-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes So, what about Leupold Mark 5 ?
- Thread starter longshot2000
- Start date
What's the preferred reticle for hunting? I don't have much time behind either MOA or MIL but there is a preference to MIL.
I think the TMK Illuminated is the ticket but it is $400 more which I don't think justifies the benefit of getting the floating dot. So I am leaning towards the PR-1 MOA but it's in MOA. How much of an issue would this be if I were to later move to MILs?
TMK nonilluminated too thin for hunting?
Also, anyone experience issues hunting within 0-75 yards with the parallax minimum of 75 on this scope?
I think the TMK Illuminated is the ticket but it is $400 more which I don't think justifies the benefit of getting the floating dot. So I am leaning towards the PR-1 MOA but it's in MOA. How much of an issue would this be if I were to later move to MILs?
TMK nonilluminated too thin for hunting?
Also, anyone experience issues hunting within 0-75 yards with the parallax minimum of 75 on this scope?
CCH (combat competition hunting) reticle would work too. As you zoom out the stadia become triangles pointing towards the center.
Thanks! It appears the TMR has a .05 and .1 mil thickness between the non illum and illum.
Have you checked how low your parallax will go to? I read on here that someone was able to focus down to 30 yards as the adjustment goes beyond the 75 yard marking.
The thin portion of the illuminated TMR is twice as thick as the non-illuminated.
I use the illuminated TMR on my hunting scopes. I’ve used other with the non- illuminated TMR, and it’s just too thin for me for a hunting scope- but great on targets. I know it costs more, but the illuminated TMR is fantastic, even w/o being illuminated. I’ve never needed to turn it on while hunting (the Mk5 low light performance is outstanding) but I like that the lines are thicker.
I just bought the 3-18 Illuminated TMR. I just mounted it on my 300 PRC hunting rig and just noticed the 2nd rev indicator is not popping up on the second rev. I took the turret off and really can’t see anything wrong, the indication moves freely on the spring, I have emailed Leupold so I’ll see what they say. Just wondering if anyone else has had this issue. I will probably never need it but just like everything to work properly.
The pin on top of the turret pops up on the third rev. The turret lock button is the second rev indicator. On the second rev, it sits flush with the turret.
What he said. The lock button goes flush on rev 2, the pin on top pops up on rev 3. Where are you hunting where you need to go past rev 1 (10.5 Mils)??
Thanks for the info! I did not notice the lock button moving flush, guess I should have read the manual. I am only getting 19 mils of elevation on my Seekins PH2 so not getting into the 3 rd rev. which is why I thought I had a problem.
I did say in my original post that I would not need to be in the 2nd rev. but if I ever want to sale the scope I want to make sure its 100%.
Reading the directions usually helps
If you don’t have a 20 MOA rail, that’s probably all the up travel you will get.
I just picked up a Mark 5 3.6-18 CCH and ran it through a tracking test, figured people following this thread would be interested in the results. I mounted the scope in a Spuhr 5001 and used the leveling wedge to level it. Next I mounted it on my tracking test plate pictured below which is a 15lb steel plate with a pic rail and levelers on it. I placed my tracking target (snipers hide / B2B precision 10mil tracking target placed end to end for 20 mils) at 100.0 yards verified by my leica 2800.com and leveled the vertical stadia of the tracking target with a plumb bob. Finally I adjusted the levelers on the plate until the bubble level on the Spuhr showed level and checked the vertical stadia of the scope reticle against the plumbed target - spot on. When the spuhr shows level my reticle is plumb. After tesing tracking out and back 5 times I'm happy to say that each time it tracked with less than .1 of error over 20 mils, meaning between 99.5%-100% tracking, and returned to zero each time. That being said, the parallax is picky and the CA is very bad, but for a 26 oz 12" scope I'm okay with that, it's good for what it is!
Don’t google it, don’t worry about it, it doesn’t exist, continue on without giving a shit.
ignorance is bliss, CA isn’t real
ignorance is bliss, CA isn’t real
Like he said, if you don't know what it is it won't bother you. Once you figure out what it looks like you can't go back and you will notice it in everything you are taking a look through, especially in some of your lower end optics.
I haven’t seen it in the 5-25 mark 5, only on the 3.6-18, due to the super short length I’m sure.
Chromatic Aberration
chro·mat·ic ab·er·ra·tion
noun
OPTICS
- the material effect produced by the refraction of different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation through slightly different angles, resulting in a failure to focus. It causes colored fringes in the images produced by uncorrected lenses.
It's standard on most ultra-short designs. The price you pay to cut the bulk.
The 5-25 doesn't have any I can find.
For those of you who use these on comp rifles, I'm thinking of picking up a 5-25 to use on a new 6.5 build and need opinions on reticle choice. Looking to get into prs matches, but realistically most of my shooting will be known distance from 100 to 1,500 yards. I can't decide if the tmr is sufficient, or if I should be looking at one of the grid/tree articles. The t3 and cch seem cluttered to me compared to tree reticles from other manufacturers, but maybe they're great? I know reticles are a personal thing, but I haven't had a chance to use any of these, so would appreciate feedback.
if you want it for PRS- get the CCH. You will be lacking trying PRS stages with the TMR. I’ve got scopes with both reticles, and I’ve shot matches with both. The TMR is not good enough for me. The CCH is great though. It works great on holdover stages, and the .25 mil marks give you enough information without being overwhelming. I’ve used the T3 and didn’t like it.
Too bad they don’t offer an illuminated CCH. At low power I find it easier to see in low light.
Does anyone have a picture of the illuminated Tremor 3 reticle through the scope? On leupold's website the illuminated version appears to have the windage marks number and the reticle almost looks thicker. I havn't been able to find any actual pictures of the reticle through the scope yet.
