I think that expires in 2025. It's why I won't buy a new zco or tangent until they can fix the fov in the 8-40 and 7-35. Khales/swaro are dickheads for patenting that and the patent office are retards for granting it.
I think the new Kahles will sell more than most people expect. In my mind a FOV advantage as large as this will cause people to disregard other "necessary" features they thought they had to have.
I generally agree, but I guess it depends on how bad the distortion is or isn't (extent and severity). A very early sample of the 2.5-20 NX8 that I checked out was ungodly bad - it was extremely noticeable even when trying to focus on the center. I would have preferred pin-hole fov to that specific sample (which was probably a lemon). I won't sweat a little distortion at the edge, but there's definitely a point where I'd rather not even have the FoV.
Agree but it's all speculation until you actually get behind it and decide if that's worth it to you. It almost sounds too good to be true.
I had the exact same experience you describe with the early NX8 2.5-20 in exactly same scenario that I viewed this Kahles (indoor viewing, bad lighting). I did not notice that in this optic. I'll check it out again sometime before the end of the week to verify.I generally agree, but I guess it depends on how bad the distortion is or isn't (extent and severity). A very early sample of the 2.5-20 NX8 that I checked out was ungodly bad - it was extremely noticeable even when trying to focus on the center. I would have preferred pin-hole fov to that specific sample (which was probably a lemon). I won't sweat a little distortion at the edge, but there's definitely a point where I'd rather not even have the FoV.
I won't swap out my ZCO420, but maybe there's a DLR LSW SKMR+ being put together that will replace my ZCO527........
This is a point I've been trying to make for years with wider FOV. 28x = to 20x on ZCO (and actually better, because ZCO's FOV values are inflated as ILya and my testing have confirmed), 28x = 18x on Kahles' own pathetic K318i (one of the narrowest FOV's on the market) and on the bottom end the Kahles K328i has greater FOV than the NF NX8 2.5-20 at 2.5x, so in essence you're getting the equivalent FOV of a 2.5x magnification scope which is crazy.
My early NX8 2.5-20 also suffered from this edge distortion and made the scope very unpleasant to look through, Nightforce has since corrected this issue and newer manufactured scopes have impressive edge to edge clarity. I trust your eyes Burdy and look forward to hearing about your second experience with the scope on the show floor...
Yeah I'm a FOV whore so this is looking really intriguing to me. Got a Tac Ops Delta 51 .308 inbound and will need a scope for it. Was going to go ZCO 420 or TT 315m but this might be the one for me. Think I'm going to wait until field reports come out after getting hosed for months for my early adoption of the last scope I bought.
Kahles doesn't have a street price that I know of so I wanted to list the MSRP for all that I could find to get the best apples-to-apples comparison on that price point. Couldn't find ZCO MSRP so I listed the street price. I marked those as street prices so we could all see them as such and assume the MSRP is higher. Higher ZCO MSRP puts the Kahles in the Alpha class price range of the ZCO. The street price of the 527 is almost the same as the Kahles MSRP and the Kahles basically combines the 420 and 527 features unless you're looking for super short like the 420.
All what other issues? I'm not that familiar with Kahles I've only seen a few people run them bit the specs have my attention
Okay so I just looked through this thing again and keep in mind on the show floor with virtually no blank wall to look at or anything uniform it is very hard to determine distortion. Everyone I think wants to know what the trade off is and I have believe I have found it.
Yes, unfortunately all of the above. I think the the one that bothered me the most was the side to side. It was very picky in that regard.
Bummer...sounds like what the guys in the Area 419 video were alluding to as their biggest con with the scope. For the experts out there, would a smaller erector reduce this problem? With this field of view I would think they could get away with this being a 5x erector vs 9x and still compete with the big boys. This is the first time I've thought a higher low end magnification wouldn't matter to me.
Kiba is a math wiz who taught me about arctan's, so I would trust his numbers
The 328i has a listed 5.9' FOV on 28x, wouldn't it be bigger than 2 yards (6') on 25x since it's already 2 yards at 28x? Super noob when it comes to this stuff and apologies if I'm derailing the thread.
Kiba is a math wiz who taught me about arctan's, so I would trust his numbers
Thank you much for doing this Burd, this does not surprise me in lieu of the design and I was wondering if Kahles engineers found some way around the limitations of a short body with high erector, you won't be able to tell this on the show floor but I imagine DOF may also be somewhat finicky, but what we really need is a production model to evaluate in the field. I'm looking into some of my sources to see if I can get one of these...
I'll try my best not to speak out of my butt here...
The above clearly states "exceptionally comfortable" but we now have two reputable sources indicating this may not be the case so one has to wonder what was the baseline for making this statement. Also, using the word "perfect" with regard to optical performance is really pushing the boundaries because no optical system is perfect...
I guess it's really hard to determine inside...
