Rifle Scopes Bought a S&B and Im not wow'd

[tylerw02]

Bought a S&B and Im not wow'd

Hensoldt, March, Premier. The NF ATACR wasn't too bad.. good contrast and color saturation but did have some CA in the blue wavelength. I haven't seen the BEAST and I can only comment on the scopes I have seen. Premier's glass is just gorgeous, awesome resolution, contrast, saturation some very slight CA in the green wavelength when viewing off the center of the exit pupil. I can't wait to see the new Tangent Theta and Minox products. TT has used the same OP as Premier but they opened up the exit pupil which gives a better what everyone calls an "eyebox". The larger the exit pupil the more forgiving the eyebox will be especially on higher mag.

Hensoldts are I adequately optioned. Premier isn't I'm business, March scopes aren't set up nearly as well as S&B and are said to be very sensitive. I've not used one as on paper they wouldn't meet my needs I'm afraid. ATACR is SFP and I wouldn't consider it for that.

Your list seem to be all about optical quality and not about functionality, which is more important. If glass quality were all that mattered, why not throw Swarovski in?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lowlight]

You mean the Hensoldt option of just a P3 reticle is not enough ... LOL

 

[shortman308055]

i dont have a s&b but i do hava a bushnell banner 6-18-50 that i have engaged 3" orange sticky targets at 300 yards at 9 pm at night with no moon and have drilled em. me and a friend of mine did take a zeiss (4.5-14-50), 2 nightforces (5-25-56), a nikon (3-10-50)and a trijicon(5-25-50) and aimed them all at 10 power on a split in a wheat stem at 200 yards and continually looked through them every minute till way dark and the nikon buckmaster could still distinguish the split stem later than all the others...... but in daylight, i love my nightforce.....

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

When did price, or a subjective rating by others equal a wow factor to all who bought in? Everyone has different needs/wants. I own USO and Leupold, both have strong an weak points over the other for the given task. They are both great for the given tasks I use them for. Are they the best for everything,...no they are not, but then again I have had NF and S&B and did not like them for the task the USO and Leupold fill either. A wow factor to me is getting the scope my way for my task, not a one size fits all that the mfgs want you to have.


If the mfgs are looking, I'd like a 2.5X10 FFP w/a IPHY ret in 1/2 IPHY ticts and the up knob in 1 IPHY clicks, w/ 65 IPHY in one rev w/a zero stop (90IPHY total) The ctr cross in the upper 1/3 of the glass so I can just hold 60-70 IPHY of up and a total of 30IPHY of wind both ways. Glass = to std Leupold 2.5X8 Mk4 would be just fine with me. Now for my needs that would give me a wow factor on my 22" do it all .308. If you'll can supply that, I'll send my wants for the 300wm at a later date.

 

[shortman308055]

wish i knew of a high power nikon , say 5-25 on a 30mm tube i could purchase and see how it holds up on say a 308 out to 3 or 4 hundred yards...

 

[tylerw02]

You mean the Hensoldt option of just a P3 reticle is not enough ... LOL

1990 called. They want their reticle back!

I honestly thought his top four would be Kahles, Steiner, NF Beast, and IOR and talk about reticles and new focus rings and knobs....




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[the once-ler]

You can't say Premier is not in business really, it's just been absorbed, renamed and the new models upgraded. You still get the same great service Premier is known for. As you said LL, Swarovski has insanely gorgeous glass especially in the Z6's but they have yet to really target the "tactical" crowd. They are close with some of the newer products but still they cater mostly to the hunting crowd and rightfully so, they really shine in that theater.
There are really so many "good" choices out there. And some real surprises in what many consider "lower end" or budget glass

 

[the once-ler]

1990 called. They want their reticle back!

I honestly thought his top four would be Kahles, Steiner, NF Beast, and IOR and talk about reticles and new focus rings and knobs....




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have never looked thru an IOR or Beast. Kahles has good glass in the 624i since they did the Gen2 upgrade. Steiner is very good as well. Reticles are all a personal choice and noone can say one is really better than another because each is completely subjective. March has very nicely done turrets. But there again turret selection is subjective as well. USO makes a damn good scope overall as well.
One I would like to hear more on even though it's a lower price range is the newer Burris scopes. LL any words on glass quality? clarity? resolution? etc?

 

[phxfa]

and there ya have it,,,,

 

[E. Bryant]

When did price, or a subjective rating by others equal a wow factor to all who bought in?

