Rifle Scopes S&B PM II 5-25 vs. NF ATACR 7-35

[Nik H]

Now that he is gone, we can get back to constructive dialogue. These are some of the things I have noticed being that I own both scopes in question

NF Positives

1. Zero Stop - I love the fact that it can be set wherever you want it. No being constrained by 3-4 clicks below.
2. Turret legibility - The DT turrets on my Bender have markings that are spaced too close together. The NF turret engraving is legible in all conditions
3. Range of magnification - The S&B is really a 7-25 versus a 5-25. The NF is a true 7-35X. It is very nice to have when you need it.
4. Illumination - Much nicer. No barnacle control and two colors.
5. MIL C Reticle - Totally agree that reticles are a personal preference but this reticle is very well thought through. Much more usable than the Gen II XR on my Bender and I like that one as well.

S&B Positives

1. Diopter setup and Parallax Adjustment - It is much easier to do. The NF diopter takes considerably longer and the parallax is much more sensitive than the Schmidt
2. Image clarity and Contrast - I think it is DAMN close but I will give the S&B this one. Contrast is a little better and low light performance is a little better but as Frank points out, we are splitting hairs.
3. Turret feel - The DT turrets are crisper than the NF. I thought this was a let down when I purchased the NF. I thought they would move too easily if bumped but that has not been the case. In the end, the S&B is crisper (tactile).

Hope it helps

 

[TipToeTango]

Now that he is gone, we can get back to constructive dialogue. These are some of the things I have noticed being that I own both scopes in question

NF Positives

1. Zero Stop - I love the fact that it can be set wherever you want it. No being constrained by 3-4 clicks below.
2. Turret legibility - The DT turrets on my Bender have markings that are spaced too close together. The NF turret engraving is legible in all conditions
3. Range of magnification - The S&B is really a 7-25 versus a 5-25. The NF is a true 7-35X. It is very nice to have when you need it.
4. Illumination - Much nicer. No barnacle control and two colors.
5. MIL C Reticle - Totally agree that reticles are a personal preference but this reticle is very well thought through. Much more usable than the Gen II XR on my Bender and I like that one as well.

S&B Positives

1. Diopter setup and Parallax Adjustment - It is much easier to do. The NF diopter takes considerably longer and the parallax is much more sensitive than the Schmidt
2. Image clarity and Contrast - I think it is DAMN close but I will give the S&B this one. Contrast is a little better and low light performance is a little better but as Frank points out, we are splitting hairs.
3. Turret feel - The DT turrets are crisper than the NF. I thought this was a let down when I purchased the NF. I thought they would move too easily if bumped but that has not been the case. In the end, the S&B is crisper (tactile).

Hope it helps

Awesome feedback, thanks!

 

[Safety_3rd]

To piggy back on Nik H, the nightforce magnification power adjust rotates the whole eyepiece so your covers rotate as you turn (or you take it off)... kind of a pain in the a$$. But the nightforce has a program that supports LEO and Military here in the US so that's why I went NF.

 

[TipToeTango]

Thanks for all the feedback. I'm going NF. I really can't tell clarity wise if one was better than the other...Might be my inexperience, both look fantastic.

 

[TipToeTango]

I think big question for me was the "need" for 35 power. "Worst" case scenario I move the NF over to a .300 or 338 down the road if I get itch to go bigger once my Gradous 6.5CM has me sucked into the game.
I will post pics of my build/setup after I pick it up tomorrow!!

 

[ICU22250]

I think big question for me was the "need" for 35 power. "Worst" case scenario I move the NF over to a .300 or 338 down the road if I get itch to go bigger once my Gradous 6.5CM has me sucked into the game.
I will post pics of my build/setup after I pick it up tomorrow!!

You made a wise choice Imho...

 

[TipToeTango]

You made a wise choice Imho...

Thanks! With my experience I don't think I would of been wrong either way. Both seemed phenomenal.

 

[TipToeTango]

I think big question for me was the "need" for 35 power. "Worst" case scenario I move the NF over to a .300 or 338 down the road if I get itch to go bigger once my Gradous 6.5CM has me sucked into the game.
I will post pics of my build/setup after I pick it up tomorrow!!

