New purchase - MATCH PRO ED 3-18X50 RIFLESCOPE

[Bigjake83]

I picked up the New Bushnell 3-18 Match Pro, and when comparing it in a Side by Side to my Leupold MK5 3.6-18 IMO I'd say the clarity on the Match Pro is definitely better with less CA. The closest house to me is exactly 207 yards away and I can clearly make out the large Phillips head screws on his front door. The MP is brighter and seems to gather more light.

The Eye Box is extremely generous and the 15yrd parallax is very broad not anywhere near as sensitive as the MK5.

The illumination shake awake function is helpful. The Match Pro has some shared features with the MK5 such as the Rev indicator, Zero Stop, Locking Elevation, Caped widget.

The Elevation adjustment is just as Audible and tactile as the MK5 but the Match Pro windage is pretty quite but still tactile.

The Turetts are easier to read especially compared compared to that funky windage line the MK5 has. 40 Mils of Elevation, 14.5 Mils Windage for the Match Pro, Field of View at 3x is 41' at 100 yds and at 18x 6.8' . Has a very generous 3.9" Eye Relief.

I prefer a 34mm main tube over the Leupold 35mm because 98% of my optics are 34mm which I already have plenty options on hand for mounting.

I've had to send in Vortex, Nightforce, minox, Leupold, Burris..what shit show that was but never a Bushnell HDMR/DMR/Pro.

At only only 2oz heavier and half the price of the MK5 I feel like I've found the perfect SPR Optic. If the reliability is anywhere near as good as the Tactical Elite 3.5-21x50, it's a win.

If anyone is interested in me following up on this thread as I Stetch it out, let me know.

 

[NHPiper]

Tagging for more! I had a Bushnell lwts that was fantastic.

 

[beetroot]

I'm surprised the glass is better than the Mark 5hd.

**WARNING Alot of extrapolating here.
I'm guess glasses on par with the Strike Eagle scopes, the 5-25x56 I had was not bad glass wise but certainly not amazing, I'd be disappointed if a Mark 5hd was even close to that.

 

[NHPiper]

@bigjake83 do you have a clip-on you can put the scope behind? I have had good luck seeing how solid low light transmission or the optics look by doing that. It's how I found out the Razor HD Gen II takes a serious dive with light transmission compared to Mk5s.

 

[BoilerUP]

I'd be very curious of a direct comparison between the MPED 3-18x and the Ares ETR 3-18x.

 

[gopherslayer]

I'd be very curious of a direct comparison between the MPED 3-18x and the Ares ETR 3-18x.

Same here. I’ve been looking at the Ares line and have a couple I’m interested in.

After my Helos 2-12 taking a tumble and not losing zero I’m feeling better about the chicom made scopes. Bushnell CS is sketchy though.

 

[Bigjake83]

I'd be very curious of a direct comparison between the MPED 3-18x and the Ares ETR 3-18x.

Unfortunately the only Ares I own is on my daughters rifle and it's a 1-10x24 FFP ATMR3 IR Mil.

I have spent some time behind one, and to me it felt more comparable to the Vortex PST Gen2 FFP 3-15, but heavier.

 

[Happiness Is A Warm Gun]

Looks interesting!

 

[Bigjake83]

I'm surprised the glass is better than the Mark 5hd.

**WARNING Alot of extrapolating here.
I'm guess glasses on par with the Strike Eagle scopes, the 5-25x56 I had was not bad glass wise but certainly not amazing, I'd be disappointed if a Mark 5hd was even close to that.

No extrapolating here, buy one and see for yourself instead of negatively speculating.

I don't have one of those scope/phone clip on deals, I just took these freehanded at a buddies house then at my place at the house 207 yards away as I mentioned above.

When you zoom in on the photos it looks like the MP has CA but it doesn't. FYI taking these freehanded was a huge pain in the ass!!! The tight eye box on the MK5 was very difficult to get the phone to focus.

The branches in front of the vent pipe didn't help at all.



101 Meters away, Bushnell Match Pro @18x

101 Meters Mk5 @ 18x

All taken at dawn, for low light examples.

207 yards MP @18x
In person you can clearly make out the different colors in the birdtshit.

 

[Bigjake83]

Here's some more scope Porn.

 

[chevy_man]

Personally, the mark 5 turret is my favorite turret ever.

I wasn't impressed with the match pro 5-30 turret I played with. Could have been a fluke.

The 3.6-18 is a short design and will give up some depth of field at the very least because of the constraints of the package.

Comparing the 5-25 or 7-35 to the 5-30mp is an entirely different game.


If you're happy, that's cool. I'm not going to be selling any of my Mark 5's.

 

[beetroot]

No extrapolating here, buy one and see for yourself instead of negatively speculating.

I meant I was extrapolating, based on my experience with the Strike Eagle I wouldn't have expected your experience.

Do you think the Bushnell is amazing glass, or more that the Mk5 under performs for the price.

 

[Bigjake83]

I meant I was extrapolating, based on my experience with the Strike Eagle I wouldn't have expected your experience.

Do you think the Bushnell is amazing glass, or more that the Mk5 under performs for the price.

Sorry, I apologize for the directness. More times often than not there always seems to be someone on here that gets Butt hurt if you mention the brand they love, when all you're trying to do is bring something new to light and share your experiences.

I wouldn't say Amazing as up there with Kahles 3-18, ATACR 4-20, SB 320 ultra short, ZC... but it's a damn fine scope for $750, I haven’t used the Match Pro 5-30 but from what I've heard it was very underwhelming/disappointing definitely not a place to judg the new 3-18 MP on.

But yes IMO it's definitely better than the MK5 3-18 in every way except length and audibleness of the Clickers, also accompanied by great customer service. I feel the MK5 line is best in the 5-25 or 7-35 range, but I've also sold all of my 5-25 and 7-35 MK5 's and went back to the ATACR's and GEN3 Razor's.

Hopefully someone who reads this thread and doesn’t want drop 2K on a Scope can find this useful and see for themselves the quality these scopes have to offer. I was worried myself, to the point I had a little buyers remorse before I even received the MP.

Those fears abated rapidly as soon as I got behind it, color, depth, clarity, Huge eye box, and a very easy going parallax adjustment.

I played with that 3-18 MK5 for days trying to find it's sweet spot when setting up the Ocular Focus, I had the MP mounted and perfectly set up in 45 mins.

Anyway, I'm not here to sell anyone on anything, just wanted to share my experience and the pleasant surprise, so much so a bought two more today.

The Bushnell 3-18 Match Pro seems like it could be the perfect Sub 1k Optic for SPR's, for those who follow the work I do in the Semi-Auto Threads you'll see a lot on them in my upcoming SPR projects with the Geissele, SOLGW and Radian builds.

Jake

 

[Burdy]

I mean judging just off your photos, I prefer the bushy.

 

[Bigjake83]

Took the Match Pro out in a snow store today for sight-in and to see how it performed in winter conditions.

Evaluating the MP in low light conditions was excellent and had zero issues with fogging on the lenses. I had a fair amount of snow on the Objective Lens that didn't seen to effect the clarity.

 

[Hickswr]

Anyone else have first hand experience with this scope? It checks a lot of boxes but seems too cheap to be true.

 

[LRRPF52]

I really like that FOV and clarity, knowing that in-person the glass will look even better due to limits of optical differences from cameras.

I really like Mk5s too. I think they’re an excellent optic on top of AR-15s and AR-10s.

If this is better with superior FOV and clarity, it’s a no-brainer.