Rifle Scopes New March FFP 5-42x56 High Master FML-TR1 preliminary review

Glassaholic

Optical theorist and conjecturer
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Nov 30, 2012
    8,341
    9,778
    Panhandle, FL
    UPDATE 07/17/2020: Full review available here - http://opticsthoughts.com/?p=2829

    I call this a "preliminary" review because this scope is not yet available to the general market (slated to come out this April). First introduced at the 2019 SHOT Show it piqued my interest some because I had heard great things about the "High Master" optical system and was anxious to see that technology make its way into March's FFP scopes. "What is High Master?" you ask, well you're not alone, I have been trying to get the low down on this system since I first heard the phrase come up a few years ago, without getting too techno geeky this is how it was explained to me
    March High Master system involves a special 3 lens structure at the objective, a proprietary lens sandwiched between two Super-ED lenses. The reason is they take care of some of the optical correction which generally appears further down the system within the scope. This does result in a very different image. Much brighter and sharper...
    Okay, so maybe that was a bit techno geek so in a nutshell, High Master (HM) is the term March is using for phenomenal optical performance! Having had two March scopes previously (not HM) I can say that March already had the most impressive optical performance I have seen come out of Japan, so I have been really curious as to whether or not HM could compete with the best I've seen from Europe.

    A lot of change has occurred with March since SHOT 2019. Their previous model was to use only one distributor in the USA which usually meant one source/company, so if you wanted to buy March there was only one place to go, but last year March began to change that model and they now have multiple dealers all over the country which I believe is a good thing and will help their name recognition here in the USA.

    One disappointing feature of the 5-42x56 HM that was displayed in 2019 was the reticle, it was not well received here on the Hide and specifically with competition oriented shooters; however, that all changed late last year and March now has a very viable .2 mil tree reticle which they've needed for a long time in their FFP scopes. The first reticle in this series is called the "FML-TR1" and it hits most of the marks that I look for in a modern Christmas tree reticle with .2 mil hash marks, center dot and dots in the Christmas tree which does not obscure the image behind it.

    1584581484707.png


    Normally many of you enjoy my reviews as I focus a lot on the optical characteristics of a particular scope and while I certainly intend to do just that, this will need to come over time as I only recently received the scope and can only provide a cursory analysis but want to take more time to provide an in depth analysis so keep watch of this thread as I will continue to update it as time goes on.

    What I can say now, with the short time I've had the scope (less than a week), is the optics are quite impressive and I'm telling you this with my current favorite scope being the Minox ZP5 5-25x56 which many consider (myself included) to be among the best optically speaking in the FFP scope world. This is the scope I use to compare others to when it comes to optical performance. With an 8.4x erector I expect there to be some compromises and will seek to flush those out in the days to come, but I can say with confidence the 26* eyepiece is legit, the FOV is enormous for a long range scope and what's more impressive is the scope appears to have superb center sharpness throughout the magnification range, but again, more testing is needed for conclusive results.

    What I was not prepared for was the new turrets that March is introducing with this scope. For any of you who've read my reviews over the years you'll know that I am not a turret purist, an optical purest yes, but as long as the turrets landed on the right tick mark and provided adequate feedback I was usually pretty happy. My past March scopes had what I would call "mushy" turrets, but they landed accurately and gave enough audible and tactile feedback to get the job done. I expected much the same with this new scope but was taken aback at just how good these new turrets are - they are anything but mushy and provide what may be the most tactile feedback I've ever felt in a turret. Previously Kahles had some of my favorite turrets with regard to tactile feedback, the ZCO turrets maybe had an edge over Kahles (I've only spun TT turrets once so would need more time with them) but the new March turrets best my experience with Kahles and ZCO. Contributing to the feel is the spacing, while manufacturers seem to be pushing the limit with 15 and even 18 mil per turn turrets, March kept their's at 10 mil per rev, a wise choice I believe as each click is very distinct and with adequate spacing between clicks that you don't get lost thinking "did I just move one or two clicks?". Not only are they very tactile, they also have a unique locking system which can be seen in the images below. I've previously used the Vortex AMG, the Schmidt & Bender locking turrets and the ZCO locking turrets (oh, and the Tract as well) and this, I think, will prove to be my favorite design. All the aforementioned designs have a "lift to release, push down to lock" turret housing that rises and falls, but March decided to place a lever at the top of the turret (also on the windage as well) with a blue dot for unlock and a red dot for lock, this lever can easily be manipulated in the dark but what I like most about it is that you can choose to turn it off and the turrets spin freely without having to worry if you need to lift up or push back down, and when you don't want them to move you flip the lever and they lock solid - no play whatsoever, and speaking of play, I cannot find any appreciable amount of play when turning. Solid, distinct, audible and with adequate spacing - these turrets I am sure will become a hit among the community. My only area of criticism is the zero stop, this is set by a hex key at the very top of the elevation turret in between the lock/unlock dots and you simply turn CW to lock; however, the turret only gets more difficult to turn at the 0-set point, but given enough effort and you can turn past the point you've set the lock, time will tell whether this becomes an issue or not, especially for competition shooters. Another recommendation I would make is to put the hex key position under one of the lock/unlock sides so that the key slot is covered by the lever... drop your scope in the mud and you may find it very difficult to clean out the slot leading to the hex nut.