Didn’t make it down to Georgia today, hopefully next week. Anticipation killing me

 

[6point5CM]

I have both and you can't go wrong. I would go with the reticle you like the best, or if you're not a reticle guy, the turret spacing you like best. Both track great, and are durable as hell. My honest feedback after running the PMII w/ H2CMR reticle for all of last season, and switching to the 7-35 w/ MIL-C this season is this: I really really like the MIL-C reticle. I don't dislike the H2CMR, but the center dot on the MIL-C is awesome. I like the click spacing on the ATACR better as well. I'm equally happy with how both turret clicks feel, but can look up on the ATACR and see where I'm at. With the PMII, I have to count each click past the whole or half MIL because spacing is too tight to visually glance and know. Optically, the PMII is better to me. It's eye box is definitely easier to get behind, and the parralax on the PMII is I think the best of any scope. It's just super easy. Colors pop out at me more with the PMII as well. That being said, I swapped them and am going to run the ATACR with MIL-C for this match season, and put the PMII on my Rbros .300 WM hunting rifle. For a match optic, the reticle and the spacing between clicks to visually identify where I'm at trump a more forgiving eyebox (it's not like the ATACR is bad, just not as great as the PMII) and parallax. The only thing I wish I could change on the ATACR is the entire ocular turning when adjusting power. I get the reasons why, I'm just not a fan. The only thing I wish I could change on the PMII are the click spacing. Go 10 MIL per rev, and have the perfect scope.

 

[TipToeTango]

Didn’t make it down to Georgia today, hopefully next week. Anticipation killing me

Was suppose to receive gun tomorrow, change of plans...they went to shoot and gun wouldn't group with factory ammo. Going to be another week of waiting

 

[TipToeTango]

Here’s an update

 

[Stag556]

That was an interesting read....

To the OP, how is the Tremor3 reticle on lower powers? Is it easy to see and make out? I have one on the way and I'm just curious as this is my first Horus reticle. (Sorry if this was covered, there was a lot of stuff I started to skip over)

 

[TipToeTango]

That was an interesting read....

To the OP, how is the Tremor3 reticle on lower powers? Is it easy to see and make out? I have one on the way and I'm just curious as this is my first Horus reticle. (Sorry if this was covered, there was a lot of stuff I started to skip over)

Limited experience just glassing..I can pick it up well. I’ve got pretty good, young eyes though

 

[scharfschutze762]

Maybe you missed my shot show pics... Accuracy International, Barrett, 90% of the rifles from Mile High Shooting... Better yet, see for yourself.

Again... Troll away and make my day go by faster.

Maybe because Mile High is no longer a S&B dealer. get your facts straight there fangirl.

 

[EnXCess]

I shot a PMII 5-25 and it seemed to have short eye relief. My ATACR does not have the ER my NXS does, but it is not bad.

 

[Canuck1977]

I’d keep the S&B.

Got both and glass is better on the S&B.

 

[EnXCess]

I guess, number one, I feel that once you get to glass quality of, say, the NXS, and certainly the ATACR, there is no benefit to be had from "better glass," if it in fact exists.

Second, as soon as I have fired a shot on a cold day, or all the time on a hot day, the picture is wavy no matter what glass I am looking through anyway.

Today I was shooting at 0.5" bullseyes at 200 yards with my ATACR on 25x. As long as there was no mirage I could easily see well enough to drill the bull every time, if only I had had no pulse and if every bullet would have flown pertectly true to aim. I just do not see any need for "better glass," if there is any. Once I get to NF glass, my concerns go to other scope aspects.

 

[JL]

Parallax issues, tracking issues, RTZ issues, fogging issues, locking turrets screw right off, parallax knobs come off. If you run in the Gov circles where they are issued you know. And its not from deployment use. Majority issues are out of the box as issued. Sad to see the once gold standard going down the tubes. The only thing they have going for them are beautiful optics.
The issued NF's run strong; old and new. I hate to sound brand biased as I'm not....I'm biased for what works reliably!If NF starts to let me down, you will certainly hear about it.

Got my fifth PMII scope now if my memory serves me. Also running several scopes considered to be in top premium class, basically very happy with all of them. Also have something to do with GOV branches who use and abuse several type of sights and other optics, and having also personal perspective for 3-figure number of PMII:s (and many others) from past couple of years.

