Looks interesting. Video is a little...
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They mount kind of odd...turret housing is in a weird location, only way they could get the FOV and mag range. Other than that, i love it@Euro.Connor I think I need a DLR CCW/RSW Mil reticle.![]()
Yeah, I definitely need a DLR CCW/RSW SKMR4 version. Would be an amazing hunting scope for crossover work. DM me with a price…They mount kind of odd...turret housing is in a weird location, only way they could get the FOV and mag range. Other than that, i love it
Connor
DLR has SKMR+ and SKMR4+.does it still have shitty skmr reticles? along with all the other issues
40% wider field of view… compared to their 5-25 LOL.
I bet the eyebox on that thing sucks ass.
Bummer, but not surprising. Can you link that video?In Area419's video, they mentioned they weren't overly impressed with the eye box. And that's a semi-hype video.
So, take that how you will.
That's equivalent to 150' @ 1x. An optic is usually called "wide angle" at 120" @ 1x, so that is impressive.42.9 ft of FOV at 100yds on 3.5x. Thats awesome.
The newest gen K624i is noticeably better than the old ones. I was told by a rep they were updated to be identical in every way to the K525i when it was developed, except the magnification, obviously. My 3 current gen K-series are nice. FOV could be a bit better, but it appears they are now fixing this on newer models.28.7 degrees average apparent field of view from 3.5x-28x is impressive, but I wonder if there will be any weird image distortion or edge effects or eye relief issues to go along with that extra wide FOV.
Also, hopefully they've stepped up their glass quality in general. I tried an early 624i many years ago and was very, very disappointed in the glass quality for the price paid. Haven't bothered to try anything else from Kahles since then.
That's my same experience moving from the K525i to ZCOs. The "Big Picture", better optical IQ, and slightly better reticles made it a no-brainer (unless you budget shop in the PX). I do miss the left side windage tho.
I'm still hopeful that the 3-28 is badass and that the eyebox is good, depth of field is good, and optical IQ is improved.
36.7oz is the listed weight.If the weight is decent it would make for an excellent hunting optic assuming the glass is up to par. Obviously not the intended market. We’ll see though
Was driving when i posted. Thats kinda a bummer. Sub 30oz would made it perfect assuming everything else checks out.36.7oz is the listed weight.
I preferred to see the location of the windage. I'd dial with my right hand as well, but just give it the ol' reach around, haha.I'm the opposite. I do all dialing with my right hand. So, I'd love to have right side windage and right side parallax.
I do almost nothing with support hand except supporting the rifle. Unless it's moving between positions, then I'll dial with my left hand.
is that the downside when it comes with large FOV?40% wider field of view… compared to their 5-25 LOL.
I bet the eyebox on that thing sucks ass.
is that the downside when it comes with large FOV?
I've personally owned 3 and had 1 loner. Two of my K624s had to go back to Kahles because they couldn't hold zero. Both confirmed and repaired by Kahles. The loner had the same issue and was returned. The k525 I had for a short time had worse image quality and CA than my k624s and my friends k624. They claimed the k525 had upgraded glass at that time too.All the other issues?You mean those imaginary hear-say ones from haters bitching about 2nd to 100th-hand knowledge that they read online from other people bitching?
I’m not saying they don’t, or haven’t had issues in some previous generations, or that things don’t fail, because they do…Every product does. But I’ve sure heard a whole bunch of bitching about Kahles, and yet to see equal the evidence from those same people, of their own personal Kahles scopes that failed…
Ironically, my Kahles scopes were perfect out of the box, and have not given me a single issue. While my ATACR F1 5-25x56 kind of sucks. The glass is extremely subpar for the price tag, and the parallax is WAY off. It should be a $2,000 scope, not $3,100. I’ve thought about sending it back for subpar glass and the parallax being way off, but after reading other CS experiences, I think I’ll just live with it, and not waste my time and money. Their CS seems to have a pretty shit reputation with “it’s within spec” being their motto.I've personally owned 3 and had 1 loner. Two of my K624s had to go back to Kahles because they couldn't hold zero. Both confirmed and repaired by Kahles. The loner had the same issue and was returned. The k525 I had for a short time had worse image quality and CA than my k624s and my friends k624. They claimed the k525 had upgraded glass at that time too.
At the time I was shooting 5-7 2 day prs matches a year and heard about nothing but issues from the majority of non-sponsored shooters using them. I hope they got their shit together but they'll never see another cent of my money. Nightforces have their quirks but of 7 ATACRS I've owned I've had to send 0 back.
Ironically, my Kahles scopes were perfect out of the box, and have not given me a single issue. While my ATACR F1 5-25x56 kind of sucks. The glass is extremely subpar for the price tag, and the parallax is WAY off. It should be a $2,000 scope, not $3,100. I’ve thought about sending it back for subpar glass and the parallax being way off, but after reading other CS experiences, I think I’ll just live with it, and not waste my time and money. Their CS seems to have a pretty shit reputation with “it’s within spec” being their motto.