    20200314_March_5-42x56_HM_005.jpg


    You may also notice in the image above that the parallax knob has what appears to be a blue dot and a red dot and yes, you guessed it, the parallax is also locking. I've never felt that I've needed a locking parallax before, but it will be interesting to see if this design proves useful over time. The illumination is also different from past March models, instead of pressing the center button to move through different magnification settings, you push to turn on/off and using the outer ring to twist to different settings which I much prefer over strictly push button.

    20200314_March_5-42x56_HM_007.jpg


    The ergonomics of this scope play out very well, at just over 14" long it is considerably shorter than the scope it was aimed to compete against - the Schmidt & Bender PM II 5-45x56. In fact, it is shorter than many 5-25 scopes and with the wide angle eyepiece has even greater FOV than the venerated TT525P and Minox ZP5 all the while providing 17x more magnification on the top end. Another feature that sets it apart from the Schmidt 5-45 is the parallax goes down to 10 yards making this a very viable option for many rimfire rigs out there - serious NRL22 competitors should take notice.

    20200314_March_5-42x56_HM_006.jpg


    I had a bunch of load development to do on the day I went out so had the opportunity to use it at 100 for sight in and at 300 for my LD work, I did notice that the parallax/focus was a bit finicky which is not too surprising given the 8.4x and shorter body design, but the parallax was easy to set and had the right amount of tension. The mag ring is a bit tighter and would benefit some with a throw lever. The diopter is a fast focus design with a lock ring and initial setup was easier than some other scopes that I've had to play around with more to get just right.

    If anyone has any specific questions, or has something you'd like me to test in the field, please let me know and I will do my best to accommodate. In shooting the March 5-42x56 HM side by side with my Minox ZP5 5-25x56 I really enjoyed shooting with the March, in fact, I found myself enjoying the FML-TR1 reticle more than my favorite - the MR4. The thicker center cross and dot made acquiring the target "easier"... it might just be my older eyes but I've found the thinner reticles are harder for me to pickup

    20200314_March_5-42x56_HM_001.jpg


    20200314_March_5-42x56_HM_002.jpg


    20200314_March_5-42x56_HM_003.jpg


    20200314_March_5-42x56_HM_004.jpg


    For size comparison, here's a top view showing the size difference the 5-42 HM has over the ZP5 5-25
    20200315_March_5-42x56_HM_008.jpg


    Update 03/24/2020: Great news, March is saying April for official production on the 5-42x56 HM. They have also provided full specs and confirmed what I'm seeing with my eyes, this has the widest FOV I've ever seen in a long range scope, in fact, at 5x the March has wider FOV than some scopes at 4x!!! Specs can be found here - https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/March-FX-5x-42x56mm.pdf
     
    Last edited:
    Optical Evaluation - updated 04/27/2020

    I've had more time behind the scope and decided to get a Schmidt 5-45x56 to compare as that's what this scope was designed to go after. Below is my summary after performing more thorough optical analysis.

    Had the opportunity to go to the range to do some Load Dev and had the scope on both my Chanlynn Bighorn 7 SAUM and my newly acquired AI AT in 6.5 Creedmoor. The more I used this scope the more I loved the FML-TR1 reticle.
    20200407_March_5-42x56_HM_Schmidt_5-45x56_HP017.jpg


    I did not think I would like this reticle as much as I do, and I now feel it is my favorite crossover hunting/long range reticle, the tree disappears when you aren't needing it and the center cross and dot are idea and easily picked up. My previous favorite has been the MR4 reticle available in the Minox ZP5 series, but I really think the FML-TR1 has some distinct advantages as there are times where the center dot of the MR4 gets "lost" in busy backgrounds but the FML-TR1 was just the right thickness to be easily seen in all kinds of background situations but also not be too thick that it obstructs. The Hide's own @koshkin is responsible for the FML-TR1 design and after using it on multiple occasions and different environments I have "seen the light", it has the ideal center thickness, .2 mil spacing, thinner outer stadia with .2 mil hash and a tree section made up of dots that virtually disappear when you do not need them. For more details on the reticle, check out the link in post #5 below.
    FML-TR1_42x_5-42x56_HM.jpg