In the case of the SB 5-25x PMII, the wow factor doesn't come simply from its astronomical price or the subjective emotions of owners. It is, by any objective standard, a phenomenal rifle scope. Now, whether that performance is worth the price is a value judgement that can only come from the person who is opening his wallet, and I won't sit here and argue with someone that feels his money is better spent elsewhere (for whatever it's worth, I own a couple of 'em, and yet my last three scope purchases were from other manufacturers).

 

[tylerw02]

Reticle selection is subjective only to a certain degree. When one can be used to better range because it has a finer increments, it becomes less about being subjective and more about fact. When one has the ability to hold wind in .2mRad increments rather than 1 mil increments, it is factual that one is better than the other for the task at hand. It isn't simply like having a favorite color.

What is subjective is talking about color an "pop" of glass. If you are going to do scientific resolution comparisons, that's a whole other ball game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[the once-ler]

Reticle selection is subjective only to a certain degree. When one can be used to better range because it has a finer increments, it becomes less about being subjective and more about fact. When one has the ability to hold wind in .2mRad increments rather than 1 mil increments, it is factual that one is better than the other for the task at hand. It isn't simply like having a favorite color.

What is subjective is talking about color an "pop" of glass. If you are going to do scientific resolution comparisons, that's a whole other ball game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What I meant by reticle choice being completely subjective: Putting a simple duplex reticle on an air rifle only to be used at close range and a Horus on a 338LM. Each is perfect in the owners eye for the purpose it serves. One can say the Horus is the better reticle by far but you really wouldn't need all that clutter if you aren't shooting past 50m.
Price can also be subjective, you could have got a great deal on an older model new or used. If I pay top dollar for something and it doesn't live up to the hype or meet my expectations I don't hold on to it and hope it grows on me. I got a SB 5-25x56 in Tan with P4F. The turrets were nicely done, but the clicks were muffled and slightly mushy. The glass resolution was there but the color saturation and contrast were dull, and it tunnelled like crazy in the lower mag range. I did like that it focused to 10m. The illumination was nice as well. I don't deny it was a very nice optic, fully capable of doing it's job, it just didn't have that $4k wow factor exactly as the OP has stated with his. Maybe they have changed some things in the 3-27 High Power but at $7k it better blow your mind. I keep hearing "diminishing returns" past a certain price point but that sounds like an excuse for something that costs a lot but don't deliver.

 

[tylerw02]

Bought a S&B and Im not wow'd

You claimed things like Hensoldt is better despite the crappy options. You are basing everything on subjective opinion, but there are scientific ways to evaluate things. There are lots of scopes that can be used effectively, but there is one standard and a good reason it is the standard. I could just repeat my last couple of posts again. I think you missed the point lowlight and I made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[damoncali]

A $7000 scope may be worth every penny. But it depends heavily on how you make those pennies.

 

[tylerw02]

Indeed and none are worth 7k to me!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BCP]

I bought a S&B and I was expecting so much more out of the glass.

I have been running the Bushnell xrs on my comp gun for a while and decided to finally bite the bullet. But with both scopes on guns side by side the hdmr was right there with it. If the S&B was clearer it wasnt the extra money better. So I went and grabbed the wife, unknowingly telling her the "new" scope I told her to get behind the rifles adjust the parrallax and all things at the same power. She chose he hdmr.

Do I have a bad one, is that a norm for most people that have had both?

Its a 3-20x50 P4F

It's human nature to think that higher cost means more quality but it isn't always the case. Not so much the SB being bad as the newer bushnells being very good for the money.

 

[the once-ler]

So Schmidt is the "gold standard" all others are Schmidt wanna-be's and sucking on their coattails but so many others do it so well and possibly subjectively better. It don't matter how you make your money 7k is 7k.. unless you are a 1%er that's a fat chunk of change. One simple fact remains it always comes harder than it goes.
Has anyone had a chance to examine the new $7k offerings from S&B and Henny?

 

[RTH1800]

What Frank said is correct!

 

[cramey74]

What a yawn fest...

As if, most of the Hensoldts out there have a ton of CA, lots of purple fringing, and other than the new 3-26x (@ $7k) they don't have zero stops.

Won't get into the Premier debate that has been hashed out at length, but if you are comparing scopes you aught to consider the mechanics of it.

The March are decent, very unforgiving eye box in most of them because of the big magnification range and smallish scopes / objectives. The new March is actually very good with the larger objective it corrects a lot of the forgiving properties of the line. Still...