NF 7-35 has never been in my personal use, so wont comment on that. But old NXS has reputation of very strong scope, and I can agree/confirm it to be true. Surely NF still knows how to make durable scopes. But now when optics have gotten much more complicated, failure rate basically has to go up. Also very short scopes have their own unique challenges, dont believe NF is immune to these practical problems either. As they are starting with them too. Interesting to see what is situation after 1-2 years in field use.

From 5-25 PMII history i remember one case (out of 3-figure number) where any of turrets turret dropped. This was DT elevation turret on 5-25. Original reason was heavy impact on turret sideways, strong enough to flatten turret aluminum edge. Fog inside = zero cases. Parallax re-calibation = maybe 1 or 2 cases again in 3-figure scope amount. I have also seen +80% claim on "return to zero" fails with PMII series, with about 20 sample scopes. Which is odd because I have never seen it in practice, not with even one single tracking or return to zero symptom in 5-25 scope. And I do have collimator test bench to actually verify these reliably. Surely individual cases can exist- but such percentage with scopes from various lots is simply way, way too steep to believe.

All in all, what comes to basic construction and design, I honestly believe 5-25 has to be *one of the* strongest scopes ever made, by any manufacturer. But there are other good ones as well.

NF 7-35 got destroyed in a recoil test on a big gun, side by side with SB 5-25 which survived without sweat. Disassembled the damaged NF shows lots of use of plastic parts. I would recommend SB. Yes it was very big gun. I cannot share photos or publicize the test for specific reasons, so consider my statement as a rumor if you wish.

And for those who hype these new OEM -manufactured XYZ brand "new game changer" scopes, try this for few hundred
shots first before jumping into conclusions about durable scope..

 

[Fenix Mike]

Maybe because Mile High is no longer a S&B dealer. get your facts straight there fangirl.

High end retailers don't usually drop specific product lines without a reason...

 

[scharfschutze762]

No shit smart guy. Its called the the dollar..and this came about after S&B Germany dropped their New Hampshire distributor and taken over directly.

 

[scharfschutze762]

Parallax issues, tracking issues, RTZ issues, fogging issues, locking turrets screw right off, parallax knobs come off. If you run in the Gov circles where they are issued you know. And its not from deployment use. Majority issues are out of the box as issued. Sad to see the once gold standard going down the tubes.
The only thing they have going for them are beautiful optics.
The issued NF's run strong; old and new.
I hate to sound brand biased as I'm not....I'm biased for what works reliably!
If NF starts to let me down, you will certainly hear about it.

I actually am part of this so called "circle " you speak of. PM your info and lets talk your claims.

 

[PTPATAW]

I’ll have a 7-35x with a T3 ret for sale come the end of May if anyone is interested. I’m currently down range but will be home near the end of May. I need the money and I prefer lower magnification like a 3-18 or something of that nature.

 

[wareagle700]

Parallax issues, tracking issues, RTZ issues, fogging issues, locking turrets screw right off, parallax knobs come off. If you run in the Gov circles where they are issued you know. And its not from deployment use. Majority issues are out of the box as issued. Sad to see the once gold standard going down the tubes.
The only thing they have going for them are beautiful optics.
The issued NF's run strong; old and new.
I hate to sound brand biased as I'm not....I'm biased for what works reliably!
If NF starts to let me down, you will certainly hear about it.

Not the first time I've seen this. Have read the same thing from guys who test these scopes before any contacts are awarded.

 

[CSTactical]

Anyone looking for a Nightforce 7-35 Mil-C? Give us a call at 916-670-1103.

 

[Voyager1]

This thread is funny.

A lot of, MY BRAND IS BETTER THAN YOUR BRAND ???. Even though it’s anolder thread I just read it and its
Hilarious how everyone gets their pantys in a wad over “THEIR OPTIC IS THE BEST”....
I feel like I’m back in high school (sometimes I wonder based on what I read and the patients I see, if most ever left high school (mentality)....???????????????

 

[Lowlight]

The 20 scope rumor was a scam, the person making the claim was switching to work with NF and was not getting what they wanted out of S&B so they did a hit job. it was a big lie to make one look better than the other.

The other part with the "military Issue" was dual blame, some say it was Premier's fault as stuff was being worked on here in the US and they dropped the ball, Premier blamed S&B, so there was no way to really nail down who did what. Then the USMC decided not to do another test and contract so they just handed the contract to Premier because it was the US Side of the story. In the end, Premier is gone, so even with the change they did not survive

Both these issues are not so cut and dry and have a lot of underlying politics behind them.

