Rifle Scopes So, what about Leupold Mark 5 ?

[jbell]

Like Stello said the zero stop will limit what appears to be the # of revolutions your elevation turret is being turned. But the revolution indicators are only counting the revolutions from your zero stop setting. Lets say the scope has 3 1/2 complete revolutions starting from completely bottoming out the elevation turret (not the knob, but the turret / erector), if your zero stop is set a 1 turn up from bottom then you will only see 2 1/2 turns on your revolution indicators on the turret.

 

[308pirate]

I just received my Mark 5 3.6-18x44 (first hand). I have the problem that the elevation turret only can get about 17 mil and cannot go further. May I know the reason?

Because advertised elevation travel means from one stop to the other (full down to full up) and scopes don't ship with their adjustments at the extremes of their travel but close to center.

 

[308pirate]

Ordered a mark 5 3.6-18. I need to order some vortex rings.

What height should I be getting? It's going on a tikka ctr with a 20 moa rail.

Thanks

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/ring-height-info-how-to-measure-correctly.20706/

 

[oscar2550]

thanks for helping. Problem solved

 

[Adam B]

How do these compare to the Sig Tango6 line?

 

[jbell]

How do these compare to the Sig Tango6 line?

I love my 2 MK5's and also love the PMII, ATACR F1 scopes for reference. You could not give me a Sig scope. The few I have experienced were a complete joke. They may track fine and might be tough, but I would not know b/c the ones I have seen were like looking through a fish bowl. Just before you buy one find one you can try first...

 

[Yoteski]

How do these compare to the Sig Tango6 line?

I've had 2 Tango 6 5-30's and one MK5 5-25 CCH. Both the Tangos have left the stable. Solid tracking, but the glass was surprisingly terrible for a scope in that price range. An Athlon Cronus BTR blows the tango away as far as glass goes.

 

[bgavin]

How does the Cronus and mark 5 compare?

 

[Yoteski]

I think the MK5 is a better overall scope myself; not to say the Cronus is a bad scope at all.

 

[Txmxracer]

Anyone have a decent picture of the cch reticle? The Leupold website sucks.

 

[vol375]

 

[vol375]

 

[Subhunter2]

Positive experience so far, been shopping for a dual use scope for a light varmint / truck gun or for having some fun at distance, without lugging around the 18lb match rifle.
Compared to my TT or pm2 its not on that level, but it fills the need for solid glass, decent tracking (so far), and allowing for decent wind calls out to 830 .
For what your getting weight wise and with dang good glass, its hard to beat for the money,
New burris might be taking that over, but for now the mk5 fits the bill

 

[Txmxracer]

Thank you. How do you like it compared to the H59?

 

[vol375]

I’ve not shot the H59. I’ve spent a lot of time behind the tremor2/3 and like the CCH better. It is more open at magnification but thick enough to use at lower power.

 

[dgheriani]

Thank you. How do you like it compared to the H59?

I've shot the H59 extensively and now have 2 Mark5 5-25s wth the CCH. I really like the reticle. It does take some getting used to though since it's not as thick as the H59 but at the end of the day, if you like the H59, you'll like the CCH.

 

[The_Mechanic]

Hi guys, long time reader and I read this damn thread about 20 times and still torn.

I REALLY like how the Mk5 looks (5-25) and just sold my razor gen 1 thinking I was going to get the gen 2 but the whole mk5 thing has really screwed up my decision making. This will be going on my RPR 300 winmag to shoot 1500+ yards and I just cant make the decision between the two. With the mil discount, its about $400 difference.

PLEASE HELP!!!!!!

 

[stello1001]

Hi guys, long time reader and I read this damn thread about 20 times and still torn.

I REALLY like how the Mk5 looks (5-25) and just sold my razor gen 1 thinking I was going to get the gen 2 but the whole mk5 thing has really screwed up my decision making. This will be going on my RPR 300 winmag to shoot 1500+ yards and I just cant make the decision between the two. With the mil discount, its about $400 difference.

PLEASE HELP!!!!!!

When you say you like how the MK5 looks, do you mean aesthetically or through its glass?

