Rifle Scopes Known issues with the S&B 3-27 or 5-25

[aaalbert]

Back in 2014, PRB did a tactical scope field tests [link] with 18 optics. One of the biggest surprises was the new S&B 3-27, it failed to have the advertised max zoom of 27, but rather a max of 22.4. Is this a known issue with the S&B? If so has it been fixed?

I'm interested in purchasing either a S&B 3-27 or a S&B 5-25, but I am hesitant to spend the extra cash for the 3-27 if it doesn't zoom pasted the 5-25. I would appreciate any conversation on known S&B issues and thoughts on if the 3-27 is worth the extra cash.


Thanks

Edit: I am aware of the tunneling issue with the S&B 5-25. it is one of the major reason I'm considering spending the extra cash on the 3-27.

 

[TangoSierra916]

Ive had a few 3-27 all were exceptional in my experience. I sold them and regret that. No tunneling and very wide FOV. I did a few side by side compares, nothing fancy, with a TT 5-25 and ATACR 5-25 and the top end of the SB showed a bit more zoom, so Ild say mine went to 27x but I dont know how to measure if it was 26.9 vs 27.1 if that makes sense.

I wouldnt hesitate to buy the 3-27, great optics. That being said in the 3-27 price point there are some very nice optics that Im sure youll hear about , so it really depends on what features are important to you.

 

[Tony1320]

Ive had a few 3-27 all were exceptional in my experience. I sold them and regret that. No tunneling and very wide FOV. I did a few side by side compares, nothing fancy, with a TT 5-25 and ATACR 5-25 and the top end of the SB showed a bit more zoom, so Ild say mine went to 27x but I dont know how to measure if it was 26.9 vs 27.1 if that makes sense.

I wouldnt hesitate to buy the 3-27, great optics. That being said in the 3-27 price point there are some very nice optics that Im sure youll hear about , so it really depends on what features are important to you.

How did the Schmidt and Bender and NF Atacr compare?

 

[TangoSierra916]

Personally to me the sb 3-27 seemed to produce a more refined image at distance than the atacr. With both on 25x (sb approx 25) and parallax adjusted optimally on both for my eyes the sb produced more fine detail at longer range over 500-1100m. Both were great optically the sb seemed very close may even say the same as TT in image definition to my eyes. The thing I noticed too which again is likely me and /or the prescription of lense coatings is that my eyes felt more relaxed with the sb vs the atacr. I checked both scopes multiple days in different lighting with recovery periods but usually notice myself squinting with the atacr and not with the sb.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Back in 2014, PRB did a tactical scope field tests [link] with 18 optics. One of the biggest surprises was the new S&B 3-27, it failed to have the advertised max zoom of 27, but rather a max of 22.4. Is this a known issue with the S&B? If so has it been fixed?

I'm interested in purchasing either a S&B 3-27 or a S&B 5-25, but I am hesitant to spend the extra cash for the 3-27 if it doesn't zoom pasted the 5-25. I would appreciate any conversation on known S&B issues and thoughts on if the 3-27 is worth the extra cash.


Thanks

Edit: I am aware of the tunneling issue with the S&B 5-25. it is one of the major reason I'm considering spending the extra cash on the 3-27.

That was a sample size of one. I’d be surprised if that was indicative of the 3-27 overall.

@koshkin ??

 

[hk dave]

I thought it was found out that they made a mistake setting up that particular s&b or something, causing it to behave not as intended?

 

[hk dave]

As for the 5-25, the only known issue is it’s a 7-25. Outside of that, still one of the best scopes on earth.

 

[koshkin]

This is going to sound a bit inconsiderate, but PRB content is really good when he is summarizing what people use and all that. The whole optics testing stuff he did... well, it is not great. He bit off more than he could chew with that. You can talk to a bunch of experts and try to set up experiments, but if you lack understanding of the fundamentals you will make silly mistakes. The business with the S&B 3-27x was one of those.

He had the eyepiece grossly out of adjustment which can make the magnification look very much off to the camera, which is exactly why his camera-based measurements were a bunch of huey.

I share some of the blame since I did not help him beyond answering a couple of questions here and there. He did ask for more help when he was figuring out how to do it and I weaseled out of it. It looked like a lot of work that would be even harder to do remotely and he was using Spuhr mounts to boot (I have a policy of not involving myself in anything that uses Spuhr products for a variety of personal and political reasons).

The PRB guy (I do nor remember his name for which I apologize) has his heart int he right place and he tried to do a really interesting project, but he really does not understand optics. His charts look pretty though.

ILya

 

[koshkin]

As for the 5-25, the only known issue is it’s a 7-25. Outside of that, still one of the best scopes on earth.

Aside from the tunneling, I actually prefer the 5-25x to the 3-27x. They were designed by different optical designers, so the feel of the glass is very different. Above 10x or so, the 5-25x is a better design. There is a reason it has remained relevant for all these years.

ILya

 

[hk dave]

Pretty cool info Ilya. I’ve never looked through the 3-27 myself.