 

[Voyager1]

IMHO they are both TEIR one absolute best if the best. If you get either the Schmidt and Bender PM 2 with the correct reticle your golden. If you,get the NF ATACR 7-35 or 5-25 with the reticle of YOUR CHOICE your golden. It’s all a matter of preferences....

 

[OzzyO20]

I have a S&B, and my buddies have ATACRs (4-16 and 5-25). I don’t have nearly the same amount of time behind the NF, but I’ve made some observations over time.

I really like the NF turrets, the spacing and feel are much nicer than my MTC/LT Schmidt. For me the locking turret is only useful on the windage, and the capped turret on the NF is an elegant and cost effective solution to that need. For what it’s worth, I also like the aesthetic of the NF.

I do not like the ocular ring rotating on the NF. It is very annoying to take the caps on and off or have the cap hitting when you run the mag ring up. I also prefer the S&B parallax 10:1 over the NF.

I’m not a optical expert, but to my layman’s eyes S&B starts to pull away after 1,300 yards in the glass category. At 1,500 we have a door sized piece of steel hung up painted white with a orange ‘+’ in the center. Vortex Razor Gen 2 would resolve the target the crosshair, NF resolved the target, cross hairs, and faint hits (SA 6.5 and 6mm after fresh paint, not a big wack), S&B revolved the target, cross hair, hits, and even pock marks on the steel (thin non AR500).

I’m shooting more and more PRS style matches and dialing more elevation than before. I’ve considered making the switch to a ATACR or S&B DR to get away from the MTC/LT turrets. I’m thinking DT over NF, but that’s neither here nor there.

You have a great problem on your hands. Either way you’re gonna be happy with your decision.

 

[Steved1911]

Old thread but Ozzy020.. right on! I own both and experience/feel the same.

 

[TangoSierra916]

old thread but to the OP - how are you liking the ATACR?

 

[TipToeTango]

Man I love the ATACR! Turrets and glass are awesome. Aesthetically it's just bad a. If I could change one thing it is the rotating ocular, it's just so different than anything I've ever used. The caps moving is just a pain to deal with. I wouldn't trade it though, however. I've got T3 model which seems to be losing favoritism with XT out. I'm use to T3 so I'm going to stick to that same path. I'm building a shorty rifle soon and will be in buying a smaller power ATACR for sure.

 

[Ryridesmotox]

Tenebrex rotating cap and you wont even notice the ocular rotate

 

[generalzip]

Old thread but just my .02 for someone making the same decision. I own both the 7-25 Mil-C and S&B 5-25 H2CMR DT. @Nik H absolutely owns both scopes because I could not agree more with all of his comments. I think the choice between the two comes down to use.

I have both on PRS rifles. Here's the biggest differences for me in line with what Nik H already covered, strictly related to what makes them good for PRS.

Schmidt Pros

1. Schmidt has a better eyebox at all magnification settings. The NF is still absolutely usable but in weird PRS or left hand positions it's noticeable and appreciated on the Schmidt.

2. The parallax is more more forgiving on the Schmidt. This is kind of a big deal because when the timer starts you don't want to be dicking with the focus/parallax in your 90 seconds. I don't care how good your glass in your scope is, if it's not perfectly focused, a lower quality scope will look better and allow you to spot misses/hits better. Also the Schmidt's numbers line up to true in standard TX temps better (~80F).

3. The glass is better than the NF IMO

4. Rotating ocular on NF gets annoying for PRS and can interfere with bolt manipulation but this is pretty rare as you can set your cap to be fine between 10-25x which is the majority of PRS use. Minor point but worth noting.

NF Pros

1. 10x more, albeit the eyebox gets crazy tight after 27-28x. Usually limited to max of 28x due to mirage anyway in TX.

2. NF has "faster" PRS turrets. The spacing is better and it's easier to see where you are. Especially if you have older eyes. You can get fast with the schmidt with some practice, but the fact remains the NF is easier and faster to confirm position due to the spacing.

3. Locking ocular. This is a feature I like on any hard use scope that can get bumped around.

4. Mil-C reticle is very good. I may prefer is slightly to H2CMR. That said my H2CMR has gotten me some of the highest scores on mover stagers I've ever had. Maybe just a coincidence?