I have a 2x 5-25 T3’s, one illuminated and one non illuminated. I can tell you 100% that the illuminated one is not thicker. The reticles are identical between both optics, except one lights up when you turn the switch. I will also say that this is the best version of an illuminated Horus reticle I’ve seen in any scopes and I’ve also had the T3 in S&B’s and NF’s.
Me too although I hated the floating dot for a start but now I love it. Need another scope now for my other rifle gonna try somethng other than Leupold as I have them on all my other rifles.
How is the illumination different with the Leupold's version of the Tremor 3? Does the entire reticle light up or just the center dot? Also is the main horizontal line mil marks numbered like the image on leupolds website or is it still only numbered every 5 like on Horus website? I've been debating on what reticle to get for this scope that works in low light and I'm not a fan of the TMR.
Attachments
I like the color temp a little better on the Burris. The glass is about the same to me. The mk5hd has a neutral color look which some might think it has a washed look. I like the turrets on mk5hd better but don’t like the parallax or fov. Most rifle scopes have a warm look that makes tans, browns & reds look great but whites greens & blues won’t look as good as a neutral or cool tone. From having some experience with telescopes I know there are 3 types of glass that are the most used which are bak4 in cheaper, fpl51 or fk61 in mid level, & fpl53 fcd100 or fluorite in the high end scopes. Most likely the Burris & Mk5hd use a an fpl51 or equivalent at this price range. You probably won’t see much difference until you get to alpha level which are using expensive Ed glass like Schott fk58 or fpl53 Japanese glass. Even in the high end most people won’t see much of a difference unless they have a lot of experience looking at high end glass.
OK, I gotta ask, with all the MK5 love, what about the MK6 3-18? Assuming that the tracking issues are fixed, or get fixed by factory return, any reason to pick the MK5 over MK6? MK6 is slightly more compact- lighter, shorter, 34 mm tube, wider fov. Don't know about glass differences, haven't seen that discussed.
I Think the Mk5 is more appealing than the Mk6 for a couple of reasons, from what I have read, I think that they may have improved the glass slightly, or maybe its the same glass with larger 35mm main body that allows more light to enter the optic. While I have not had any issues with my Mk6 Turerts, they were definitely a not the high point of the optic. The Mk5 improves this.
Its light, its easy to get behind, and i think most importantly, especially though the LE/MIL program, the priced it at a price point that almost makes it a no brainer.
Almost like Glock, there are better options out there but are those options really worth the juice?
I think the reasons that MK5 became favored over MK6 ( price, tracking, weird turret) may not be as valid anymore, at least for the non-illuminated MK6, the street price has come down closer to the MK5, with M5C2 turrets and tracking fixed, and the optics and form factor are better, so for a hunting scope I am liking the mk6 3-18 non-illum TMR M5C2 for around 1500-1600. If you want a different reticle or illuminated the price difference jumps for some reason and the MK5 is for sure a better deal.
The cheapest I’ve seen the m5c2 model is $1800 & most everywhere else it’s $2500
Would a jump from an illuminated Mk6 to an illuminated Mk5 be an upgrade, push, downgrade? I have a tremor 2 but thinking of a TMR for hunting reticle but torn between the two models.
Don't know but I'm skeptical it'd be an upgrade, though certainly cheaper. It'd be nice to see a side by side comparison of MK5 and MK6 glass. What I can say is I just got a non-illuminated MK6 with TMR for a hunting setup and I think the reticle will work well for that, its got good visibility in low light at 3x. I only just got it, but putting it side by side against a Hensoldt 4-16x56 at different times of day, the light transmission and resolution of the MK6 holds up very well, although it is more finicky to focus.
Last edited:
I don’t know about the recent mk6 coming out of the factory. But I’ve used a mk6 for 8 years and looked though a few dozen of them. Some newer than others. The mk5 glass was noticeably better ( and I am no glass snob) and the turrets were better on the 5. I bought a MK 5 for personal use.
Question for guys running the 3.6-18 mounted in a Spuhr on a short action.
Is the eye relief / eyebox flexible enough to a certain point? Being that the mount is longer there doesn’t seem to be a lot to play with.
Is the eye relief / eyebox flexible enough to a certain point? Being that the mount is longer there doesn’t seem to be a lot to play with.
Anybody seen the sx5hd 27-55x80 spotting scope. Apparently it has the same glass as the mk5hd. You can find used ones or demos for around $1400 & new around $1700-1800. Looks like it might give the razor spotter some competition. Another spotter that’s getting a lot of praise in the birdforum is the Nikon monarch Ed spotting scope. The birdforum people are saying the Nikon monarch is the closest in performance to the alphas at this price range. Anyone had a chance to compare the leupold sx5hd to the Nikon monarch ed or the vortex razor spotter
What’s the difference between what nikons doing & all these scope companies doing business with CHINA. I could care less that there not making rifle scopes anymore. Most likely it’s $$$ & not politics. I doubt any of these companies put politics or ethics ahead of $$. There plenty of other scopes that are as good or better
Well I still haven’t gotten the check they promised me 3 months ago for the red dot that didn’t work, after trying to give me a coupon to their non stocked optics store.
good Luck with customer service and warranty claims in my experience they’ll take care of you when they get around to it
you’re welcome to most likely it back and forth and justify them not selling Shooting stuffs anymore, but combined withmy awful experience with them they are blacklisted for me. Either way have a good one:
good Luck with customer service and warranty claims in my experience they’ll take care of you when they get around to it
you’re welcome to most likely it back and forth and justify them not selling Shooting stuffs anymore, but combined withmy awful experience with them they are blacklisted for me. Either way have a good one:
Last edited:
I agree their customer service is nowhere near leupold or vortex. Try contacting bman940 he used to work for Nikon & has helped a lot of other people on the hide with customer service
