip on is mounted. I've not noticed anything noticeable but I haven't tested this to the extreme.

I wasn't necessarily making that conclusion, and I'm not sure it follows from my logic. Its very early here so I'm at "drool-o-clock" in the morning.
The larger objective lenses behavior is that of light gathering. You can make a 3-24x24mm scope, but past 8x the image is pretty much just a black circle with a reticle in it on all but the brightest of days. Exit pupil etc etc.

When what I'm viewing is an 18mm phosphor screen, or a 20mm LED/OLED/etc, there are only x million photons being delivered. The large objective on a hunting scope drinks in the cornucopia of light down there to give me a bright as hell image. Not so with an intermediate device.

Light loss through a lens is a factor of the sheer quantity of atoms the photons pass through and the coatings on the lens. When viewing a scene in mother nature, the amount of photons coming in to the scope increases with surface area of the lens far in excess of the losses created by the extra lens mass.

This isn't true of a finite source like a thermal display. There is also going to be a tipping point where it goes from minor effect to major effect, and that tipping point may not be in the place that my theory assumes.

 

[RayDBonz]

How about the other side of the coin?

What thermal clip-ons are you using?

 

[The King]

The group of people I've seen in this thread so far? All of them probably.

The one I'm using the most lately is that Bering Yoter-C. Its...just...so much clip on for the money.

I have used the UTC-XII with my SB 3-20 and the later FLIR units (T65 if I remember right). Also, all of the clip-on I2's that were ever popular have been on these guns I think. The PVS-30, 24, 2124LR, 27, 26, and some of the cheaper commercial only ones.

 

[Choid]

As a general rule my favorite scopes are the SB 3-20 and the Kahles k318i. I don't know if they are the best scopes behind a clip on, but they are the right size and magnification range, and they are great scopes to shoot during the day, which is like 99% of my shooting. I think all of the ultra short scopes were literally made to run with clip ons, though I am not positive. This is with the UTC-xii, LWTS-LR and TigIr.

 

[wigwamitus]

Agree, I don't pick my scopes to work with clipons. I pick the scopes I want and then make them work with the clipons I use.

These days I like

L&S mk4 2.5-8x mil-hash/dot on the mk12s (light, small and get good results. And the image with the utcs and 27 is GREAT.

Moving L&S mk6 3-18x t3 over to new m110-ish.

Have NF 2.5-20x t3 on bolt gun and will backfill the mk6 with a repeat of the nx8 on second bolt gun.

==
BTW, I disagree with the idea that only under $200 scopes have bad image with thermal clipons. I've had a number of burris XTR2 scopes and thought they were great until I started running them side by side with the L&S and the NF I have now ... and the xtr2s are "dark" ... and the thermal image is NOT as clear. Now some under $1000 scopes work fine, like Trijicons as even the low cost ones seem to have good glass (i.e. more coatings).
So I still think "decent" glass helps.

 

[rlsmith1]

Reviving this thread a little bit. Anyone run an NX8 1-8 with a clip on? I know it's not preferred by many but the small form factor and light weight check a lot of boxes. The new Primary Arms 1-8 is interesting too but that has yet to be proven

 

[Ksracer]

Reviving this thread a little bit. Anyone run an NX8 1-8 with a clip on? I know it's not preferred by many but the small form factor and light weight check a lot of boxes. The new Primary Arms 1-8 is interesting too but that has yet to be proven

I went to an NX8 2.5-20 on my Yoter. I greatly prefer it over the G3. The adjustable paralax lets me focus in on the screen and really cleared things up at higher magnifications. The NX8 looks better on 12x than the G3 did on 8x. The G3 looked better under 5x though.

 

[rlsmith1]

I'm more curious about the 1-8 version since it's so compact but does not have side focus. Thanks

 

[The King]

I'm more curious about the 1-8 version since it's so compact but does not have side focus. Thanks

I have both. The 1-8 is ok to good, but I don’t love it like I do the 1-10.

I like the size and weight a lot of the 1-8

 

[rlsmith1]

I have both. The 1-8 is ok to good, but I don’t love it like I do the 1-10.

I like the size and weight a lot of the 1-8

Thanks for the feedback. Would you say they are pretty even through 4x or so with a clip on? It seems like 6-8x is about as far as you want to go without having the ability to focus?

 

[The King]

Thanks for the feedback. Would you say they are pretty even through 4x or so with a clip on? It seems like 6-8x is about as far as you want to go without having the ability to focus?

Nnnnno. (thoughtful no sound).