5. Illumination I like more on the NF but honestly for PRS who gives a shit. They both work fine and unless you're a lefty the S&B knob doesnt bother me.


Overall with the prices I see these going for in the exchange, I'd save the money and take the Schmidt. The less picky parallax and eyebox make it a better PRS scope overall in my opinion. That said the 7-35 is still a badass scope. And if prices were equal it would come down to what feature set you prefer. For ELR I'd take the 7-35, running around in weird positions I'll take the Schmidt.

 

[TangoSierra916]

@generalzip - great insight above, I'm also in the same decision situation as you it sounds like. lol

How do your thoughts change, if at all, if the optic is pulling double/triple duty - PRS/hunting/target shooting?

I think they both are great options either way.

 

[generalzip]

@generalzip - great insight above, I'm also in the same decision situation as you it sounds like. lol

How do your thoughts change, if at all, if the optic is pulling double/triple duty - PRS/hunting/target shooting?

Basically it comes down to compromise. Things I don't really care about in a PRS scope suddenly become more important. Weight, warranty, low light gathering performance, price and glass quality become much more important to me.

For hunting I usually run a LHRSi or a AMG and that's for a few reasons. First, I tend to bang my guns around a lot more hunting than I do at the range or at a match (i wrap my scopes in athletic tape fairly thick for protection as well as it makes a "mini bag effect" when pressed against a steel or wood surface). I cringe at the thought of dragging my Schmidt or tangent through mud and tree branches with the caps off. I've dropped guns (unloaded) while hunting so for me warranty and price come into play. The AMG has awesome low light ability and turrets and a reticle that I'm at home with from a PRS background to make the shot when needed. That said if I had to pick between a schmidt and 7-35 for hunting it would be a tough call as the low power FOV is roughly the same because the schmidt tunnels. I recall several shots I've take from weird positions in tree stands and odd obstacles however so I think that forgiving eyebox and parallax trump everything else for me here. Not sure where you hunt but think back to when that big buck came into view and you had 20-30 seconds to shoot. Did you really check your parallax/focus or truly think about the perfect sight picture while you're mind is going 555 miles per minute with your heart? The Schmidt is just an easier to get behind scope in my opinion. Prone they are basically a wash so if you're out west shooting 500+ yards all the time prone always then this may be a moot point to you. Most of my hunting, which I hate to admit, is between 25-400 yards.

For target shooting I'm in the camp that the more magnification you can use the better. Period. If you live in the colder states where mirage isn't a huge factor I'd absolutely take the 7-35 for punching paper. On cold days in Texas or early mornings I can make out 223 holes well past 200 yards on paper. The 35x is very nice to have when shooting groups at 100 as well. For whatever psychological reason the more I zoom in the tighter my groups get. Even in PRS I zoom in as much as I can (usually 15-18x for positional stuff) as it kind of makes me "aim smaller" in a way. This may just be my and my brain so take that with a grain of salt. Also the Mil-C reticle with the small floating dot I think is better suited for target shooting vs a crosshair. again personal opinion. I can still shoot little ass groups with the H2CMR but I'm also not a benchrest/F-class guy. Also, always shooting prone or from a bench the pickier eyebox of the NF isn't quite as important. I will say past 30x however even prone its tight and you need to make sure your stock is set up well.

Hopefully this was helpful. Sorry I type like a dog that got into a pile of coke sometimes.

 

[generalzip]

One thing I forgot to mention is turrets for hunting. The NF comes with a windage cap which is very nice. If you go with the locking schmidt turrets you basically make this a wash in your decision as well. Man is it a good time to be in the shooting/scope world haha

 

[5RWill]

Just traded my buddy my K525i for his ATACR to give it ago with the Mil-C had been wanting to try NF for a long time, seemed like an opportune moment. I still wanna look at a 7-35 since that appears to be a step up from the 5-25? Or so i read? Idk hoping i can pick up a shorter ATACR for the 223 trainer when the k318i goes just to have similar optics on the trainer and match rifle.

In the mean time in my two week break before fall semester, i'll have the k318i, AMG, and ATACR to compare. Which will be fun.

 

[TangoSierra916]

One thing I forgot to mention is turrets for hunting. The NF comes with a windage cap which is very nice. If you go with the locking schmidt turrets you basically make this a wash in your decision as well. Man is it a good time to be in the shooting/scope world haha

haha gotta love some coke in the afternoon.