But again, more talk as if ... there isn't a manufacturer out there that doesn't hold the S&B 5-25x as the standard to which they strive to reach.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ X10

If I took my wife to a car show and showed her a car with a $3,000 paint job vs. one with a $15,000 paint job, then ask her to pick the best one she would simply say "they are both shiny". It is not that she is dumb, it's that she doesn't know what to look for. Bushnell optics are great and at their price point are a good buy, but in no way compare to a S&B.

I apologize in advance if any butts were injured in this post.

 

[tylerw02]

If I asked my wife what was best and showed her two scopes, she'd say, "whatever one is cheapest".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cramey74]

If I asked my wife what was best and showed her two scopes, she'd say, "whatever one is cheapest".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not my wife. She is always concerned about optic clarity, rifle fit and finish, and of course accuracy. ;-)

 

[the once-ler]

Not my wife. She is always concerned about optic clarity, rifle fit and finish, and of course accuracy. ;-)

You have a smart wife dude

 

[steve123]

What I meant by reticle choice being completely subjective: Putting a simple duplex reticle on an air rifle only to be used at close range and a Horus on a 338LM. Each is perfect in the owners eye for the purpose it serves. One can say the Horus is the better reticle by far but you really wouldn't need all that clutter if you aren't shooting past 50m.
Price can also be subjective, you could have got a great deal on an older model new or used. If I pay top dollar for something and it doesn't live up to the hype or meet my expectations I don't hold on to it and hope it grows on me. I got a SB 5-25x56 in Tan with P4F. The turrets were nicely done, but the clicks were muffled and slightly mushy. The glass resolution was there but the color saturation and contrast were dull, and it tunnelled like crazy in the lower mag range. I did like that it focused to 10m. The illumination was nice as well. I don't deny it was a very nice optic, fully capable of doing it's job, it just didn't have that $4k wow factor exactly as the OP has stated with his. Maybe they have changed some things in the 3-27 High Power but at $7k it better blow your mind. I keep hearing "diminishing returns" past a certain price point but that sounds like an excuse for something that costs a lot but don't deliver.

Haha, I started laughing when I read this.

Guess what scope and what reticle I used to win a very difficult 2 day national level Field Target air rifle match last weekend in open division?!?! That would be a S&B PMII 5-25/H-59. Yes it works just as well on my USFT/.177 as it does on my Tactical rifle/6.5 SAUM. I also used the .2 mil hash's for wind because we were dealing with 20 mph winds at times. My opinion is that this particular scope is the most versatile rifle scope ever created.

 

[the once-ler]

Dude, I just used that as an example of reticles being subjective for each individual and his application for it. It was just as a reference, and you really just proved my point... A Horus may work great on an air rifle for all I know.

Good job on your win BTW

 

[steve123]

Thanks.

Sorry I wasn't making fun of you, it was just ironic is all.

Last summer I used it for Hunter FT which is all holdovers and holdoffs on 12x. I determined distance by using the mil bracket lines above the horizontal crosshair for ranging the known sizes of the kill zones. They worked fantastic for that application!

 

[the once-ler]

Yes that does make perfect sense. An air rifle is infinitely more susceptible to drop and drift as it's velocity and projectile weight are lower than a propellant driven weapon

 

[dieselgeek]

I've looked though the ERS/XRS and length. I've owned a few of them, and I've spent plenty of time behind the S&B PM II. The glass on the S&B is much better.

Try using the G2 to mil with the .10 subs on the end. I can't do it, the edge is not clear like the S&B. Resolve on some paper at 25 and 50 and 100 yards. It should even be more clear then.


The ERS/XRS and HDMR are great scopes and glass for the money, but for more money the S&B is at the top of it's game. I'm a big fan of the Kahles k624i. The Glass is awesome the FOV and eye relief are top notch, and the MSR-K can't be beat IMO.

 

[beenjammin]

I tried S&B; two of them (5-25 and 3-20) and I know the glass is better overall than NF but I have been able to afford the twelve NF scopes I own where I could not own that many S&B scopes. Boils down to having the same thing on every rifle and the NF won out. I give up FFP for the NF 5.5-22 but that can be overcome with practice. My two latest NF are a ATACR and a 15=55 Competition and glass is some what improved with them. I would like to at least try the NF BEAST.

.... says the guy with 10 AIs

 

[jevan126]

I have never seen better glass than I did on a SWAROVSKI Z6i, they all say that S&B is the shit but I don't think so.

 

[ZombieMonkey]

I have never seen better glass than I did on a SWAROVSKI Z6i, they all say that S&B is the shit but I don't think so.

