I am looking for a scope for PRS. After reading many opinions on scopes in the 5-25 range, it seems there are a few standouts (Nightforce 4-35, Minox 5-25, Vortex Gen2 5-25, etc.) challenging B & S for this title. Please give your opinions.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes S & B still "Gold Standard?"
- Thread starter iron88
- Start date
Its still the gold standard but like the .30 175smk for .308 it has been eclipsed by other offerings, specifically the Minox ZP5 and the TT. Its not to say by any means that model is not worth purchasing and will for the most part still hold its own or still beat most new comers. If you find a great deal with the reticle you want by all means go for it, you'll be happy and it will serve you for years to come.
Considering there are several in the for sale section going for under 2500, I'm not sure they can be beat if you like the available reticles.
The Minox has a shit ton to prove and has barely been on the market for any time at all. The TT is ran by very few because of the price tag. A good Schmidt can be had for 23-2500$ at the moment which still a toss up on glass when compared to the Mixon. The TT does have a touch better glass than the Schmidt though.
They've been around for a long time and have been proven over and over again with very few issues.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We're talking about splitting hairs... Im going to adopt the Frank mentality here. Top tier scopes ALL have phenomenal pictures. Each person will have a different preference on what characteristics stand out. Brightness / Contrast / Low Light / Chromatic / etc etc ... Turret style & reticle become your main choices... Lastly & arguable most important is the reputation/warranty offered...
I had a GenI Minox ZP5 with the MR4 - Loved the reticle, Picture was very nice, but 2nd rev on the turret was a tough transition, also no locking turrets
Overall I feel like the Minox is a direct competitor to the Vortex AMG, and I kept my AMG over the Minox because of price & warranty & longevity of company
Minox - Price/$2650 - Warranty/Lifetime Non Transfer - Company/Too New
AMG - Price/$2300 - Warranty/Lifetime No Questions - Company/ US & Lasting Power
I have owned no less than 7 S&B scopes over the last 5 years... These are still my go too. Reliable, High Quality, Endless choices, and 20 year warranty... If S&B doesn't make the scope your looking for, your not meant to shoot... 30+ scopes in their Tactical lineup, with 33+ Reticle choices, and at least 3 different configurations on turrets, that leaves endless options and combinations... The new written 20 year warranty is a big plus. You can't go wrong with S&B, Thats why they are still considered the best by a large percentage of shooters around the world (US Military Included)
Tangent Theta - Whats not to like... They fall into an unobtainable realm for most. Even harder finding one to look through...
Hensoldt ZF - Is another like scope, even more unattainable than the TT for most... Definitely sits at the top of the expensive scope pile
4-4.5k Is my limit, and I feel anything beyond that is just unjustified (My personal opinion, I know everyone has different means)
My humble assessment
I had a GenI Minox ZP5 with the MR4 - Loved the reticle, Picture was very nice, but 2nd rev on the turret was a tough transition, also no locking turrets
Overall I feel like the Minox is a direct competitor to the Vortex AMG, and I kept my AMG over the Minox because of price & warranty & longevity of company
Minox - Price/$2650 - Warranty/Lifetime Non Transfer - Company/Too New
AMG - Price/$2300 - Warranty/Lifetime No Questions - Company/ US & Lasting Power
I have owned no less than 7 S&B scopes over the last 5 years... These are still my go too. Reliable, High Quality, Endless choices, and 20 year warranty... If S&B doesn't make the scope your looking for, your not meant to shoot... 30+ scopes in their Tactical lineup, with 33+ Reticle choices, and at least 3 different configurations on turrets, that leaves endless options and combinations... The new written 20 year warranty is a big plus. You can't go wrong with S&B, Thats why they are still considered the best by a large percentage of shooters around the world (US Military Included)
Tangent Theta - Whats not to like... They fall into an unobtainable realm for most. Even harder finding one to look through...
