-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Reticles: thru scope pics! ZCO, TT, NF, S&B, Minox, Horus, Steiner, Kahles, March, Vortex, and More!
- Thread starter Squibbler
- Start date
S&B 3-27 GR2ID - sorry for the poor image above.
Max power at 1250 meters. Yeah it's pretty awesome scope.
Max power at 1250 meters. Yeah it's pretty awesome scope.
S&B 1-8x Dual CC Shortdot. Wish I could use this one more often.
You can also light up the tree in another mode. This is red dot dual CC mode. Pier is about 900 meters away.
You can also light up the tree in another mode. This is red dot dual CC mode. Pier is about 900 meters away.
Last edited:
Hunting - S&B 1.5-6x42 Stratos. I was surprised how good this optic was, replaced my Z6i LD-I.
S&B 5-25x56 PMII with LRR-Mil here. The center dot is tiiiny. I think 1.6 cm at 1000 meters.
www.thefirearmblog.com
TFB Review: Schmidt & Bender 5-25×56 PMII with Long Range Reticle – Milliradian (LRR-Mil)
This is a review of the Schmidt & Bender 5-25x56 PMII rifle scope with the LRR-MIL reticle in a Spuhr SP-4602 mount. When I think of it, the Schmidt & Bender 5-25x56 PMII is probably one of the most expensive products we at TFB have ever tested!
www.thefirearmblog.com
Holy s. I was like that looks like a Bender I would like. Then I looked them up. $5000.00!!!!!!
I just can't get comfortable yet with the dot reticle. Anyone else have that problem? I have one of the ZCO 527 MPCTT2 reticles. I switched back to the S&B PMII H2CMR for a school coming up soon. I like everything about the scope except getting use to the reticle. Maybe my old eyes is the problem. I have trouble focusing on the dot when shooting for a 100 yard zero.
Reticles are a personal thing, most that I have encountered absolutely love the center dot over cross-hairs and the majority of manufacturers discussed here have introduced some type of floating center dot in an open center on their higher end scopes.
Assuming you have set your diopter up correctly to you, it could be an eye issue unfortunately.
Thanks for the reply. I haven't given up on ZCO yet. I have the S&B dialed in. I'm going to switch back to ZCO and give it another try before the class.
I tried to get a better picture of my 1-8 atacr
It's the best I can do (aka not that great) while holding a cell phone and trying to get a stable image. Roughly 800-850 yards.
I need a phone scope or something. Maybe just a real camera and tripod for it.
It's the best I can do (aka not that great) while holding a cell phone and trying to get a stable image. Roughly 800-850 yards.
I need a phone scope or something. Maybe just a real camera and tripod for it.
Holy Spiderweb, Batman!
I was into this ret until I saw this. All that crap above the main horizontal stadia, aieeee!
In the photos the reticle takes over, due to exposure I guess.
In reality you don't notice the reticle as much, and you can also use it if your zero is higher and you want to shoot something close.
will try to get some better ones. Burris SCR-Q 1/4 mil retc
Regards
DT
Please do, I'm curious how the 1/4 mil looks. Leupold's PR2 has open center where each hash meets stadia, I've heard this can be a pain and would like to see if SCR-Q solves that.
ZCO 840 MPCT3X
Grain bin at 1200 yards. Low mag pics were at dusk. Higher mag pics were on overcast day.
Grain bin at 1200 yards. Low mag pics were at dusk. Higher mag pics were on overcast day.
Now that’s some gdamn photography!
Good pics taken! I can only imagine the image quality in real life
Just reviewed all the reticles in this thread. It's all personal preference, but 3 really stand out to me as well very well done:
#1 Tract Torid PRS MRAD (I think this would be the quickest to read under pressure while maintaining precision)
#2 ZCO MPCT3
#3 NF FC-DMX (For it's intended use case on LPVO)
#1 Tract Torid PRS MRAD (I think this would be the quickest to read under pressure while maintaining precision)
#2 ZCO MPCT3
#3 NF FC-DMX (For it's intended use case on LPVO)
That's some serious chromatic aberration running through the scope there, might want to send that in, almost looks like a rainbow
What’s the fov difference between the 8-40 and 5-27? And is the reticle noticeably thinner at x15 in the 8-40 than the 5-27?
Looking at the FOV specs of each (ft/100 yards) from ZCO datasheet...
420 -- 28ft @ 4x, 6ft @ 20x
527 -- 21ft @ 5x, 4.5ft @ 27x
840 -- 13.8ft @ 8x, 3ft @ 40x
A person can obviously see a reduced FOV with the increased magnification ranges. Although, relatively speaking at 15x, the 840 has more FOV. This is where a picture is worth a thousand words...
(It was snowing during pics)
A person can see more FOV at the same relative mag setting with the 840.
A 20 mil wide FOV occurs at 21x on the 840, whereas a 20 mil wide FOV occurs at 18x on the 527. The 840 can achieve a higher magnification with the same FOV.
At 15x, I marked a spot on the wall of the outer most perimeter of the 840 FOV. In order to see that same spot on the wall with the 527, I had to move ~3.4mil horizontally. At 20x, I had to move ~1.3 mil horizontally with 527 to see the outer perimeter FOV mark of the 840.
To answer your last question, yes the reticle is thinner at 15x, but still very usable. I could easily see .2mil subtensions at 15x with the 840.
Hope this helps. A simple man's conclusion is that this scope defies optical physics.
Not an optics engineer, but...
