Other than scope length, what is lost with a shorter scope? Resolution? Brightness?
Shorter scopes must compromise something?
Anyone?
Shorter scopes must compromise something?
Anyone?
Rifle Scopes Schmidt & Bender PMII 5-25x vs Vortex Razor HD Gen 2 4.5-27x
- Thread starter Zatoichi66
- Start date
They don't necessarily compromise anything from my experience. I had a Mark 6 that was very tiny and it had a great image.
I didn’t take “cool kid” as an insult. It’s the interweb....;-)
I do know the concept of “keeping up with the Jones’” and that’s not the reason behind the possible choice. As I explained, I purchased a Leupold Vari-X III and saw the difference with good quality glass years ago, then started replacing my Bushnells & Bausch & Lomb less expensive scopes with Leupolds. Once I got used to quality glass, I couldn’t go back.
I see Leupold has a comparable scope at a comparable price, but from my readings, there are higher quality scopes.
I do know the concept of “keeping up with the Jones’” and that’s not the reason behind the possible choice. As I explained, I purchased a Leupold Vari-X III and saw the difference with good quality glass years ago, then started replacing my Bushnells & Bausch & Lomb less expensive scopes with Leupolds. Once I got used to quality glass, I couldn’t go back.
I see Leupold has a comparable scope at a comparable price, but from my readings, there are higher quality scopes.
PMII 5-25 is overkill on a AR15, honestly. I seldom go over 20x even past 1,000. I’d look in the 15’ish range on the high end. Not to throw another wrench in your plans, but a NF ATACR 4-16 would be an excellent optic for an AR15. Leupold has the 3-18 MK6 that’s a nice optic and would save you a ton of money (money I would put towards a SPUHR mount).
I know you think you want to ‘see more’ with more magnification, but you’ll be amazed at how much optical quality comes into play at the same mag range. That is, how much better a NF ATACR is than the vari-xx, even at the same power.
And to everyone saying their Razor 2 has glass on par or ‘a wash’ with a Schmidt, I’d genuinely love to get behind your scopes. A lot of Razor 2’s come to the range I shoot at and at 1,500 yards there is absolutely zero comparison, none. Maybe the 15+ examples I’ve looked though we’re duds.....
I know you think you want to ‘see more’ with more magnification, but you’ll be amazed at how much optical quality comes into play at the same mag range. That is, how much better a NF ATACR is than the vari-xx, even at the same power.
And to everyone saying their Razor 2 has glass on par or ‘a wash’ with a Schmidt, I’d genuinely love to get behind your scopes. A lot of Razor 2’s come to the range I shoot at and at 1,500 yards there is absolutely zero comparison, none. Maybe the 15+ examples I’ve looked though we’re duds.....
I looked at Nightforce. I looked at Swarovski, Steiner, US Optics, etc.
I have a Leupold Vari-XIII 4.5-14 & seeing soda cans at 300 yards isn’t as easy as I would like...hence the choices.
It seems to boil down to $3500 glass being better than $1400 glass. The variable is the name on the scope.
I have a Leupold Vari-XIII 4.5-14 & seeing soda cans at 300 yards isn’t as easy as I would like...hence the choices.
It seems to boil down to $3500 glass being better than $1400 glass. The variable is the name on the scope.
OK, I guess I would say that the AR15 really isn't a "paper at >300yd" platform... its kind of a 'chest-sized target at <300yds'.
In any case, it sounds like optical quality is what you desired. But beware, none of these scopes will reliably see .22" holes at >300yds, so don't go into this purchase with that as your benchmark. In terms of optical quality in the $ range you are in (which is generous, high end, but not super high end range), I think the Minox is what you want. Bunch of great reviews on here covering the strong optical performance of the Minox. Minox traces their design from Premier Heritage, a now bankrupt company which also formed the foundation of the Tangent Theta (TT) scopes (big bucks, 2x your range). Minox is German designed and made and a decent track-record of performance in the field now (its several years old now). Good reticle choices too.
Thank you jbailey. I think you’re correct as I read more about Minox, the spy camera folks.
