Rifle Scopes Mk5 3.6-18 Tremor 3 Illumination

[Kline]

Looking for some first hand experience.

Has anyone here had both an atacr 4-16 and a Mk5 3.6-18 (illuminated) with Tremor reticles?

How does the reticle brightness compare between the two?

I have owned (and used prior) the non illuminated mk5 for about 6 years or so now.

I decided I wanted an illuminated version so that I could pull double duty and drag my mws out to hunt with here in Michigan, and was going to get another mk5 but got a good deal on an atacr 4-16. I mounted it up, and honestly the illumination seems downright unusable unless on max power in very very low light.

I’m wondering if the mk5 would be better and thus usable at minimum power (just need a solid dot to aim with at 3.6 not usable tree) or if I need to be looking elsewhere altogether.

Thanks

 

[stanley_white]

Video by @C_Does:



-Stan

 

[Kline]

Video by @C_Does:



-Stan

I appreciate it, but I’m asking specifically about illumination between the two, with the tremor 3 reticle.

 

[stanley_white]

I appreciate it, but I’m asking specifically about illumination between the two, with the tremor 3 reticle.

At around 14:40 @C_Does describes the ATACR illumination as “kind of okay.”

Maybe he will chime in here with more thoughts.

While you might not find the specific answer you are looking for if, in general, one model has brighter illumination in any reticle, this also might be true with the Tremor 3 model.

Good luck in your search.

-Stan

 

[Alcanino]

Hi,
I have a NF 5-37×56 with tremor 3 and illumination, just the center dot @ the cross hair is illuminated, no part of the Xmas tree markings are illuminated.

Hope that helps you.

 

[Kline]

Hi,
I have a NF 5-37×56 with tremor 3 and illumination, just the center dot @ the cross hair is illuminated, no part of the Xmas tree markings are illuminated.

Hope that helps you.

Not at all, I have an atacr. I am wondering about the Leupold and how it fairs in comparison to the atacr.

I appreciate the attempt to help though.