    I then took the scopes out at 1000 yards (tree next to the house at the top of the rise in between the scopes in the image below)
    20200331_March_5-42x56_HM_Schmidt_5-45x56_HP014.jpg


    At 1000 yards I did a number of tests using my Minox ZP5 5-525x56 and then the Schmidt 5-45 as a comparison. One thing I noticed with the March is the sight picture, when you get behind the March the image feels "bigger", when I reviewed the ZCO last year I had the same experience, the image just presents itself to your eye as bigger, the best analogy I can come up with is the difference between a 55" 4k TV on the wall and a 75" 4k TV, they are both showing a 4k image but one is bigger than the other. Not quite sure what gives this impression, but what I can say is that it is a pleasing experience. When not using caps the black outer edge is very thin, similar to the ZCO, which may contribute to the effect.

    I've already evaluated the excellent turrets in post #1 above along with some of the other ergonomics and specs so I'm going to try and focus on just the optical performance. One thing I do want to point out is that while this scope is considered an ELR style scope, it feels more like an Ultra Short, especially when you put the scope next to many of the 5-25 and larger scopes today. While some may not care about the size/length of a scope, the trend is moving towards shorter and shorter designs, but there are drawbacks towards making scopes shorter as it is harder to obtain the same optical performance as the longer siblings.

    Edge to Edge Performance
    Not only did March design a short body scope for the 5-42 but they also used a wide angle eyepiece, "how does that benefit me" you might ask, and I'm glad you asked... In the world of dynamic shooting and even hunting, the more you "see" at a given magnification the better off you are, field of view (FOV) rules the day and is an often overlooked spec. For years we have told ourselves that magnification is where it's at, why choose a 6-24 when you can get a 5-25, "if I want to see more, then 5x is going to be better than 6x, right?" It sounds logical because one number is lower than another, but in reality what you see is not so much determined by the magnification but rather the FOV at a given magnification. So what if I told you that the 6-24 scope actually has greater FOV than the 5-25 throughout the magnification range, meaning you can actually see more at 6x in the 6-24 scope than you can at 5x in the 5-25 (and this is in fact the case when you compare the Vortex AMG and Kahles K624i to the Schmidt PMII 5-25 and Nightforce ATACR 5-25 scopes at the lower end of the mag range). Scopes that have traditionally had the widest FOV have been the Optronika (GSO) designed 5-25's (Premier, Tangent Theta and Minox ZP5) but recently the Schmidt 5-45x56 High Power boasted even greater FOV and I can safely say the March 5-42x56 boasts the widest FOV I have seen in a long range scope. But wide angle and short body do have a downside in the March design and that is some edge distortion which is more noticeable at lower magnifications, the sweet spot of the March appears to be around 15-25x with 25x showing the least amount of edge distortion.

    DOF/Parallax
    Another downside with the short body design and high magnification erector is the DOF is more narrow in the March and parallax a bit more finicky, meaning if you change to a different target that is nearer or further way you might need to fine tune the side focus a bit more than you will some of the other scopes. With ELR shooting, which is what this scope was designed after, I don't see that as much of a hindrance as I would dynamic shooting that you'll see with PRS/NRL style competitions (for these the new March 4.5-28x52 I believe will be a much better choice).

    Eyebox
    I usually see much more forgiving eyebox from more traditional/longer scope designs while ultra short designs can suffer a bit from having less forgiving eyebox (the alpha class ultra shorts being the exception) but the March seems to have figured this out with the 5-42 design and I found the eyebox to be better than expected.

    CA
    The High Master glass used with the March 5-42 shows excellent control of center CA but does have falloff (as many scopes do) toward the edges where more fringing can be seen, mostly in the blue/yellow spectrum depending on eye position.

    Color/Contrast
    Another area where the High Master lens system excels is color and contrast, the image really pops when you look through the scope and the color is spot on. I have had issues with Japanese glass being too cool (bluish) in the past, but the March scopes have always trended toward the neutral to warm tones we typically see from European glass, the High Master even goes a bit further in this regard.