Hensoldt ZF - Is another like scope, even more unattainable than the TT for most... Definitely sits at the top of the expensive scope pile
4-4.5k Is my limit, and I feel anything beyond that is just unjustified (My personal opinion, I know everyone has different means)
My humble assessment
Last edited:
I jumped head first onto the Premire train way back when. Had #50 and #104 sold one kept the other. Reticle blew out 2nd trip to the range.
Moral to this story is I dont want to own the first of anything anymore.
Minox seems to be a powerhouse but for my money I want to see some longevity before I drop that kind of coin.
Moral to this story is I dont want to own the first of anything anymore.
Minox seems to be a powerhouse but for my money I want to see some longevity before I drop that kind of coin.
In my humble opinion I think that these days there's just too many good options to say that just one is "the gold standard".
I have a Schmidt, but I actually prefer my Nightforce scope. I really liked my TT 525 and Tt315m. I've had great luck with vortex as well. So many good companies with proven track records by now that I don't know if there truly is just one gold standard.
Schmidt is certainly the pioneer of tactical military scopes as we know them now with the 5-25 and that's what a lot of people constantly reference, but I think that's based more on legacy than some of the current stuff.
Another thing to note is I think it could also depend on the specific scope you're talking about. If you say the pmii 5-25, there are so many options in that space that one could say NF is "their standard" as lots of shooters swear by NF. Some would say TT because it's better glass and excellent quality. Some say hendsolt.
If you're talking about small scopes I think Schmidt is definitely the gold standard. No other company at the moment has a scope that can compete with the 5-20US with all its features in that size and weight. And if you're talking big mag range scopes, again they have to be the standard with the new 5-45. No one is making anything close to that with the features it offers.
So I think it's a matter of perspective. At the current prices on the 5-25 they are an amazing buy and you surely won't be disappointed as long as you can find a reticle you like.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have a Schmidt, but I actually prefer my Nightforce scope. I really liked my TT 525 and Tt315m. I've had great luck with vortex as well. So many good companies with proven track records by now that I don't know if there truly is just one gold standard.
Schmidt is certainly the pioneer of tactical military scopes as we know them now with the 5-25 and that's what a lot of people constantly reference, but I think that's based more on legacy than some of the current stuff.
Another thing to note is I think it could also depend on the specific scope you're talking about. If you say the pmii 5-25, there are so many options in that space that one could say NF is "their standard" as lots of shooters swear by NF. Some would say TT because it's better glass and excellent quality. Some say hendsolt.
If you're talking about small scopes I think Schmidt is definitely the gold standard. No other company at the moment has a scope that can compete with the 5-20US with all its features in that size and weight. And if you're talking big mag range scopes, again they have to be the standard with the new 5-45. No one is making anything close to that with the features it offers.
So I think it's a matter of perspective. At the current prices on the 5-25 they are an amazing buy and you surely won't be disappointed as long as you can find a reticle you like.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As far as I am concerned, Schmidt & Bender is still the gold standard.
I have had and looked through most top shelf scopes and still can't find anything that the PM2 does not offer.
If Hensoldt offered some modern reticles they would be up there as well.
I have had and looked through most top shelf scopes and still can't find anything that the PM2 does not offer.
If Hensoldt offered some modern reticles they would be up there as well.
When people talk to me about Optics, the first question out of my mouth is, how much do you have to spend on the scope? At least that gets you into the ball park of which optics to look at. Schmidt no doubt has some awesome glass, but as mentioned above, so do others in that price range. Then you get down to features and what you like. The most important to me is the reticle, which ones make the most sense to my brain? I have looked through pretty much every scope listed above, minus the Minox, and I can say they all work well. If you have the money spend all you can on optics you can never go wrong on that. Best bet is you can find some people around you that have the optics you are interested in and look through them on a range and not in a gun shop.
Just some clarification on Minox, their warranty is being improved after I brought up the non-transferable warranty that was discussed here. It just takes some time to have it finalized by lawyers both in Germany and in the U.S. Minox the company has been around since 1945 as far as I can find but are only new-ish in the "Tactical Riflescope" game after acquiring Optronika. Minox is in the same family of Sig Sauer and Blaser Rifles so they are in it for the long haul.