The FOV (min and max) to magnification ratio appears proportional between the 3 ZCO models.
420 vs 527 max FOV: (4mag ÷ 5mag) x 28ft = 22.4ft.
However, in reality the 527 min magnification is closer to 5.25... (4mag ÷ 5.25mag) x 28ft = 21.3ft (21ft per specs)
420 vs 527 min FOV: (20mag ÷ 27mag) x 6ft = 4.4ft (4.5ft per specs)
---------
420 vs 840 max FOV: (4mag ÷ 8mag) x 28ft = 14ft (13.8ft per specs)
420 vs 840 min FOV: (20mag ÷ 40mag) x 6ft = 3ft (3ft per specs)
---------
527 vs 840 max FOV: (5mag ÷ 8mag) x 21ft = 13.1ft (13.8ft per specs)
527 vs 840 min FOV: (27mag ÷ 40mag) x 4.5ft = 3.0ft (3ft per specs)
This would make sense if they share an eyepiece, which drives angular FOV (doesn't change based on magnification).
I suspect zoom ring numbers (between min and max) are off enough to prevent useful FOV comparisons between scopes.
I'm sure @koshkin @carbonbased @Glassaholic @beetroot can confirm/correct this as appropriate.
The FOV (min and max) to magnification ratio appears proportional between the 3 ZCO models.
420 vs 527 max FOV: (4mag ÷ 5mag) x 28ft = 22.4ft.
However, in reality the 527 min magnification is closer to 5.25... (4mag ÷ 5.25mag) x 28ft = 21.3ft (21ft per specs)
420 vs 527 min FOV: (20mag ÷ 27mag) x 6ft = 4.4ft (4.5ft per specs)
---------
420 vs 840 max FOV: (4mag ÷ 8mag) x 28ft = 14ft (13.8ft per specs)
420 vs 840 min FOV: (20mag ÷ 40mag) x 6ft = 3ft (3ft per specs)
---------
527 vs 840 max FOV: (5mag ÷ 8mag) x 21ft = 13.1ft (13.8ft per specs)
527 vs 840 min FOV: (27mag ÷ 40mag) x 4.5ft = 3.0ft (3ft per specs)
This would make sense if they share an eyepiece, which drives angular FOV (doesn't change based on magnification).
I suspect zoom ring numbers (between min and max) are off enough to prevent useful FOV comparisons between scopes.
I'm sure @koshkin @carbonbased @Glassaholic @beetroot can confirm/correct this as appropriate.
I find it hilarious that I am included in such a group! But thanks!
I could enter stuff into my crappy excel FOV spreadsheet (that others way smarter than I helped me with) and arrive at some number, but I am deferring lest I lead someone astray.
Seriously, I feel like some days I can barely tie my own shoes lol
Can you please show a 1x in bright daylight as well ? Thanks !I tried to get a better picture of my 1-8 atacr
It's the best I can do (aka not that great) while holding a cell phone and trying to get a stable image. Roughly 800-850 yards.
I need a phone scope or something. Maybe just a real camera and tripod for it.
I'll see if I have time today, might have to do it tomorrow. This thing gets extremely bright, it's going to look like an aimpoint if my phone can focus on it. The 8x picture you quoted was at power level 3 out of 10. Any higher my phone struggled to focus on the reticle and mountain.
In your first pic the 8-40 is not magnifying 15x. The structure in the image is smaller than in the other two scopes. So either the 420 and the 527 are off or the 840 is off. But all three are not at 15x.
I am not sure I understand what the question is. Generally, ZCO seems to use more or less the same eyepiece design for all three of their scopes, but there can be some FOV differences due to small internal variations.
Also, keep in mind that the actual FOV with the ZCO scopes I have measured was a little less than in their published specs. I think it was the same on the same magnification between the 4-20x and 5-27x and about 5% lower than listed in their specs.
I have only seen the 8-40x briefly at SHOT. Apparent FOV looked pretty similar to their other scopes, but I obviously have not had a chance to measure it.
ILya
Last edited:
Thanks Ilya, you addressed the question/statement... how the FOV (at a given magnification) compares between the 3 models.
This is a pretty cool picture considering the perfectly clear image and the bolt is pulled back and still in the pic. Is the eye relief really this forgiving on these Burris scopes? I could be off in my thinking.
1x sun directly at back max brightness
1x 7/10 brightness
8x idk brightness. Don't remember if I changed the brightness but if this is at 10 it's not representative of how bright it is. Also remember I'm holding a cell phone trying to stay in the right eyebox and not shake lol so picture quality doesn't even cone close to what I see.
1x sun up diagonal right 9/10 brightness
1x basically looking into the Sun 9/10 brightness.
Reason for 9/10 is max was too much for the phone, looked washed out/white less bright.
It's definitely daylight bright.
Last edited:
Sorry, no H59 in inventory, can't help ya there. If someone wanted to send me one I'd gladly snap a few pics. Otherwise if someone has one, help the man out and give him a few pics!
I'm on vacation next week and can try to snap some H-59 at 12 and 18x if I remember
18x and 12x H-59 through Bushnell HDMR-CR 3-21x50. Focus issues are my phone.
Time will tell, I just did a really quick 120 seconds photo shoot before the sun set and it was windy and freezing. S&B hasn't changed the optics side of things, and I can't remember it beeing poor in terms of CA.
Cameras can lie - as it did for the Leica and Kahles I tried. What the camera registered I didn't.
That's why I asked, some cameras induce CA in pictures through scopes that are not present to our eyes.