S&B glass is good, but Swarovski glass is nicer, yes. At least I think so anyways. That being said, Swarovski does not yet fill the role the PM II does and has set the standard for in a tactical rifle. Hopefully one of these days Swarovski enters the game and does so while building a scope that meets the needs of long range precision shooting.

 

[Potenza]

So Schmidt is the "gold standard" all others are Schmidt wanna-be's and sucking on their coattails but so many others do it so well and possibly subjectively better. It don't matter how you make your money 7k is 7k.. unless you are a 1%er that's a fat chunk of change. One simple fact remains it always comes harder than it goes.
Has anyone had a chance to examine the new $7k offerings from S&B and Henny?

One of my friends have the new 3-27 S&B and 6-24 Hensoldt and the Hensoldt is in other category, the best of all optics, you can add Swaro,Steiner,March,...

 

[tylerw02]

Too had Hensoldt and Swarovski won't make their scopes worth a crap in the other areas necessary to make a good scope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Advokaten]

What is wrong with hensoldts then, I am sort of behind the ball on that topic. /CHris

 

[tylerw02]

Read the thread from the beginning


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shoot4fun]

.... says the guy with 10 AIs

A slight exaggeration. I am down to four. Wanna buy one of your old ones back???
Tough!

 

[MJY65]

If I took my wife to a car show and showed her a car with a $3,000 paint job vs. one with a $15,000 paint job, then ask her to pick the best one she would simply say "they are both shiny". It is not that she is dumb, it's that she doesn't know what to look for. Bushnell optics are great and at their price point are a good buy, but in no way compare to a S&B.

I apologize in advance if any butts were injured in this post.

I think there is more to it than butthurt. Things like tracking and mechanical tests are objective and repeatable. That is not true with what we call "nicer" when it comes to images (or paint). You and I can both look at a car that is painted green and call it green. We do so because someone taught us that grass is green and this car is similar to that. However, that doesn't mean we are actually seeing the same thing. Our retinas and brains are all different and an individual's perception of color or focus is not a universal constant. If you like one scope better than another, it doesn't mean you are wrong or that another shooter doesn't know what he is looking for (although that could be the case). You might as well argue about which speakers sound better or which wine tastes better.

 

[calling4life]

I thought Khales was Swarovski's tactical division? Swarovski's are for hunters, Khales for tactical and long range

 

[tylerw02]

No. Kahles makes hunting gear too. Swarovski owns Kahles, but Kahles is run independently.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2442532&postcount=7


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kombayotch]

1990 called. They want their reticle back!

Will they be taking their SFP and MOA back too?

 

[steelringer]

My wife commented on the mirage worse in the s&b, so it wasnt just like looking at a shiny paint job.

I find some of the comments helpful, like what to look for and how to increase the ability of the s&b. Lots of subjective talk in here which is what I had to kind of expect.

 

[tylerw02]

Were you running them at the same power? Are you sure you had it properly focused?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[oldfatguy]

My wife commented on the mirage worse in the s&b, so it wasnt just like looking at a shiny paint job.
I find some of the comments helpful, like what to look for and how to increase the ability of the s&b. Lots of subjective talk in here which is what I had to kind of expect.

Mirage is reduced by dialing down the power on a variable power scope, any variable scope, not by changing the parallax. Changing the parallax setting does two things. It moves the image off of the reticle plane, inducing parallax problems, and causes the image to be out of focus. So, whoever said mirage can be reduced with parallax adjustment is right. Less apparent mirage, but due to a poorly focused image.

OFG

 

[ssgtkyle]

The ocular is used to adjust the reticle to your eye. If that's not done correctly it will cause eye fatigue. You shouldn't mess with the parallax dial when setting the ocular as you should not be fixated on an object. Here is how we write it in our instruction booklet:

Setting Reticle Focus
NOTE: To prevent the natural tendency of the eye to adjust and compensate image clarity, do not fixate on a particular object for a prolonged period of time.
1. Set the scope magnification to the highest magnification level.
2. Rotate the eyepiece counter clockwise until it stops rotating.
3. With both eyes open, point the scope toward a white wall, or to the sky. Do not stare at a particular object.
4. Rotate the eyepiece clockwise until the reticle is clearly in focus.
5. When the reticle is in focus close your eyes for 3 seconds, then reopen them. The reticle should still be clear and sharp. If not, repeat steps 1 through 4 until the desired image clarity of the reticle is reached.
6. Set the magnification to its lowest level to confirm that the desired image clarity of the reticle is achieved.