Yea to each their own. It’ll be a pretty interesting scope for sure.That was my viewing pleasure, thank you Will!!! Burdy and Area419 mention tight eyebox but you mentioned it was pretty easy to get behind
Man, I can't tell you how many times I see new scopes and think that exact thing, it's like the mfr's get some things right and then completely botch others.
Agreed.
As long as it's not worse than March/NF NX8 I think I'll be happy with that. But I agree with Ghandi above, had they kept this scope to 5x erector and lengthened it a bit with a 56mm objective and kept that new ultra wide eyepiece, that I think would be a real game changer, they just simply tried to do too much with this design when it wasn't necessary.
Kahles response when I asked, “why a 50mm and not 56mm on the objective”
What a salesman!
I think I would have countered with, "so why not make it 20oz and 30mm objective" and see if they would have followed with the same logic... But NL Pure didn't drop objective size to get the wider FOV - compare EL 10x42 to NL 10x42. With the FOV in these designs it's all in the eyepiece, and you clearly noticed how they were able to get such ultra wide FOV by pointing out the beastly eyepiece on there in your video (that was funny by the way). The dimensions of the scope are very reminiscent of the Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50, it too has a really short front end, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Kahles/Swaro took some design queues from the NX8, but that was the wrong direction IMO.
Curious how they responded, guessing there were some blank stares as the guys and gals at the booths are sales and marketing and typically not the engineers.
Well that is a very good point, they had a specific purpose behind the design and we know that Swaro doesn't understand the FFP arena so they came up with this and doing their best to market it toward where they think the most sales will come from (dynamic shooting sports).
You'd have to imagine the 50mm objective was done to help keep the scope shorter, and lighter.What a salesman!
But NL Pure didn't drop objective size to get the wider FOV - compare EL 10x42 to NL 10x42. With the FOV in these designs it's all in the eyepiece, and you clearly noticed how they were able to get such ultra wide FOV by pointing out the beastly eyepiece on there in your video (that was funny by the way). The dimensions of the scope are very reminiscent of the Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50, it too has a really short front end, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Kahles/Swaro took some design queues from the NX8, but that was the wrong direction IMO.
Curious how they responded, guessing there were some blank stares as the guys and gals at the booths are sales and marketing and typically not the engineers.
Well that is a very good point, they had a specific purpose behind the design and we know that Swaro doesn't understand the FFP arena so they came up with this and doing their best to market it toward where they think the most sales will come from (dynamic shooting sports).
I just watched through his video and heard the same. Maybe @Burdy is so used to forgiving LPVO's he was shocked with a long range scope
JK of course. Who knows, it is hard to tell inside, shame on me for jumping to conclusions before actually seeing the thing, but getting a short body scope with 8x erector to have a forgiving eyebox, well this would be a first so really curious to get my hands on one.I’m too curious and will probably order oneI just watched through his video and heard the same. Maybe @Burdy is so used to forgiving LPVO's he was shocked with a long range scope
I'll settle this once and for all. Someone send me one and I will tell you how forgiving it isI just watched through his video and heard the same. Maybe @Burdy is so used to forgiving LPVO's he was shocked with a long range scope
First of all, I would trust @koshkin long before I trusted myself.I just watched through his video and heard the same. Maybe @Burdy is so used to forgiving LPVO's he was shocked with a long range scope
It is quite forgiving given how wife the FOV is and the erector ratio. I would not have any issues using this scope on a precision rifle.I just watched through his video and heard the same. Maybe @Burdy is so used to forgiving LPVO's he was shocked with a long range scope
I can't even begin to understand your post.
Sometimes I do not trust my own eyes and have to have others look through and verify what I'm seeing or not seeing.
That is exactly what I was hoping from the Leupold Mark 4HD - an extremely forgiving design. The 8-32x56 could prove to be a fantastic option for dynamic shooting sports on a budget.
Using my best interpretation skills I think what he is asking is whether or not a scope can be designed with either an 8x erector or 10x erector and if the scope used a long focal length design could the image be Tangent Theta quality?
And possibly referencing the old USO 3.8-22, which was very long, heavy scope. You're probably spot on because after reading it about 5 times I was thinking along those lines. Only Bryan knows for sure, lol.
After seeing the Mark 4HD, Im grabbing one. Very very easy for me to get behind.
The 2.5-10 and 8-32 have the biggest appeal for me personally, it is encouraging to hear they are very forgiving to get behind and even though they have narrow FOV, there "ease" of use will definitely stir the market and hopefully more mfr's begin to focus on "forgiving" optics.
Oh good, give him a big long hug for me to make things awkward
I had some family matters to attend to this year but hoping to make it out next year to SHOT 
I was kicked out at least you made your own decisionI dumped IG after the 2020 marxist fiasco but maybe time to pick up again (cause now I trust them, jk!