I will check these 3 (and probably more) scopes at Eurooptic. I wish I had a comparison with the optics of these scopes with the Leupold 4.5-14x I have been using. That’s really the driving point for 25x as I checked my shooting/reloading notes—side notes by me bitching I can’t clearly see the target.
I will check these 3 (and probably more) scopes at Eurooptic. I wish I had a comparison with the optics of these scopes with the Leupold 4.5-14x I have been using. That’s really the driving point for 25x as I checked my shooting/reloading notes—side notes by me bitching I can’t clearly see the target.
I too have just started hearing about the Minox and have been pricing it but WOW they are high! 
My main binocs are Leicas so I don't need to be told (forum 'splained) about German glass but I WAS looking at scopes in the $1000 - $1500 range and that Minox is way above that!
My main binocs are Leicas so I don't need to be told (forum 'splained) about German glass but I WAS looking at scopes in the $1000 - $1500 range and that Minox is way above that!
Make sure you don’t require closer than 50m parallax/focus. The minox won’t get closer than 40 at best.
It’s going to be my >300yrd gun. I guess I’ll “fix bayonets” if i’m inside 50 yards.
;-)
;-)
I've found if you go to minimum power on your scopes you can shoot much closer than the minimum parallax setting just fine. At minimum power of 5x, you should clearly be able to shoot around 25 yards away.
Geez—I thought “fix bayonets” was witty....the visual of me charging a groundhog with an AR & bayonet attached....
Well, never mind then—I’m only half ass witty as I think....
Well, never mind then—I’m only half ass witty as I think....
with that big 5-25x on the top of your AR, it will hardly be a useful hand-to-hand weapon. If you are using it for ground hogs, why look at the 1-8x scopes? Both Vortex and SuB make great options there... I use my AR to keep my farm hog free, and its got a good 1-6x on it, which is good for 300yds, 50 yds or 5yds. Just the other weekend, had a hog at 5yds and put 5 rounds in his ass in 3 seconds as he ran away. Never do that with a 5-25x.
This is being set up for targets >300 yards, and probably long range varmints.
I have an AR with a Leupold Vari-X III 4.5-14x scope and have trouble seeing soda can sized targets/clay pigeons resting on the 300 yard berm.
I have an AR with a Leupold Vari-X III 4.5-14x scope and have trouble seeing soda can sized targets/clay pigeons resting on the 300 yard berm.
A Krieger SAM-R barreled Compass lake Engineering isn’t a 300+ yard rifle?
I respectfully disagree.
I respectfully disagree.
Typically the only need for focusing closer is precision 22, in which you need as much magnification as possible.
With .22 becoming more and more popular, and many people only being able to afford one or two high end optics, I always caution people to consider the parallax if they are even remotely considering utilizing it for something like that.
I do appreciate these scope are quite long...17”!
Looking at ultra compact S&Bs now, too.
Why doesn’t someone make a 3-20x that’s 14” OAL?
Looking at ultra compact S&Bs now, too.
Why doesn’t someone make a 3-20x that’s 14” OAL?
Attachments
True, but I think it’s fairly rare for folks to put a S&B that goes down to 10 meters on a .22. Not saying it doesn’t happen, especially with people buying vudoos, etc now. Even then in .22 prs, 50 yards is the closest shot. And most of not all scopes will get you to a 10-12 power which is more than adequate and focus to 50 yards.
Most close shots (less that 50 yards) probably occur from hunting in the woods in which case you’d likely be at your minimum magnification, 3-5x. On your minimum parallax setting and lowest power the reticle and image will be clear much closer than your lowest setting dictates.
Could not disagree more. I see schmidt’s on 22 at every match I shoot and the shots are 15 yds to 300 depending on the venue.
Also, when your are doing other 22 matches and shooting things like matchsticks and playing cards at 30 yds, 10x ain’t gonna cut it if you want to be competitive.
You’re speaking in the world of competitive .22 shooting... I’m referring to the average joe that buys a .22. Apples and oranges. On average, it is highly unusable for someone to put a 3000 dollar optic on a 3-500 dollar .22. The folks you are talking about at these matches are the exception not the rule.
Anyways, this is completely off topic from the discusssion. To address the OP, unless you’re looking to get into competitive .22 shooting, which clearly is not your intent from your post, minimum focus distance will not be of any concern to you whatsoever for your application of long range shooting.