Hope this helps.

 

[bbowles]

Just received my nightforce beast and felt same way as OP. Nice but not the wow I expected. Nice functions. Have no problem with the .25 moa lever.

I get that experts will "see" things that inexperienced people like me won't. But I took the Beast outside at dusk with an old leupold vx 2 3-9 and a vortex pst viper 6-24 sfp. Could not tell difference between any of 3 in detail I could pick out in very low light. That said neither of those scopes could hold a candle to features of beast. One other very noticeable item was the eye box. Vortex was the pickiest. Then beast. The leupold was noticeably most tolerant. Did all comparisons at equal powers.

This is not scientific but subjective. Would love to see a s&b 5-25 to compare to.

 

[Matt in Virginia]

I I've also owned a Bushnell scope that could have matched performance to an S&B fo I sometimes think the ultra-premium brands depend on hype to convince us all of their marketing.

fwiw,
Schmidt Bender did not get where they are by marketing hype...

I've heard from many "scope reviewers" who "review" their latest scope by recording their initial impressions of the scope as it was removed from the packaging. I've been involved with this awhile and I've yet to learn anything worth the time to repeat that came from these getting to know you sessions. I would suggest mounting the scope on an actual rifle, zero it, zero out the zero stop, and start sending lead down range and cranking on the windage and elevation knobs. Your appreciation will likely grow.

While an AI AW or an AX make for a far more impressive "meet and greet" than does a Savage, the information obtained in such a session fails to encompass the take home message of an AI Rifle. Your cold bore zero retention should impress you more than the finish machining on the receiver. It can only be obtained by wearing a little finish off the bolt and learning to appreciate the trigger.

Respectfully submitted...

Regards, Matt Garrett.

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

Just received my nightforce beast and felt same way as OP. Nice but not the wow I expected. Nice functions. Have no problem with the .25 moa lever.

I get that experts will "see" things that inexperienced people like me won't. But I took the Beast outside at dusk with an old leupold vx 2 3-9 and a vortex pst viper 6-24 sfp. Could not tell difference between any of 3 in detail I could pick out in very low light. That said neither of those scopes could hold a candle to features of beast. One other very noticeable item was the eye box. Vortex was the pickiest. Then beast. The leupold was noticeably most tolerant. Did all comparisons at equal powers.

This is not scientific but subjective. Would love to see a s&b 5-25 to compare to.

And there you have it. This is a gun sight, not a spotting scope. Thank you.

 

[Ring]

As with all things, there are diminishing returns over a certain price.

Over say, roughly $2k, if you spent twice that, you are not getting twice the scope.

this.. sat side by side with my Razor VS a S&B... i could see a difference... but not a 2k difference...

 

[GhengisAhn175]

Send it to me I'll give you a second opinion ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bbowles]

Got my beast couple weeks ago. Said in this thread earlier that I took it out at low light just before dark and wasn't any better than much cheaper scopes I have. After 2 weeks of actually using this on a rem 700 until my crescent customs is built I NOW appreciate the quality of this fine piece of equipment. Functionality is superb. I even love the 1/2 moa clicks with the throw lever. This may even be the future. Easy to use and huge elevation with one turn.

Never used a s&b but wondered if I made a mistake buying beast over s&b but after using it (like many suggested before passing judgement) I can't imagine wanting anything else. Lowlight's review of beast was spot on! I think the Beast is as good as advertised.

 

[ToKeepAndBear]

What is wrong with hensoldts then, I am sort of behind the ball on that topic. /CHris

Tons wrong with Hensoldt scopes - they have a huge eyebox, the image is too bright (it hurts my eye, it's too vivid), scope body practically disappears (they don't tunnel enough for the S&B 5-25 folk), they gather light too well (you may not get to use your $$$ night vision scope), they only have 12 mils per turn (I mean who doesn't dial 18 mils every time they shoot), if you get the proper base/mount they stop about 1 mil below 100 yard zero (aw mah gaaashhh - that is so difficult to keep track of, aw mahhh ggggaaaassshhhhhh), they only have mil-dots and the NH1 reticle for options (eeewwwhhh, mil-dots are thick and simple, and that NH1 thingy is just weird, don't you know you have to have a micron thick cross hair reticle and 0.00000000000001 reticle gradations to shoot small groooops, eeeeeewwwwwhhhhhh!), and they are too short and stubby in length ('nuf said, if it isn't almost as long as your barrel, it ain't cool dude).

Ain't worth a crap... Ain't worth a crap I say!

TKAB