    After evaluating at 1000 yards I was dealing with a lot of atmoshperics so decided to do some resolution tests closer in.
    20200418_March_5-42x56_HM_Schmidt_5-45x56_HP042.jpg


    Resolution
    While the 5-42x56 High Master may suffer from a bit of edge distortion, it excels in center resolution and offers superb image quality (IQ).
    Overall, for an ELR designed scope the March is really in a class by itself, it is a full 3 inches shorter than the Schmidt 5-45, is $1500 less, has excellent turrets and amazing center resolution. The March has the widest FOV I've seen in a long range scope but is a bit finicky with parallax/focus, the DOF is not as forgiving and it does suffer with some edge distortion. If you're in the market for a ELR scope that offers high magnification, a huge amount of travel, an enormous FOV with excellent color and center resolution, the March should definitely be on your list to check out. Click on the below link to get to eurooptics.com March page or call Jason to order:


    Sneak peek with the Schmidt 5-45x56 High power, yes, it is quite a bit larger than the March!
    20200418_March_5-42x56_HM_Schmidt_5-45x56_HP021.jpg


    I will be posting my full review of the March vs. the Schmidt on opticsthoughts.com in the near future. Both scopes are outstanding ELR style scopes that are more than capable of getting the job done and both have their pros and cons that will be discussed in further detail.
     
    Last edited:
    Interesting. It looks like the March Rep showed me the FML-MT reticle.

    So, @koshkin, I take back what I said in our short convo at shot.

    I think the MT looks like shit. The TR1 is much better.
     
    it's defiantly a pretty scope I do like that it's a ffp


    I think its the same scope . I like the look of the recital depending on the price I may have to look into one further . would love to see more video's on it .
     
    it's defiantly a pretty scope I do like that it's a ffp


    I think its the same scope . I like the look of the recital depending on the price I may have to look into one further . would love to see more video's on it .

    I was worried the center portion of the reticle would be too thick, but I actually really enjoyed shooting with it and I like how clean it is around the reticle. Everything is spaced at .2 mils so very easy to bracket.

    Edit: if the entire reticle was as thick as the center I think I would not like it as much, but because the rest is thinner it strikes a very nice balance overall.
     
    Last edited:
    Also, I’m sure I’ll take some heat for my comments on the turret’s feeling better on the new March than they did with the Kahles and ZCO. Keep in mind this is my experience and my opinion, my statements do not infer that somehow the Kahles and ZCO turrets are inferior, but at 15 mil per rev they have a different feel and what I’m saying is I prefer the feel of the new March turrets and part of that could simply be the wider spacing being 10 mil per rev vs 15. YMMV
     
    depending on the price I may have to look into one further . would love to see more video's on it .

    keep in mind it’s MSRP is $4200, not sure what MAP will be, but the scope is designed to compete with the Schmidt & Bender 5-45x56 and is priced very competitively with that in mind.

    March also has a new 4.5-28x52 scope coming out that has my interest even more than the 5-42. Paired with these new turrets that scope could really shake things up if priced competitively
     
    I am really curious what conclusions Bill will have on the optics. I tested this scope very carefully and I will talk about it more once Bill forms his opinion.

    I did like the turrets a lot. The way the locking feature is executed allows me to lock or unlock the turret with no disruption to the sight picture or my shooting position. Click feel is excellent and keep in mind these are relatively low profile turrets. I have never seen a reasonably compact turret have clicks as good as these.

    ILya
     
    Thank You. I think you were looking at the Genesis. That one had the MT reticle.

    ILya

    It was definitely the HM. I think there were a couple HM at the booth if I remember correctly.

    I remember when we were talking about dialing vs holding and I was thinking “wtf.” But makes perfect sense now seeing this reticle.
     
    How much time have you actually spent behind a Tangent Theta? Just curious.
    I did write "among the best" and would not presume to think the ZP5 is the best. To be honest, I have spent very little time behind TT, certainly not enough to give a qualified opinion on how TT has compared, but I know others on the Hide have had both TT and ZP5 and have remarked at how impressed they are with the ZP5 optically speaking, I am also aware that some shooters have gotten some "duds" with their ZP5's; however, this has not been my experience with the 2 ZP5's I own as well as others' ZP5's I've had the opportunity to look through. The closest I've come to with regard to overall IQ that I've spent any appreciably amount of time with is the ZCO ZC420 (I did get a change to look through the ZC527 but did not have enough time to fairly evaluate) - this I hope to change very soon as I have a friend who recently purchased a TT and we hope to get some time at the range together soon.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: D_TROS and MACHTECH
    I have had a chance to compare TT, ZCO and ZP5. Optically, TT is still the best of the three, but the differences are not very big and only come out in challenging conditions. ZCO and ZP5 are a close second behind the TT. ZCO has slightly better resolution at closer distances, but ZP5 has wider FOV and better contrast.