Great response and I appreciate it, I also agree its a great time to be a consumer of basically anything in this firearm/precision world we dabble in, so many great choices. Interesting that you chose the AMG over 4-16 SB or ATACR, though it is an impressive scope, do you notice more light gathering from the AMG vs the other 2 or mostly a warranty choice? (not saying its only good for the warranty). Ive hunted with the PM2 5-25 before and as you said in tree stand and confined spaces/shots it is forgiving but the tunneling doesnt help either when trying to see an animal move and pick-up background movement or objects too. My hunting primarily takes place in the ranges you mentioned but in the midwest with temps usually at or below 0. This is where things like tacticle turrets and clicks and ease of operation with gloves become important with me.

Many great choices thats for sure

 

[jeffl838]

The quality is there is both products, but I prefer schmmidt generally for features (ie locking turrets).

I own a 4-16 atacr, the turret locks on zero and I love it. Wish nf would adopt a locking turret like schmidt's though.

 

[generalzip]

Just traded my buddy my K525i for his ATACR to give it ago with the Mil-C had been wanting to try NF for a long time, seemed like an opportune moment. I still wanna look at a 7-35 since that appears to be a step up from the 5-25? Or so i read? Idk hoping i can pick up a shorter ATACR for the 223 trainer when the k318i goes just to have similar optics on the trainer and match rifle.

In the mean time in my two week break before fall semester, i'll have the k318i, AMG, and ATACR to compare. Which will be fun.

You will NOT regret that trade. The NF is better in almost every catagory in my opinion.

 

[generalzip]

that you chose the AMG over 4-16 SB or ATACR, though it is an impressive scope, do you notice more light gathering from the AMG vs the other 2 or mostly a warr

Mostly a price/warranty choice. If I drop and break my AMG I have a new one inside a week. Do that with a Schmidt and its gone for months which I can't afford during hunting season. Also I like the locking turrets and less weight of the AGM for LR hunting. The AMG pics up a lot of light. The Schmidt glass doesn't, which actually make it look better during the day. On a bright sunny day the AMG can look more washed out, but as the sun goes down or it's cloudy you notice the AMG looks better with less light which is kind of odd. The Schmidt went with a very neutral tone or something which makes it very well balanced for all conditions. Honestly we are splitting hairs here. The Schmidt has probably the most pleasing image to my eye however overal in terms of resolution and color. It has that "wow" factor some describe.

Also the AMG at 6x has more FOV than both the 7-35 at 7x and schmidt at 5x. Something to think about as well for a hunting scope.

 

[Nik H]

Just traded my buddy my K525i for his ATACR to give it ago with the Mil-C had been wanting to try NF for a long time, seemed like an opportune moment. I still wanna look at a 7-35 since that appears to be a step up from the 5-25? Or so i read? Idk hoping i can pick up a shorter ATACR for the 223 trainer when the k318i goes just to have similar optics on the trainer and match rifle.

In the mean time in my two week break before fall semester, i'll have the k318i, AMG, and ATACR to compare. Which will be fun.

I got to play with a K525i for a day this past Sunday.

It really is an interesting optic. I do see some improvement against my 2nd generation K624i. However, the CA is still present which to my thinking should not exist on an optic of this cost. However, I do realize that cramming that much performance in a compact package is unusually challenging. There have to be some compromises. Turrets were really nice which was a hallmark of my k624i.

However, I agree with @generalzip. You got the better part of that deal. Enjoy the ATACR

 

[generalzip]

One thing people don’t talk about much is the tube effect of the kahles. It literally looks like you’re looking through a straw. Put it side by side with a Schmidt and you’ll be like holy shit it’s like comparing an iPhone screen to a 50” TV. It has that type of full image feel.

That said the turrets and mag find on the kahles are super nice. Glass quality is below both the ATACR and Schmidt imo. I agree CA isn’t acceptable in that optic. I owned one and shot it for 3 months about before selling it to fund another Schmidt.

 

[5RWill]

You will NOT regret that trade. The NF is better in almost every catagory in my opinion.

It's to note i've seen this ATACR a decent bit and do like it a lot. K525i definitely has some trade offs, i wasn't nearly as critical of it as some. But the buddy of mine moved to a k624i and wanted to try it out to have matching reticles/turrets etc.