What’s happening is the optics package on the 1-10 is superior. Every part of it from the front to the back. It is so superior that on 8x it beats the SB 1-8 CC.

I’m not really able to quantify it in words - but an analogy would be a 1000hp Honda Civic might turn in the same time at the drag versus a 1000hp Mclaren. But you know which of the two is actually giving you more.

This superiority has no subtlety to it, like it would if you said 2022 Vette vs McLaren.

 

[rlsmith1]

@The King gotcha... Really appreciate it!

 

[Ksracer]

Has anybody tried a Burris XTRii with a clip on?

I've got a 3-15 on my AR that I might throw the new SY-C on. They have a nice reticle and are pretty rugged, although the glass is kind of meh. I didn't know if it was worth spending the $200 for an objective mount or not.

 

[wigwamitus]

Yes, I used xtr2s for years with clipons The 3-15x the 5-25x and thev1.5-8x.
In their day, for sub $1k scopes, i thought they were great and like the reticle and illum at all powers
But the glass is dark, and with say a UTC on a 3-15x side by side with an atacr 4-16x the atacr wins hands down
Atacr also shorter and lighter
if budget is an issue i also had a ziess conquest v4 4-16x and it was GREAT
very clear and had parallax and zero stop.
and sub $1000
But it is SFP and mine was MOA
But those issues didnt bother me with the utc
But i no longer require myself to have sub $1k scopes.

 

[Ksracer]

Yes, I used xtr2s for years with clipons The 3-15x the 5-25x and thev1.5-8x.
In their day, for sub $1k scopes, i thought they were great and like the reticle and illum at all powers
But the glass is dark, and with say a UTC on a 3-15x side by side with an atacr 4-16x the atacr wins hands down
Atacr also shorter and lighter
if budget is an issue i also had a ziess conquest v4 4-16x and it was GREAT
very clear and had parallax and zero stop.
and sub $1000
But it is SFP and mine was MOA
But those issues didnt bother me with the utc
But i no longer require myself to have sub $1k scopes.

I still have the G3 razor on a shelf and I could swap them easy enough, but the parallax issues I saw with the Razor have me skeptical.

Were you able to dial the parallax out with the XTRii?

I believe my primary rig will still wear the NX8/xELR combo.

The AR with the XTRii/SY-C will be a buddy gun or times where I expect close range/multiple shots.

 

[wigwamitus]

.. Were you able to dial the parallax out with the XTRii? ...

Yes xtr2 has wide range of parallax adjustment.

.. G3 razor on a shelf and I could swap them easy enough, but the parallax issues I saw with the Razor have me skeptical ...

I need to test more, but believe most LPVO should be fine with the Theon's due to the Theon's being setup for ~100yds parallax and many LPVO are as well. I shot the ATACR 1-8x with the "LR" quite a bit and did not detect any POI shift and removed and remounted it between each string of shots.

 

[Travis224]

I'm more curious about the 1-8 version since it's so compact but does not have side focus. Thanks

I had one, I didn't like it at all with the rh25 or the voodoo S. I do use the athlon 1-10, the G3 1-10, and ordered a 1-8 Atacr. I also have a March 1.5-15x but I haven't played with it much but I think it's very capable with the TigIr.

I will add, the Athlon was the brightest and the "biggest" picture than all the others. It's odd, the image is so big and bright and seems...closer than the others. I'm super curious about the NX8 2.5-20 ....

 

[Ksracer]

Yes xtr2 has wide range of parallax adjustment.



I need to test more, but believe most LPVO should be fine with the Theon's due to the Theon's being setup for ~100yds parallax and many LPVO are as well. I shot the ATACR 1-8x with the "LR" quite a bit and did not detect any POI shift and removed and remounted it between each string of shots.

Interesting. I wouldn't have guessed that the clip on could be made to work with different parallaxes, but maybe the thermals eyepiece can be made such that the light is focused in the scope correctly.
In my mind, the image from the LPVO needs to be focused internally on the same vertical plane as the reticle, other wise you have an apparent shift when viewed from an angle, or when your eye isn't positioned in the same spot.
Just to clarify, the G3 (or XTRii) would be going back on the new SY-C. I had a several Mil reticle shift just from moving my head with this scope previously, and without a side focus, it can't be adjusted.
The Theon will be paired with my NX8. I can dial the NX8's parallax out completely when paired with the SY-C, so I expect no issues with the Theon either.
The G3 might have a better image, but accurate shot placement trump's image for my use.