Granted, what I paid for it brand new, it’s worth that much, but I wouldn’t pay remotely near list price.
Well, I believe your experience with your 1 NF. The parallax numbers being off is a quirk but I don't know anyone that's an experienced shooter that doesn't adjust parallax by looking through the scope. As far as the glass quality goes I've never owned a 5-25 but they are rumored to have the worst IQ of the ATACR line and the couple I've looked through I believe it. All that said I'd much rather have those 2 issues than a scope that won't hold zero and has poor IQ.Ironically, my Kahles scopes were perfect out of the box, and have not given me a single issue. While my ATACR F1 5-25x56 kind of sucks. The glass is extremely subpar for the price tag, and the parallax is WAY off. It should be a $2,000 scope, not $3,100. I’ve thought about sending it back for subpar glass and the parallax being way off, but after reading other CS experiences, I think I’ll just live with it, and not waste my time and money. Their CS seems to have a pretty shit reputation with “it’s within spec” being their motto.
Granted, what I paid for it brand new, it’s worth that much, but I wouldn’t pay remotely near list price.
And you don’t even own any guns, scopes, or do any shooting… I mean, you never post any pictures, so I’m just assuming you’re a random nobody that runs his mouth and just loves to bitch about things he perceives he doesn’t like, since he obviously doesn’t own any firearms. Until you post up proof of what you own, I’ll take advice and opinions from people who do actually own guns and shoot.Cool, that dude is probably also shooting more in a week on one of his rifles for a train up and 2 days PRS match then you shoot in a year.
Kahles scopes suck ass. It’s just the nicest thing you’ve owned so of course when you’re shooting low volume and a year ago were talking about how great your Arkens are Kahles is going to seem like a great optic. Report back when your training wheels come off and you have beyond the worst example of ATACR’s from the line to compare them to.
I adjust parallax looking through the scope, how else would I know the numbers are off?Well, I believe your experience with your 1 NF. The parallax numbers being off is a quirk but I don't know anyone that's an experienced shooter that doesn't adjust parallax by looking through the scope. As far as the glass quality goes I've never owned a 5-25 but they are rumored to have the worst IQ of the ATACR line and the couple I've looked through I believe it. All that said I'd much rather have those 2 issues than a scope that won't hold zero and has poor IQ.
And you don’t even own any guns, scopes, or do any shooting… I mean, you never post any pictures, so I’m just assuming you’re a random nobody that runs his mouth and just loves to bitch about things he perceives he doesn’t like, since he obviously doesn’t own any firearms. Until you post up proof of what you own, I’ll take advice and opinions from people who do actually own guns and shoot.
Also, you don’t know me, and it’s not the nicest scopes I’ve ever owned. Just the most expensive ones you know about. You only know what I want you to know…Remember that.
Then you don't need the numbers.....I adjust parallax looking through the scope, how else would I know the numbers are off?![]()
I know, just pointing out they are way off. For a $3,100 scope, you’d think they could get it closer.Then you don't need the numbers.....![]()
I can agree with this other than the fact it doesn't affect my shooting in any negative way so I don't see it as a problem.I know, just pointing out they are way off. For a $3,100 scope, you’d think they could get it closer.
TT, ZCO, and Kahles don’t have that problem…
That's a good question... The 7-35 is obvious since it's a Japanese scope and definitely has different glass. My 4-16s have excellent glass and they are "US made" so I don't know why they don't have the IQ issues of the 5-25. I'm not claiming NF is perfect by any means, but they check every box I need for shooting especially in reliability. The only complaints I hear about NF at matches and by friends that use them is just personal preference stuff that they don't like about them.I just think for the money, they should be a bit more refined. It tracks great, and I love the turrets, I just think they could do better for the price. Also, how did that 1 model end up with shit glass? All the other ATACR models have great glass.
Damn, that would be nice to have on-hand.I really like my 525 DLR that I’ve been using over 2 years now. Can’t wait to give this one a try. Now to put my 55% off cert to good use.![]()
No, it's unbelievable.42.9 ft of FOV at 100yds on 3.5x. Thats awesome.
I was under the illusion this was done by reducing magnification to below 1x. But looks like it's the same eye piece design for both these scopes.Their new 1-8 is 150 ft @ 100 yds on 1x. Looking at the bodies it looks like Kahles has figured out a superwide FOV scope.
![]()
![]()
Was there any wonky edge distortion or did it look pretty clean?So I looked at this scope today, not even knowing that it had come out and I picked it up and looked through it and the field of view smacks you in the face like a bag of hammers. It was a real "what the F am I looking through" moment. The only thing way I can describe it is it was like looking through a high magnification k16i. Obviously I can't determine optical quality inside of a building but I just walked away wondering what type of gun I need to buy in order to own this scope.