Was talking to some friends of mine about NF and sample variance. Both of them run Schmidts exclusively, which i told them to take a hard look at ZCO and TT. They kind of felt like me that they had seen some ATACRs that were pretty underwhelming. Which out of the three i've seen two were great and one was extremely underwhelming though it was SFP. I'm hoping i can trade or sell the K318i to grab a 4-16x50 ATACR.

I'm curious at how much better the 7-35 is over the 5-25 though i always hear people say it's a step up.

Truthfully i jumped on the ATACR because there was a member here wanting a straight trade for a mint ZP5 and it was something i couldn't refuse. Though someone beat me to it. Either way i've been really wanting to try out and am sure i'll enjoy it. Though i do wish i could switch out to the Mil-XT, but NF doesn't allow that..

 

[blbennett1288]

I'm curious at how much better the 7-35 is over the 5-25 though i always hear people say it's a step up.

Best thread I have found comparing the 5-25 to the 7-35 ATACRs.

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/nf-5-25-and-7-35-glass.6937447/#post-7667433

Personally, I preferred the image and eye box of the S&B to the ATACRs. The S&B glass wise is extremely close to the other Alpha’s. I spent the better part of 2 days comparing a S&B PMII 5-25 to my TT525P from 50-1000yards and was quite impressed. Over the handful of ATACRs I have looked through, optically I think it is a step behind. I prefer the turrets on the ATACR more. Yes, the parallax is less dependent on the PMII, but I can’t get over the size and travel of the parallax wheel. The range of adjustment is almost endless. Coming from the AMG, ZP5, TT I am spoiled and almost expect a set it and forget it type parallax.

These are just my personal take aways from each scope. The image differences are extremely small and you are really splitting hairs at this point.

At the current prices of the S&B PMII’s and 5-25 ATACRs there is a hell of a lot of performance for your money. I would pick whatever line has the reticle you prefer.

Kinda a side bar, but I lump S&B PMII, TT, and ZP5 into the same viewing “class.” I think TT still has the best glass/image, but the ZCO in my uneducated optical opinion is a completely different experience than any of the aforementioned.

 

[generalzip]

Best thread I have found comparing the 5-25 to the 7-35 ATACRs.

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/nf-5-25-and-7-35-glass.6937447/#post-7667433

Personally, I preferred the image and eye box of the S&B to the ATACRs. The S&B glass wise is extremely close to the other Alpha’s. I spent the better part of 2 days comparing a S&B PMII 5-25 to my TT525P from 50-1000yards and was quite impressed. Over the handful of ATACRs I have looked through, optically I think it is a step behind. I prefer the turrets on the ATACR more. Yes, the parallax is less dependent on the PMII, but I can’t get over the size and travel of the parallax wheel. The range of adjustment is almost endless. Coming from the AMG, ZP5, TT I am spoiled and almost expect a set it and forget it type parallax.

These are just my personal take aways from each scope. The image differences are extremely small and you are really splitting hairs at this point.

At the current prices of the S&B PMII’s and 5-25 ATACRs there is a hell of a lot of performance for your money. I would pick whatever line has the reticle you prefer.

Kinda a side bar, but I lump S&B PMII, TT, and ZP5 into the same viewing “class.” I think TT still has the best glass/image, but the ZCO in my uneducated optical opinion is a completely different experience than any of the aforementioned.

Agreed. One other thing about the Schmidt is it doesn’t have enough parallax adjustment to set it parallax free in weather below about 45-55 degrees past about 450-500 yards. Checked it on 3 different samples and they all do it. You can return it to Schmidt to adjust it for cold weather but the way it’s designed you’ll either have to give up the close range focus to get the cold weather long range adjustment or live without the long range parallax free in colder weather which is what I chose since I live in south Texas.

 

[5RWill]

Might be trading the K318i for the ZP5 if a friend of mine doesn't sell it. Which will be interesting. ATACR vs ZP5 vs AMG. AMG will probably be with me indefinitely i've wanted one of those for quite some time and the price was absurdly good thanks to Scott at Liberty. It just fits a niche hunting/comp hybrid perfectly.