Define "gold standard." I own 3 S&Bs and an ATACR and I would recommend either. In terms of objective scope engineering, features, and capability, there are newcomers that offer similar levels of engineering and capability. Few if any newcomers can touch the S&Bs long term track record for reliability and engineering excellence.
In general I think threads like this are kind of pointless. The whole notion of the existence of a "title" for best scope by any objective measure is just nonsense in today's market. This type of argument belongs in the SAC vs GAP vs LRI category. These debates are more about ego and justifying one's expensive purchase than facts. There are lots of incredible scopes out there today, and any attempt to say one is objectively the best just turns into a pissing match.
In general I think threads like this are kind of pointless. The whole notion of the existence of a "title" for best scope by any objective measure is just nonsense in today's market. This type of argument belongs in the SAC vs GAP vs LRI category. These debates are more about ego and justifying one's expensive purchase than facts. There are lots of incredible scopes out there today, and any attempt to say one is objectively the best just turns into a pissing match.
After finding a scope that can reliably get your bullet to hit your target when you do your job it becomes a matter of preferences. As to whether or not Schmidt is the gold standard is very subjective. Does Schmidt continue to produce reliable scopes with excellent mechanics and outstanding optical performance, I would say the answer has to be a resounding yes. Are there other scopes that offer reliability, excellent mechanics and superb optical performance and the answer is yes, much more so today than in the past. So they manufacturers have upped their game while Schmidt has been consistent for many years.
In regard to which scope is the gold standard for PRS style of shooting again would be highly subjective. It really comes down to which features do you like best and what reticle works the best for your style of shooting.
In regard to which scope is the gold standard for PRS style of shooting again would be highly subjective. It really comes down to which features do you like best and what reticle works the best for your style of shooting.
The name Minox has been around since 1945, but they were primarily known for some rather specialized cameras. They were purchased by Leica in mid-90s, but then went independent again in 2001 when a management buyout of sorts happened. I think they started making binoculars either during their Leica ownership period or just after. The first Minox riflescopes I know of showed in 2010.
They moved into the tactical world a few years later when, after the slow agonizing collapse of Premier, Minox merged with Optronika to form GSO (German Sports Optics). I was not aware of any connection with Sig, etc, beyond Blaser USA being the distributor.
The principle players at GSO are all former S&B, Leica and Zeiss people, including Hans Bender (he is the Bender in Schmidt and Bender) who runs the show, and some of the best minds in the business. Perhaps, David Senne who chimes in here once in a while can offer more detail.
They make a good product and they are here to stay.
As far as the "gold standard" goes, I do not think there is a gold standard in the current market place. There are several very strong players and the choice between them frequently comes down to which reticle you prefer, etc.
S&B 5-25x56 was the gold standard when it came out and its longevity is a testament to that. Now, it is would be difficult for anyone to make such a claim with a straight face (although I have seen some marketing people who would manage).
All the players are all trying to differentiate themselves a little with every new model, but it is not an easy thing in such a niche market. I find S&B Ultra Short designs interesting. I think what Tangent Theta has been doing with the turrets is interesting. Nightforce's BEAST is another approach that is a little different. Vortex' AMG was, in some ways, a step sideways and it is easily my favourite of their scopes. Kahles decided to reinvent the ergonomics of parallax adjustment and I think they has something there. None of these is a gold standard, but the choices available make it a great thing for the consumer.
Lastly, it is important to differentiate between companies that are very focused on riflescope market, including the civilian one, and those for whom it is a diversion. As much as I like my Elcans, Elcan is a division for Raytheon and Raytheon has zero interst in the civilian market (I used to work for Raytheon). Whatever civilian/consumer sales they get is nice, but makes no difference for them. I do not think that ever influenced their design process. Same for Hensoldt. After some reorganizations, it is now a billion dollar revenue company focused on sensor solutions for the military. Riflescopes are at best an afterthought and they one way you will get a new one is if they need to design one for a government tender.