    ILya
     
    Not to derail the thread, but will the 4.5-28x52 have the same high master glass and wide angle eye piece? I'm hoping that model will have those features and be priced lower

    It is a different design, but is also a High Master optical system with a wide angle eyepiece. That one will be 25degree apparent FOV, I think.

    ILya
     
    awesome write up Bill, always appreciate your in-depth reviews.
    is the model you had a production or pre-production model?
    I’m curious if they’ll maybe change the zero-stop a little bit. I HATE needing to have several or even 1 small, easily lost little tool just to change my zero.
    hoping they get rid of the hex
     
    I'm led to believe the production model is tool-less, however that is third hand. I did not attend SHOT this year, so didn't get a chance to question them / enquire.
     
    keep in mind it’s MSRP is $4200, not sure what MAP will be, but the scope is designed to compete with the Schmidt & Bender 5-45x56 and is priced very competitively with that in mind.

    March also has a new 4.5-28x52 scope coming out that has my interest even more than the 5-42. Paired with these new turrets that scope could really shake things up if priced competitively
    I am given to understand that the March-FX 4.5-28X52 will have the HM lens system and as ILya mentionned, a 25degree WA eyepiece. The initial model will not have these turrets and will have a brand-new reticle designed specifically for the PRS game. I do not have the final details on the pricing but I believe it will be quite competitive in that arena.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: lead ƒarmer
    Also, as a note. March makes a very nice and inexpensive zoom lever that attaches nicely to their scopes. I have one on both my March scopes and I highly recommend them.
     
    Last edited:
    It was definitely the HM. I think there were a couple HM at the booth if I remember correctly.

    I remember when we were talking about dialing vs holding and I was thinking “wtf.” But makes perfect sense now seeing this reticle.
    There were several HM models at the booth. We had a March-X 10-60X56HM, the March 6-60X56HM Genesis, the March 4-40X52HM Genesis, the aforementoned March-FX 5-42X56HM, and the March-FX 4.5-28X52HM.

    You could say it was quite a panoply of High Master Lens System scopes.
     
    awesome write up Bill, always appreciate your in-depth reviews.
    is the model you had a production or pre-production model?
    I’m curious if they’ll maybe change the zero-stop a little bit. I HATE needing to have several or even 1 small, easily lost little tool just to change my zero.
    hoping they get rid of the hex
    Kickin, one could say this is the "finalized" pre-production model. I suppose it's always possible for March to make some last minute changes, but my understanding is that the scope I have in hand will be the same as the scopes they release to market shortly.

    Regarding future upgrades, March is listening and my hope is that the new 4.5-28x52 scope will have an enhanced version of this turret but even if it doesn't the turret is still completely usable I just wish they had someway to hide a hex wrench like Kahles does inside the battery cap.

    While it is not toolless it is nice that you only need one hex wrench and one hex bolt to adjust to set zero stop from the top of the turret.

    I believe I forgot to mention this above, but to set zero it is similar to other scope designs where there are two hex bolts on the side of the turret housing that must be loosened and then the turret spins freely (no clicks) to set zero wherever you like, then cinch up the two hex bolts and you're GTG.

    Weather has not been forgiving in Colorado of late, we got about 6" of snow on the first day of spring :p But I hope to get out again soon to do more testing.
     
    I have had a chance to compare TT, ZCO and ZP5. Optically, TT is still the best of the three, but the differences are not very big and only come out in challenging conditions. ZCO and ZP5 are a close second behind the TT. ZCO has slightly better resolution at closer distances, but ZP5 has wider FOV and better contrast.

    ILya
    Tangent Theta uses Schott Glass. Know wonder it was the best.
     
    Minox uses Schott glass, yet it wasn’t as good...
    [/QUOTE]
    Yes, of the makers that use Schott Glass IOR is probably the best, followed by TT, then the rest. But even the bottom line Schott Glass is still far away better than anything Japan can produce.
     