I agree that it's splitting hairs but you know it's like tasting good food or getting a fix of something addictive. Once you've seen or been behind something your eyes favor over what you're currently using, you want it. Granted i still didn't have that much disdain in the k525i optically. Sure there were parts i disliked, mainly FOV/DOF. I thought that part of the new gen Kahles was inexcusable. Optically where i lived with it (12x-18x) i couldn't honestly complain, even next to a PMII or ZP5. 25x left a lot to be desired but was usable. Turrets are still my favorite that i've used thus far. Either i'm extremely picky or entirely too curious to stop moving optics. 10 years i've been doing this only changed rifles a handful of times. My first custom is still with me, yet i've been through double digit optics. I think ZCO would pretty much fill that niche feature set to glass quality comparatively speaking in it's price range.

Truthfully if i could slap the Mil-XT in a TT 5-25 that's what i would want. I'm a pretty big Mil-C/Mil-XT fan i just think the opposite side denotation of 2/10th hashes is intuitive as hell so i never get lost in the count.

Looking forward to the ATACR to TT comparson bennet.

 

[blbennett1288]

Truthfully if i could slap the Mil-XT in a TT 5-25 that's what i would want. I'm a pretty big Mil-C/Mil-XT fan i just think the opposite side denotation of 2/10th hashes is intuitive as hell so i never get lost in the count.

Looking forward to the ATACR to TT comparson bennet.

Yeah, MIL-XT in TT525 would be pretty sweet. I have not been grateful enough to get behind a Gen3XR, but i still can’t sell myself on the reticle looking at the reticle card. Leave the dot at the full mil, but instead of increasing height of the hashes do something like the mil-c/skmr/MR4 and simply stagger them. How my brain works 1mil should be the tallest hash, not 0.8mil. 1mil being a dot with increasing hashes from 0.2-0.8 logically doesn’t make sense.

I have been pretty pleased with the simplicity yet usefulness of the Gen2XR.

Plans changed and I sold the AT because it never got used, so I don’t foresee myself getting into an ATACR this year. I will have to settle for comparing the TT to friends ATACRs while barrels cool down.

 

[generalzip]

Yeah, MIL-XT in TT525 would be pretty sweet. I have not been grateful enough to get behind a Gen3XR, but i still can’t sell myself on the reticle looking at the reticle card. Leave the dot at the full mil, but instead of increasing height of the hashes do something like the mil-c/skmr/MR4 and simply stagger them. How my brain works 1mil should be the tallest hash, not 0.8mil. 1mil being a dot with increasing hashes from 0.2-0.8 logically doesn’t make sense.

I have been pretty pleased with the simplicity yet usefulness of the Gen2XR.

Plans changed and I sold the AT because it never got used, so I don’t foresee myself getting into an ATACR this year. I will have to settle for comparing the TT to friends ATACRs while barrels cool down.

Use one long enough and your brain will adjust. It’s much less cluttered than the mil XT which blocks too Much of shot impacts for My taste. I honestly Prefer simple Reticles like mil C and h2cmr. I think I’m the last 3 matches I’ve had maybe 1 stage where a tree would be helpful.

I think you’ll be amazed at the glass difference between the tangent and Atacr. At least I was with my sample. I’ve had friends with 5-25 Atacrs that swear they are as good as Schmidt. What the tangent buys you is the best zeroing technology. The best turrets. The best glass. And the least picky parallax. It’s truly engineering art.

 

[blbennett1288]

Use one long enough and your brain will adjust. It’s much less cluttered than the mil XT which blocks too Much of shot impacts for My taste. I honestly Prefer simple Reticles like mil C and h2cmr. I think I’m the last 3 matches I’ve had maybe 1 stage where a tree would be helpful.

I think you’ll be amazed at the glass difference between the tangent and Atacr. At least I was with my sample. I’ve had friends with 5-25 Atacrs that swear they are as good as Schmidt. What the tangent buys you is the best zeroing technology. The best turrets. The best glass. And the least picky parallax. It’s truly engineering art.

I kinda had the same thought about the GEN3XR, that if I used it I might get accustom to the design. That is a lot of coin to drop for a “might”

I have only looked through one MIL-XT and thought it was less cluttered than a H59 or Tremor3. I honestly didn’t get much time behind it, but I thought it looked promising.

Yeah I think the only scopes I would really consider upgrading to from the TT525P GEN2XR would be the GEN3XR or any of the ZCO’s. The S&B PMII GR2ID intrigues me enough to want to try it. Anything else would simply be to free up cash.