ILya
If you are looking for a PRS scope don't overlook reticle design. Only problem I see with S&B is I think there are better reticles out there for PRS. Going with some of the Vortex, NF, Kahles and even a few others may be a better option for you. Lots of good choices, and no one manufacturer has the 'best' title any more these days.
Very well put ILya, I think this is what the sport optics industry has become - with modern technology many companies are capable of putting together an optical design that competes with the best, but it's the other features that help to differentiate which you sum up nicely above. I would also throw in Revic and their upcoming scope, another differentiating factor is the HUD built into the scope, Schmidt & Bender with their Digital BT line and the new Swarovski dS with laser, atmospherics and so forth built in to provide an all in one solution (albeit without wind). I think we'll begin to see more companies pursue more technology in the coming years whether it be Bluetooth or other wireless technologies or directly built into the scope.
Electronic integration is going to be a big thing. I am a little surprised LRF integration has not moved faster. Burris said a surprisingly good job with the Eliminator line, but I can think of ways to make a another, albeit more expensive integration.
I have yet to see Revic in person. The concept is worthwhile though, so we'll see how it comes along (and I am a mrad guy), so I wait until they go there).
ILya
I have yet to see Revic in person. The concept is worthwhile though, so we'll see how it comes along (and I am a mrad guy), so I wait until they go there).
ILya
Three criteria to meet for the shooter in this crowded marketplace of good products.
1. Budget - how much do I have to spend? In the good old days of 5 years ago we used to say spend as much on your scope as you have done on your rifle. Does that still hold?
2. Use - what are you going to use it for and how often? That has the flow on into breakage rates, warranties, weight, parallax, knobs and clicks, and all that good stuff that seems to drive Internet arguments.
3. Brand - do I want to be associated with this brand? This is the intangible of marketing, it is emotionally based, and the subtext beneath all the vim and vitriol. For example, I would through the March 2.5 - 25 x 52mm SFP or 3 - 24 x 52mm FFP into the mix - not because I am a fan boy but to reflect that there is a broader market place for this criteria. In doing so, I am conscious that this offering will draw the greatest emotional response from the readership.
So, the answer to your question is "there is no Gold Standard" and in fact there never has been. Since the late 1990s, we have been blessed with an increased selection of better product as the companies compete for our attention.
1. Budget - how much do I have to spend? In the good old days of 5 years ago we used to say spend as much on your scope as you have done on your rifle. Does that still hold?
2. Use - what are you going to use it for and how often? That has the flow on into breakage rates, warranties, weight, parallax, knobs and clicks, and all that good stuff that seems to drive Internet arguments.
3. Brand - do I want to be associated with this brand? This is the intangible of marketing, it is emotionally based, and the subtext beneath all the vim and vitriol. For example, I would through the March 2.5 - 25 x 52mm SFP or 3 - 24 x 52mm FFP into the mix - not because I am a fan boy but to reflect that there is a broader market place for this criteria. In doing so, I am conscious that this offering will draw the greatest emotional response from the readership.
So, the answer to your question is "there is no Gold Standard" and in fact there never has been. Since the late 1990s, we have been blessed with an increased selection of better product as the companies compete for our attention.
Minox failed tracking test, to me that's the end of story. It could be that specific sample, plus their interesting warranty term, and I really hate that second Rev friction even in reality I never hit second rev. I really prefer SB at its current price point.
I know nothing about Minox or their tracking, but I keep saying it over and over (regardless of brand): Tracking is KING. If a tactical scope has tracking issues, it is WORTHLESS, regardless of how many fancy features and what "awesome glass" it has.
Really, I hadn't seen this, was it KillSwitch? Please point me to where this test was done, thank you.
yeah KSE did the test. Again it could be that specific scope. Just look for minox tracking test on YouTube.
