Rifle Scopes Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

[ccoker]

I could have sworn I have read someone report the FFP version of the Mark 4 had better glass than the SFP.

This evening I got to test back to back
Both scopes are brand new Mark 4, 4.5-14x50 TMR

I tested both viewing back to back at 250 yards views into the dark. I could discern no difference whatsoever and I am pretty well versed at testing scopes in little to no light as I do a lot of hog hunting and have tested a bunch of scopes over the years.

I would say that I would prefer the FFP for daylight uses but the thin TMR reticle (both were set to 11 power) get's lost fast. The illuminated TMR is done well and at it's lowest setting there is no flare whatsoever and is totally usable, as such, if I was going to use for hunting as well, I would probably opt for the illuminated TMR / SFP version.

I haven't tested against an older Leupold Mark 4 yet and will do so this weekend against a few of them.

 

[holy cow]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

Do you think the glass in the older Vari X 111 scopes is a better quality glass than what is going in them now. I am curious to some opinions on it because a lot of people older than I tell me that it is.

 

[crawdad1]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

I just recieved a new 4.5-14x50 mk4 today and it is alot better than the previous models i have had. Maybe leupold is finally getting there act together again.

 

[ccoker]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

I got a Firedot 2-7 and was very impressed with the low light performance of it..
Comparing directly against my S&B 1.5-6 and Trijicon 3-9
Was it AS good as the S&B?
No..
But was it better than expected?
yes...
very pleasantly surprised and it was hanging with the Trijicon

Bill Wilson reported the same findings with the new Firedot 3-9s against the Trijicons

 

[Dionis]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

Thanks for review!

 

[BCP]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dan Tucker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you think the glass in the older Vari X 111 scopes is a better quality glass than what is going in them now. I am curious to some opinions on it because a lot of people older than I tell me that it is. </div></div>

Newer VX-3 glass is better than the older vari-x glass.

 

[ccoker]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

I got it from Leupold that the M4s have the "extended twilight" lens coating upgrades in the last year.

 

[BCP]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ccoker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I got it from Leupold that the M4s have the "extended twilight" lens coating upgrades in the last year. </div></div>

Yeap! Should be the VX-3 coating. I think. Heard that somewhere on another forum.

 

[ccoker]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

I would say I was pleasantly surprised with the low light performance

 

[JSTARSZ]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

intersting...I have a SFP and FFP Mk4 so I will have to check this out. I never noticed it as better but I normally don;t have them side by side for a comparision.

 

[ccoker]

Re: Glass quality between Mark 4 FFP and SFP: tested

I think there was just some timing differences and what was released product wise and what the website said

http://www.leupold.com/tactical/products...m5-front-focal/

http://www.leupold.com/tactical/products...-illum-reticle/

Both show the extended twilight lenses, but I don't think the latter got updated... the tech told me that the FFP version came out with the new lense coatings and was as such announced, about the same time the SFP scopes got the treatment but the specs on the website didn't get updated until sometime later, hence, possibly the confusion