I would recommend against getting a scope purely for how it looks aesthetically.

 

[The_Mechanic]

When you say you like how the MK5 looks, do you mean aesthetically or through its glass?

I would recommend against getting a scope purely for how it looks aesthetically.

Sorry for not being more clear. I looked through the mk5 at cabelas and was thoroughly surprised with how bright and clear it was. I compared it side by side with a nightforce and was NOT impressed with the NF.

They didnt have a gen 2 razor so I will be going to buds gun shop today at lunch to look through that. I prefer the razor's EBR2 reticle but the CCH doesnt really kill the deal for me.

 

[jbell]

I have owned both & the MK5 is 100% my choice! Lighter, tracks as well (both very good), better turrets, better eye box IMO. Less $

 

[The_Mechanic]

I have owned both & the MK5 is 100% my choice! Lighter, tracks as well (both very good), better turrets, better eye box IMO. Less $

Thanks Gunny. I can take that to the bank. Mil discount through Leupold makes it VERY VERY attractive as well.

 

[FJBPrecision]

I’ve shot the gen 2 razor quite bit over the last 2 years. Got my hands on a MK5 and since I have unloaded my razors and bought a few more MK5s. I don’t see how you could be disappointed with a MK5.

 

[jbell]

Mil discount through Leupold makes it VERY VERY attractive as well.

Exactly...

 

[The_Mechanic]

Exactly...

Could you help with scope ring height? Am i wrong to say I need super high for my ar10 and high for for ruger PR?

 

[jbell]

Hard for me to say b/c all of mine are on bolt guns with smaller diameter barrels

 

[LAW-DOG]

Too much ca for this priced scope & I checked 2 of them outside if sportsman’s wherehouse. Razor amg has much better eye box, fov, & reticle, turrets, & better ca handling. The turrets are loud but too easy to skip but if you are a leupold fan this is definitely their best but too much competition around this price range for them. Bushnell dmr Pro & xrs2, nightforce nxs 22x56mm, vortex razor hd & amg can be had new on eBay at $2200-2300, the SB 5-25x56 p4-fine for $2600-2700 on eBay all the time this would be the best pick or the razor amg call sport Optics they could probably beat the eBay prices for both razor & Sb. I know there are lot of Leupold fans & they will be satisfied with mk5 but it’s not as good as the others yet, but they once made the best binoculars with the golden ring hd series that could keep up with swaros, Leicas, & Zeiss at a fraction of the price & I hope they do the same with their rifle scopes. I still keep an eye on eBay for those golden ring hd binos because you can get them used for $500-650 & they are about as good as the $2800 alphas

 

[LAW-DOG]

The mk5 is a good start for them but they should use the feedback & revise the mk6 line. Make a lighter 30mm 5-25x50 & a heavier 34mm 5-30x56 with an open center Christmas tree reticle & use the same quality glass & optical engineering they used in the golden ring hd binos at competive prices & they will dominate the sales. They did it once before with the golden ring hd binos, they could do it with the rifle scopes

 

[mpl2353]

Has anyone compared the mk5 5-25 to the mk8 3.5-25 (if money were not involved, purely performance)?

 

[LAW-DOG]

Has anyone compared the mk5 5-25 to the mk8 3.5-25 (if money were not involved, purely performance)?

This is the only time I have heard the mk8 being compared to other scopes. It will give you a good idea how it might compare to mk5. I would guess it’s probably a good step up vs the mk5 & probably handles ca better too. You can read the whole article it compares 18 of the best scopes from 2014. Articles name is Tactical scopes: field test results summary & overall scores. There some good pics showing all the scopes next to each other for a size comparison

 

[Glassaholic]

View attachment 6993038
This is the only time I have heard the mk8 being compared to other scopes. It will give you a good idea how it might compare to mk5. I would guess it’s probably a good step up vs the mk5 & probably handles ca better too. You can read the whole article it compares 18 of the best scopes from 2014. Articles name is Tactical scopes: field test results summary & overall scores. There some good pics showing all the scopes next to each other for a size comparison

You will find a few on here who have issues with Cal's tests, that being said I've heard great things about the Mark 8's optical quality, it was the price, turrets and reticles that turned many away.