The 5-25 still wows me every time I look through it.

 

[koshkin]

Pretty cool info Ilya. I’ve never looked through the 3-27 myself.

The 5-25 still wows me every time I look through it.

3-27x is a very soild scope, but microcontrast is optimized differently and the view is harsher. 5-25x is still a remarkable scope. If low end magnificationis improtant, 3-27x is probably a better general purpose design, but above 15x, I think the only scope out there right now that has an edge over the S&B is Tangent Theta (disclaimer: I have not yet tested ZCO and M7Xi).

ILya

 

[scharfschutze762]

The 3-27 is 27X at the top and IMO opinion the finest and most optically advanced sniper optic available today . And to be blunt none of the other optic makers could even make this optic even if they wanted too. I even know the designer of the optic firsthand. There is a reason why almost every REAL Tier 1 sniper unit in the free world use this optic. I have used the MX7 side by side with the 3-27 and its no 3-27 S&B.
Not discounting your expertise and opinion Koshkin but I have tens of thousands of rounds of firsthand experience with these optics mentioned except the ZCO. But I do know where the ZCO is made firsthand.
IMO if you can afford it go for the 3-27. Id go with a NF 5-25 ATACR over a 5-25 S&B.

 

[koshkin]

The 3-27 is 27X at the top and IMO opinion the finest and most optically advanced sniper optic available today . And to be blunt none of the other optic makers could even make this optic even if they wanted too. I even know the designer of the optic firsthand. There is a reason why almost every REAL Tier 1 sniper unit in the free world use this optic. I have used the MX7 side by side with the 3-27 and its no 3-27 S&B.
Not discounting your expertise and opinion Koshkin but I have tens of thousands of rounds of firsthand experience with these optics mentioned except the ZCO. But I do know where the ZCO is made firsthand.
IMO if you can afford it go for the 3-27. Id go with a NF 5-25 ATACR over a 5-25 S&B.

Opinions differ.

I liked Tangent Theta more than the 3-27x S&Bb and at higher mags I preferred 5-25x S&B.

The part where none of the other optics makers could make one is just rubbish. The rest of it comes down to personal preference.

I have no first hand knowledge of which sniper teams qualify as Tier 1 and what they use and why.

Ilya

 

[Carl A]

have a SuB PM II hp, 3-27.
really like it. Only slight issue is that when it's colder, say below 32-40 Fahrenheit, the parallax might be tricky to get perfect. - in warmer it generally is very accurate also with the distance marked on it, but in colder it has to be set on much longer distance - beside the issue it is tricky to get completely accurate.

The clicks on the turrets I would say are a bit to much resistance, in a hunting situation it might get annoying. (here I hold the Vortex HD gen I 5-20 I had a while ago as perfect.)

No tunnel at all at 3, and also perfect at 27.

I can really recomment it, though I havent tried so many top scopes.

 

[Glassaholic]

This is going to sound a bit inconsiderate, but PRB content is really good when he is summarizing what people use and all that. The whole optics testing stuff he did... well, it is not great. He bit off more than he could chew with that. You can talk to a bunch of experts and try to set up experiments, but if you lack understanding of the fundamentals you will make silly mistakes. The business with the S&B 3-27x was one of those.

He had the eyepiece grossly out of adjustment which can make the magnification look very much off to the camera, which is exactly why his camera-based measurements were a bunch of huey.

I share some of the blame since I did not help him beyond answering a couple of questions here and there. He did ask for more help when he was figuring out how to do it and I weaseled out of it. It looked like a lot of work that would be even harder to do remotely and he was using Spuhr mounts to boot (I have a policy of not involving myself in anything that uses Spuhr products for a variety of personal and political reasons).

The PRB guy (I do nor remember his name for which I apologize) has his heart int he right place and he tried to do a really interesting project, but he really does not understand optics. His charts look pretty though.

ILya

OP - back in 2014 there were heated debates here on the Hide about Cal's results from his tests, he also messed up on the March mil issue if I remember as well, but it was a while ago. What ILya mentions here pretty much sums it up, if you're basing magnification on what you see through a camera that takes an image through the scope then you have to have baselines for everything and make sure it is apples to apples. This is why I try to have disclaimers on all my images shot through a scope, it is not wise to judge the quality of a scope based on an image you see on the internet, regardless of who took the image. With regard to the Schmidt 3-27 or 5-25 I would ask this, how much is the low end magnification to you? Or put another way, do you ever envision needing below 7x magnification for the style of shooting you do? If the answer is no then the 5-25 can be had at some amazing prices, but if you think you will have situations where having the much greater FOV of the 3-27 then I think the choice is clear.

 

[aaalbert]

Thanks for all the responses. You guys have been quite informative. I was unaware of the errors in the 2014 test.

 

[hk dave]

Thanks for all the responses. You guys have been quite informative. I was unaware of the errors in the 2014 test.

Yah, it was a massive attempt, but a poorly contrived and executed one.

His website tracking stuff is pretty cool though. Love that.