    Yes, of the makers that use Schott Glass IOR is probably the best, followed by TT, then the rest. But even the bottom line Schott Glass is still far away better than anything Japan can produce.
    This has nothing to do with the March scope, please stop posting here, thank you
     
    Minox uses Schott glass, yet it wasn’t as good...
    Yes, of the makers that use Schott Glass IOR is probably the best, followed by TT, then the rest. But even the bottom line Schott Glass is still far away better than anything Japan can produce.
    [/QUOTE]
    Haven’t you been run off before schilling for IOR which is known junk? No one wants that crap bro, move on.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Stoweit
    I call this a "preliminary" review because this scope is not yet available to the general market (slated to come out later this summer). First introduced at the 2019 SHOT Show it piqued my interest some because I had heard great things about the "High Master" optical system and was anxious to see that technology make its way into March's FFP scopes. "What is High Master?" you ask, well you're not alone, I have been trying to get the low down on this system since I first heard the phrase come up a few years ago, without getting too techno geeky this is how it was explained to me

    Okay, so maybe that was a bit techno geek so in a nutshell, High Master (HM) is the term March is using for phenomenal optical performance! Having had two March scopes previously (not HM) I can say that March already had the most impressive optical performance I have seen come out of Japan, so I have been really curious as to whether or not HM could compete with the best I've seen from Europe.

    A lot of change has occurred with March since SHOT 2019. Their previous model was to use only one distributor in the USA which usually meant one source/company, so if you wanted to buy March there was only one place to go, but last year March began to change that model and they now have multiple dealers all over the country which I believe is a good thing and will help their name recognition here in the USA.

    One disappointing feature of the 5-42x56 HM that was displayed in 2019 was the reticle, it was not well received here on the Hide and specifically with competition oriented shooters; however, that all changed late last year and March now has a very viable .2 mil tree reticle which they've needed for a long time in their FFP scopes. The first reticle in this series is called the "FML-TR1" and it hits most of the marks that I look for in a modern Christmas tree reticle with .2 mil hash marks, center dot and dots in the Christmas tree which does not obscure the image behind it.

    View attachment 7276311

    Normally many of you enjoy my reviews as I focus a lot on the optical characteristics of a particular scope and while I certainly intend to do just that, this will need to come over time as I only recently received the scope and can only provide a cursory analysis but want to take more time to provide an in depth analysis so keep watch of this thread as I will continue to update it as time goes on.

    What I can say now, with the short time I've had the scope (less than a week), is the optics are quite impressive and I'm telling you this with my current favorite scope being the Minox ZP5 5-25x56 which many consider (myself included) to be among the best optically speaking in the FFP scope world. This is the scope I use to compare others to when it comes to optical performance. With an 8.4x erector I expect there to be some compromises and will seek to flush those out in the days to come, but I can say with confidence the 26* eyepiece is legit, the FOV is enormous for a long range scope and what's more impressive is the scope doesn't appear to lose edge sharpness throughout the magnification range, but again, more testing is needed for conclusive results.

    What I was not prepared for was the new turrets that March is introducing with this scope. For any of you who've read my reviews over the years you'll know that I am not a turret purist, an optical purest yes, but as long as the turrets landed on the right tick mark and provided adequate feedback I was usually pretty happy. My past March scopes had what I would call "mushy" turrets, but they landed accurately and gave enough audible and tactile feedback to get the job done. I expected much the same with this new scope but was taken aback at just how good these new turrets are - they are anything but mushy and provide what may be the most tactile feedback I've ever felt in a turret. Previously Kahles had some of my favorite turrets with regard to tactile feedback, the ZCO turrets maybe had an edge over Kahles (I've only spun TT turrets once so would need more time with them) but the new March turrets best my experience with Kahles and ZCO. Contributing to the feel is the spacing, while manufacturers seem to be pushing the limit with 15 and even 18 mil per turn turrets, March kept their's at 10 mil per rev, a wise choice I believe as each click is very distinct and with adequate spacing between clicks that you don't get lost thinking "did I just move one or two clicks?". Not only are they very tactile, they also have a unique locking system which can be seen in the images below. I've previously used the Vortex AMG, the Schmidt & Bender locking turrets and the ZCO locking turrets (oh, and the Tract as well) and this, I think, will prove to be my favorite design. All the aforementioned designs have a "lift to release, push down to lock" turret housing that rises and falls, but March decided to place a lever at the top of the turret (also on the windage as well) with a blue dot for unlock and a red dot for lock, this lever can easily be manipulated in the dark but what I like most about it is that you can choose to turn it off and the turrets spin freely without having to worry if you need to lift up or push back down, and when you don't want them to move you flip the lever and they lock solid - no play whatsoever, and speaking of play, I cannot find any appreciable amount of play when turning. Solid, distinct, audible and with adequate spacing - these turrets I am sure will become a hit among the community. My only area of criticism is the zero stop, this is set by a hex key at the very top of the elevation turret in between the lock/unlock dots and you simply turn CW to lock; however, the turret only gets more difficult to turn at the 0-set point, but given enough effort and you can turn past the point you've set the lock, time will tell whether this becomes an issue or not, especially for competition shooters. Another recommendation I would make is to put the hex key position under one of the lock/unlock sides so that the key slot is covered by the lever... drop your scope in the mud and you may find it very difficult to clean out the slot leading to the hex nut.