 

[LAW-DOG]

You will find a few on here who have issues with Cal's tests, that being said I've heard great things about the Mark 8's optical quality, it was the price, turrets and reticles that turned many away.

I agree these tests are not very good & I would not buy a scope based on these articles. It’s the only mk8 review or comparison I know of

 

[jbell]

View attachment 6993038
This is the only time I have heard the mk8 being compared to other scopes. It will give you a good idea how it might compare to mk5. I would guess it’s probably a good step up vs the mk5 & probably handles ca better too. You can read the whole article it compares 18 of the best scopes from 2014. Articles name is Tactical scopes: field test results summary & overall scores. There some good pics showing all the scopes next to each other for a size comparison

Interesting comparison... What would make you say the MK8 is a good step up from the MK5? The MK5 is a newer scope with newer/better optical design and technology. It is a more advanced scope vs the MK8. Just curious.

 

[LAW-DOG]

Interesting comparison... What would make you say the MK8 is a good step up from the MK5? The MK5 is a newer scope with newer/better optical design and technology. It is a more advanced scope vs the MK8. Just curious.

I’ve seen mk5 more than a few times now & how do you know it’s a better optical design than the mk8, because it’s new? Leupolds old golden ring hd binos are way better than any of there new binoculars out now. I doubt a $2000-2700 has a better optical design than the same companies $4000+

 

[LAW-DOG]

Interesting comparison... What would make you say the MK8 is a good step up from the MK5? The MK5 is a newer scope with newer/better optical design and technology. It is a more advanced scope vs the MK8. Just curious.

How do you know it’s a better optical design & technology? There’s all kinds of old scopes that are better than the mk5. Leupolds golden ring hd binos are way better than their new stuff. I doubt the same companies $2000-2700 design has better optical design than the $4000+ one & the mk8 is not that old

 

[jbell]

Based on an in depth conversation I had with the Leupold Military rep a few months ago. We specifically discussed the MK8 & MK6 scopes and then the design of the MK5. The 2 I have (a 3-18 & a 5-25) and the few others I shot before buying mine did not have any CA issues. The optics are very close to or maybe slightly better than my ATACR F1's, PMII's, IMO better than the GenII Razor. So far (I have only had mine for a few months) they are mechanically 100%, I have tested tracking a few time on both in air temperatures down to the mid 20's. It is supposed to be high in the teens this weekend so Ill be able to see how they preform when it starts to get real cold.

I would caution you to base quality on price...

 

[LAW-DOG]

Sorry about the double post my phone died while I was typing & not sure if it posted

 

[jbell]

There’s all kinds of old scopes that are better than the mk5.

That is a pretty bold statement. How do you quantify better??

 

[LAW-DOG]

Based on an in depth conversation I had with the Leupold Military rep a few months ago. We specifically discussed the MK8 & MK6 scopes and then the design of the MK5. The 2 I have (a 3-18 & a 5-25) and the few others I shot before buying mine did not have any CA issues. The optics are very close to or maybe slightly better than my ATACR F1's, PMII's, IMO better than the GenII Razor. So far (I have only had mine for a few months) they are mechanically 100%, I have tested tracking a few time on both in air temperatures down to the mid 20's. It is supposed to be high in the teens this weekend so Ill be able to see how they preform when it starts to get real cold.

I would caution you to base quality on price...

 

[LAW-DOG]

I have a pmII 5-25 & I agree the optics are close except on ca but everyone is different there on ca. Others here have seen ca on the mk5 & others have not

 

[jbell]

I hear ya, I think it can be a scope to scope thing. Kind of odd how some have issues and some don't. I don't pay too much attention to it honestly, it certainly isn't super bad on mine, but you can bet Ill be looking for it now... HA!

 

[LAW-DOG]

That is a pretty bold statement. How do you quantify better??