Well, now I get it....
The Minox & S&B i’m looking at take up more than half of my rifle... I made a cardboard mock up.
I guess I could be a serial crusher with a really huge scope like that.
The Minox & S&B i’m looking at take up more than half of my rifle... I made a cardboard mock up.
I guess I could be a serial crusher with a really huge scope like that.
One of the best scopes I've come across is the regular S&B 3-20x50. It's on my go-to bolt rifle right now. It strikes a good balance in most ways.
On my target AR is a Athlon Midas TAC 4-16x40, it's just what I want on that rifle. There's no better way to say it than that some scopes turn out better in execution than originally anticipated and that certainly applies to this scope. It's in the $500 -give a few range, in street price.
All that being said I have a 5-25 S&B on my 22, it looks stupid on there because it's way to big for the rifle but on occasion I need to see 22 holes in the black bulls. Well and I want the extra weight for that rifle too.
A perfect example of how personal preference comes into choice. I had an S&B 3-20 and really care for it. It was a good scope but I didn't like the locking knobs and found it to do nothing that the 5-25s I owned didn't.
Length on an optic on a match rifle is only a problem if it sticks out past the muzzle which none do. OP don't stress the length. I ran 4" sunshades on all my scopes. No issues in use. Even on my .22s.
Length on an optic on a match rifle is only a problem if it sticks out past the muzzle which none do. OP don't stress the length. I ran 4" sunshades on all my scopes. No issues in use. Even on my .22s.
Totally agree with Rob. Only exception would be a hunting rifle that needs to fit a certain pack where size starts to matter. For a range gun it’s a total non factor. I also use scope shades for competitions because it gives me more area to grab when pressing into a bag or barricade.
I was quoted $2200 for the Razor Gen ll 4.5-27 yesterday by a vendor here. I have gotten a couple of S&B 5-25's for right at $2500 . Ask the vendors here.
I bought one S&B at Euro optic recently. Also got a nightforce 5-25 about the same price. The gen 2 razor would be crazy on an AR. # friggin lbs. I have been trying to think of any gun I would want that on. I wouldn't even want it on my 338 Desert Tech. Adding a scope, suppressor, and carrying all the range stuff....Kestral, Terrapin, PDA, drag bag. No way I would carrry a 3 lb scope. Maybe for a 50 cal Barrett.)
I bought one S&B at Euro optic recently. Also got a nightforce 5-25 about the same price. The gen 2 razor would be crazy on an AR. # friggin lbs. I have been trying to think of any gun I would want that on. I wouldn't even want it on my 338 Desert Tech. Adding a scope, suppressor, and carrying all the range stuff....Kestral, Terrapin, PDA, drag bag. No way I would carrry a 3 lb scope. Maybe for a 50 cal Barrett.
)I was quoted $2200 for the Razor Gen ll 4.5-27 yesterday by a vendor here. I have gotten a couple of S&B 5-25's for right at $2500 . Ask the vendors here.
I bought one S&B at Euro optic recently. Also got a nightforce 5-25 about the same price. The gen 2 razor would be crazy on an AR. # friggin lbs. I have been trying to think of any gun I would want that on. I wouldn't even want it on my 338 Desert Tech. Adding a scope, suppressor, and carrying all the range stuff....Kestral, Terrapin, PDA, drag bag. No way I would carrry a 3 lb scope. Maybe for a 50 cal Barrett.
You say that until you drop your rifle, scope first, onto a rock. I'd be pretty confident the Razor would hold zero. Not saying the S&B isn't sturdy, but id I had to chose 1 to hit nails into a 2x4 with it would be the Razor. What's more important is the reticle. I'd imagine at 2500 the S&Bs you're looking at is the P4FL reticle. This reticle is outdated pretty shitty for tactical/PRS shooting. Can you make it work? Yes. Is it ideal? Hell no. The EBR-1/2C is a much better reticle than the P4FL. Also if you look hard enough and call around I bet you can find a Razor for less than 2200. Or buy used. The Vortex warranty should keep you worry free.
If the S&B has a different/better reticle and 300 dollar difference is really the best price difference you can find, then I'd go with the Schmidt.
Similar threads