    View attachment 7276340

    You may also notice in the image above that the parallax knob has what appears to be a blue dot and a red dot and yes, you guessed it, the parallax is also locking. I've never felt that I've needed a locking parallax before, but it will be interesting to see if this design proves useful over time. The illumination is also different from past March models, instead of pressing the center button to move through different magnification settings, you push to turn on/off and using the outer ring to twist to different settings which I much prefer over strictly push button.

    View attachment 7276429

    The ergonomics of this scope play out very well, at just over 14" long it is considerably shorter than the scope it was aimed to compete against - the Schmidt & Bender PM II 5-45x56. In fact, it is shorter than many 5-25 scopes and with the wide angle eyepiece has even greater FOV than the venerated TT525P and Minox ZP5 all the while providing 17x more magnification on the top end. Another feature that sets it apart from the Schmidt 5-45 is the parallax goes down to 10 yards making this a very viable option for many rimfire rigs out there - serious NRL22 competitors should take notice.

    View attachment 7276430

    I had a bunch of load development to do on the day I went out so had the opportunity to use it at 100 for sight in and at 300 for my LD work, I did notice that the parallax/focus was a bit finicky which is not too surprising given the 8.4x and shorter body design, but the parallax was easy to set and had the right amount of tension. The mag ring is a bit tighter and would benefit some with a throw lever. The diopter is a fast focus design with a lock ring and initial setup was easier than some other scopes that I've had to play around with more to get just right.

    If anyone has any specific questions, or has something you'd like me to test in the field, please let me know and I will do my best to accommodate. In shooting the March 5-42x56 HM side by side with my Minox ZP5 5-25x56 I really enjoyed shooting with the March, in fact, I found myself enjoying the FML-TR1 reticle more than my favorite - the MR4. The thicker center cross and dot made acquiring the target "easier"... it might just be my older eyes but I've found the thinner reticles are harder for me to pickup

    View attachment 7276433

    View attachment 7276434

    View attachment 7276435

    View attachment 7276436

    For size comparison, here's a top view showing the size difference the 5-42 HM has over the ZP5 5-25
    View attachment 7276439
    Sounds "Beautiful" will probably cost a Lung and a leg to buy.
     
    Sounds "Beautiful" will probably cost a Lung and a leg to buy.
    Yes it’ll be expensive but less than the Schmidt 5-45 it’s designed to compete against. With 40 mil total elevation and 10y min Parallax it opens some ELR and rimfire opportunities as well.
    If you don’t need the magnification the new 4.5-28x52 will align much better with the current set of long range competition Optics, and should come in at a lower price point.
     
    I wonder why they didn't use the 28* eyepiece on the 4.5-28x52? And why not use a 56mm objective?

    Thanks for keeping us posted on the March, it looks like the next big thing in optics.
    ILya, can speak to this better than I. The 5-42 uses a 26* eyepiece and the 4.5-28 uses a 25* eyepiece so it’s not too far off. Why didn’t they use the same one? I’m not sure to be honest, maybe something to do with a better fit for the optical formula based on the specs they were aiming for. With regard to the objective, there is a relationship between the erector (magnification), how short the scope is and reticle in FFP. The 52mm objective was used to keep within these parameters.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Gil P.
    The erector system is different between the two and one of the design objectives for the 4.5-28x52 was to get a deeper and more forgiving depth of field and eye relief while keeping the overall size and weight reasonably compact. A slightly smaller objective helps with that.

    The idea with the 4.5-28x52 and 5-42x56 is that these are complementary designs that will appeal to slightly different types of shooting and to different individual preferences. People who like magnification will lean toward the 5-42x56 that is really optimized for high magnification performance. It works well across the board, but at high magnification is where it will really stand out especially with the wide angle.

    The 4.5-28x52 is really well optimized in the 15-20x range where I spend most of my time and I do not think I have seen a compact scope before that does as well. This one should crossover well between precision boltguns and gas guns.

    That having been said, I have not yet seen a full production 4.5-28x52, but the prototype looked really impressive to me.