Better for me is not better for you just an opinion. I got the pmII because they have performed in the worst conditions & hold up to heavy recoil, which is why I got it for my elr rifle. This mk5 is a new scope & we don’t know yet how tough & dependable they are.

 

[LAW-DOG]

The old scopes I was saying would be the pmII, premier, & the atacr or beast

 

[jbell]

Better for me is not better for you just an opinion. I got the pmII because they have performed in the worst conditions & hold up to heavy recoil, which is why I got it for my elr rifle. This mk5 is a new scope & we don’t know yet how tough & dependable they are.

The PMII is a good scope. But I have personally had 3 fail on me. The first stopped adjusting elevation at all, it was on a 20” 338LM TRG, the second would only track correctly for about 2-2.5 mils on the windage then it would start going up or down depending on the direction of adjustment (based on the report from Schmidt it was something in the erector being made wrong), I can’t remember the specifics on the 3rd right now (it was a long time ago) they were all 5-25 PMII’s.

Basically any scope can fail. But I agree the PMII is an excellent scope.

 

[LAW-DOG]

The PMII is a good scope. But I have personally had 3 fail on me. The first stopped adjusting elevation at all, it was on a 20” 338LM TRG, the second would only track correctly for about 2-2.5 mils on the windage then it would start going up or down depending on the direction of adjustment (based on the report from Schmidt it was something in the erector being made wrong), I can’t remember the specifics on the 3rd right now (it was a long time ago) they were all 5-25 PMII’s.

Basically any scope can fail. But I agree the PMII is an excellent scope.

Very true any scope can fail especially when heavy recoil is involved

 

[mpl2353]

Very true any scope can fail especially when heavy recoil is involved

That was my biggest concern as I’m planning on using it for PRS and ELR with the heavier recoil.

 

[jbell]

The Leupold rep and I also spoke about scope weight vs durability. As the weight of the MK5 is the biggest draw for me, I was perfectly happy with my NF. He brought up a good point that the heavier a scope is the more mass it has so the more recoil effects it. Meaning a heavier object is less apt to move when a sudden force is applied (recoil) and also is harder to stop moving when it comes time to stop (rifle stopping against your shoulder). Meaning the lighter the scope the less inertia is felt on the moving parts. Now I have NO IDEA if this actually holds any water at all but I do understand the concept, if you hit me with a 1 pound hammer moving at 5 fps it will hurt me less than if you hit me with a 10 pound hammer moving at 5 fps.

It is an interesting concept... I just don't want to lug around the extra weight.

 

[LAW-DOG]

The Leupold rep and I also spoke about scope weight vs durability. As the weight of the MK5 is the biggest draw for me, I was perfectly happy with my NF. He brought up a good point that the heavier a scope is the more mass it has so the more recoil effects it. Meaning a heavier object is less apt to move when a sudden force is applied (recoil) and also is harder to stop moving when it comes time to stop (rifle stopping against your shoulder). Meaning the lighter the scope the less inertia is felt on the moving parts. Now I have NO IDEA if this actually holds any water at all but I do understand the concept, if you hit me with a 1 pound hammer moving at 5 fps it will hurt me less than if you hit me with a 10 pound hammer moving at 5 fps.

It is an interesting concept... I just don't want to lug around the extra weight.

In benchrest they make the scope as heavy as possible to mitigate recoil. One easy test would be to shoot a lightweight 300 win mag hunting rifle then shoot a 27 pound barret mrad & you would see a big difference. The heavier an object is the more fore is required to move it

 

[LAW-DOG]

I meant they make the rifle as heavy as possible

 

[LAW-DOG]

The heavier an object is the more force is required to move it. My lightweight 300 win mag recoils way more than the heavy barret mrad with the same round

 

[jbell]

Right, but the way it was explained to me (again I have not clue if it actually holds up in physics class) is basically like you are saying a heavier object is more resistant to moving or changing directions. So for a lighter scope it is able to more easily just go with the flow so to speak during the recoil impulse. Like if you attach a heavy weight to the end of a rod and swung the rod it would flex more than if you had a lighter weight. This is not about recoil mitigation rather forces felt on an object, more mass = more stress imparted on the object.