I would agree.
One would think that a scopes mechanical precision and repeatability, or lack or it, would be a Go / No Go determinant. Yet, it's not often mentioned - even by many here on this site.
Just take a look at the number of posts with guys raving about what great glass their new scope has, yet barely mentioning its mechanical precision results. This may explain some of the interest in Killswitch's 'Scope Tracking Tests' thread. I'd like to extend a thank you to him for taking the time to test and post the ongoing results. I think it's appreciated by many.
Whether an optic has 'Good' glass or not is a highly subjective opinion. An opinion often based on past experiences and individual vision acuity. Good glass will allow someone to discern the details in a target at distance - and is not cheap. The most expensive, clearest scope out there, without mechanical precision, durability, and repeatable tracking, will simply render the shooter an observer.
Not to mention then being pissed off or weeping uncontrollably into their beer after the purchase.
As to the OP's question... the Schmidt and Benders have a long track record of incorporating 'good glass' and mechanical precision into a durable optic. However, they are not the only one.
and i know of 2 personal friends schmidts that had to go back to schmidt in the last year alone...one wouldnt return to zero, the other wouldnt hold zero...guess theyre out for you too
Schmidt's are that good, but so are a few others. Buy the features you need rather than the name or emblem on the scope. If Schmidt has the features you need then buy one; you will not be disappointed. Home down your needs first then find the scopes that fall into those categories. Good luck. Chris
Already mentioned in my previous post, about how to find out that test. I do not want to promote too much about it, as it is just one scope that got tested, may not present whole class of ZP5, that's why I have not started a new thread calling out "bad tracking with ZP5". Scope was Minox ZP5 5-25 with MR2 reticle. It does ask for the question what kind of QC Minox does, as it was a newly purchased scope which should have not left factory.
I looked at his old links and couldn't find them, but for how many scopes that come out of the factory regardless of manufacturer we've seen issues out the box with many premium manufacturers. Unfortunately that's what happens with anything man made. There's a handful of them at matches this year and they have been performing very well so far, if this changes than it will be reported.
As you really want it
Thank you! For the volume of ZP5's we sell, we rarely have an issue out of the box.
Thanks, I now vaguely remember that. If I recall he had an earlier version, but not sure if Minox ever stated an issue with misalignment. Very tempted to send KillSwitch a whole bunch of my scopes before my next move, been close before but the cost of shipping and insurance has always deterred me.
One example of a Minox failed a tracking test and that means there's an inherent problem with the scopes?
I guess the collective talent of former S&B, Leica and Zeiss people, including Hans Bender can no longer design a competent scope.
Putz.
It's actually not hard to build the humbler, given your interests in optics, I totally see you build up one of your own and start testing! I built one for myself in like two hours, not as solid/good as KSE's, but worked for me to validate all my scopes.
You know, that's a very good point, probably would have been much better when I lived on acreage and had my own 100yd range, now I'm back in suburbia with a tiny yard
I think I saw somewhere where someone used a chunk of i-beam and welded on a picatinny rail, but then how do you level it without a bunch of tools and such. Sorry OP, don't mean to derail the thread, maybe I'll start a new one...You know, that's a very good point, probably would have been much better when I lived on acreage and had my own 100yd range, now I'm back in suburbia with a tiny yard
My last off topic post on this thread (sorry OP)
I dont have a huge yard either. What I did, was to hang a weighted white thread, marked in mils with black sharpie, at a given distance (20 or 50 or 100), from a tree branch that is on a quiet public road. Then I screw in a pic rail on a 2X4, C-Clamp it on hand rail of my patio that has similar height to target. The rail does not have to be leveled, as long as it is facing the right direction. Then I get my scope in a mount and attach it to the rail. I then loss the mount screws, allow me to turn the scope and line up vertical with target line. Zero it, then start the test. While you can't do windage test, I really focus on elevation and cant reticle. The con is the wind, so choose your day
Similar threads