    ILya
     
    Sounds "Beautiful" will probably cost a Lung and a leg to buy.
    [/QUOTE]

    You are more than likely correct. As long as people are willing to spend the money, these companies will continue to push the envelope on how much they can charge for the newest thing. Some people equate quality with the features they want at a price they're willing to pay. So as long as they get what they want at a price they want they feel they got a quality product. Others equate quality with price alone. If it cost more, it must be better.
    So what you wind up with is the guy that bought the $5000 scope feels his scope must be better than the $3000 scope the other guy bought with no regard as to what each guy will do with said scope.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: jmop
    @koshkin or @wjm308 Any idea on rough ETA for the 4.5-28x52? This scope sounds very appealing to me, and seems to address the shortcomings of the March scope I had in the past. It is definitely on my radar.
    I think you will find that the 4.5-28 will, in fact, address some of the shortcomings of previous March FFP scopes. For those of us who've had the 3-24 (I've had both the 42 and 52mm objective versions) you know it struggles some optically at the extremes of the magnification and has somewhat shallow DOF and narrow FOV. But the 4.5-28 was designed (see ILya's comments from post #38 above) with a 6.22x erector (a first for March FFP scopes as they were 8x and 8.4x) specifically to alleviate some of these issues. The scope should be forgiving in DOF, parallax and eyebox as well as offering superb FOV throughout the mag range and packed all in a short body.

    As for ETA I know March wants to get this out asap; however, keep in mind this is still a prototype. If we look at the history of the 5-42x56 HM it was first "introduced" at SHOT 2019, and we are just now getting ready for full production, granted, that scope went through a number of iterations with reticle and turrets whereas I believe the 4.5-28x52 has already solidified it's reticle offerings and the turrets but they may have a few tweaks yet still to make. I am hopefully it will make it to market before the end of the year, but that is just speculation so don't quote me on that ;)
     
    • Like
    Reactions: lead ƒarmer
    @koshkin or @wjm308 Any idea on rough ETA for the 4.5-28x52? This scope sounds very appealing to me, and seems to address the shortcomings of the March scope I had in the past. It is definitely on my radar.

    DEON is hoping to have the March 4.5-28X52 HM WA ready for production by August. However, with the current worldwide health situation, this schedule may change.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: lead ƒarmer
    Great news, March is saying April for official production on the 5-42x56 HM. They have also provided full specs and confirmed what I'm seeing with my eyes, this has the widest FOV I've ever seen in a long range scope, in fact, at 5x the March has wider FOV than some scopes at 4x!!! Specs can be found here - https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/March-FX-5x-42x56mm.pdf

    Here's from my own database and compared to other scopes that have magnification above 30x, I've also thrown in the TT525P which previously had one of the widest FOV's in a long range scope, keep in mind the design parameters of this scope have it more comparably compared to the Schmidt 5-45 vs. other 5-25 or even 7-35 scopes, but I thought seeing the specs together would be beneficial.

    1585150192641.png
     
    Great news, March is saying April for official production on the 5-42x56 HM. They have also provided full specs and confirmed what I'm seeing with my eyes, this has the widest FOV I've ever seen in a long range scope, in fact, at 5x the March has wider FOV than some scopes at 4x!!! Specs can be found here - https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/March-FX-5x-42x56mm.pdf

    Here's from my own database and compared to other scopes that have magnification above 30x, I've also thrown in the TT525P which previously had one of the widest FOV's in a long range scope, keep in mind the design parameters of this scope have it more comparably compared to the Schmidt 5-45 vs. other 5-25 or even 7-35 scopes, but I thought seeing the specs together would be beneficial.

    View attachment 7281326
    Hmmmm the eye relief specs for the March are a little disappointing. I find I like scopes with a .1” to .25” max variation of eye relief throughout the zoom range. Perhaps the Schmidt just isn’t listing their scope’s actual eye relief range?

    For example, I once had a Leupold Vx-3i that had my head horizontally pogo-sticking along the rifle’s comb as I zoomed in and out.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: jmop
    Hmmmm the eye relief specs for the March are a little disappointing. I find I like scopes with a .1” to .25” max variation of eye relief throughout the zoom range. Perhaps the Schmidt just isn’t listing their scope’s actual eye relief range?

    For example, I once had a Leupold Vx-3i that had my head horizontally pogo-sticking along the rifle’s comb as I zoomed in and out.
    I noticed that too. I will have to check that more carefully in the field, I have not found an issue with eye relief during preliminary testing.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: carbonbased
    Nice review.

    Was pretty interested in this one. But cost a bit to much for my budget at the moment.

    Price here is about 1000$ more than the ZO527 so went with that one instead.

    Have had several March scopes before, and i'm pretty sure ill get one of these or the 28x one day.