Rifle Scopes Tangent Theta vs Minox ZP5 5-25 review

[Glassaholic]

I hear what you're saying FourT, you provided the clarification I was asking for in saying they were the worst turrets you've experienced in any scope in this class. For me, the Minox are better than the Kahles and on par with the Schmidt & Bender Ultra Short turrets. It is so difficult sometimes when we write on forums or anything electronic really because you don't hear the voice or see the body language, please understand I had no ill feelings toward what you wrote, just wanted clarification is all and you provided that After reading what you wrote and thinking, wow, these are the worst ever I had to go back to my Minox and really mess with it a lot more than I usually would at the range, to me I'd have to say the March and the Bushnell ET turrets are the "worst" in regard to feel, but that being said I still find them completely usable. Maybe I have numb hands or maybe I have overly sensitive hands and feel the clicks better than others, who knows, but you are right, I think this is entirely subjective and based a lot on user preference. I think Conrad summed it up appropriately above when he said:

At the end of the day if you can land on the number you want quickly and that number matches the trajectory you want and then returns to zero then your turret is doing its job for you.

 

[steve123]

Nearly every scope I've got my hands on has a different feel on the elevation vs the windage turret and a slightly different feel from scope to scope within the same brand and model. I used to be hung up on turret feel but I've accepted imperfection in general. 7-8 years ago I used to think if a guy paid $1800 for a Nightforce NXS that it better be perfect, grand dilutions, right. Good scopes but not perfect and same with all the expensive scopes. Something is always not quite what you or I would prefer or needs a trip back to the manufacturer.

It could be the Minox 46+2 tried was a dud in the turret department, that happens too, maybe a prototype or preproduction that slipped through. Kind of like the first gen Cronus turrets with a few pre production examples slipping through the cracks which could have turned out better. A couple shipments later the turrets were improved and now my new Cronus BTR has very nice turret feel and I have no complaint but it's basically a 3rd gen so Athlon had fixed them by then. Maybe the Minox has been sitting at the store long enough that it's turrets are coming loose a bit or are worn or both, who knows?? I bet 3rd gen Minox will be dialed in, pun intended.

I haven't owned a TT but played with them at Shot a couple times, of course they were very nice but I didn't think they were WOW awesome. Actually I liked the 315M feel the most but it's only 6 mil rev. I liked the S&B DT feel just as much as the P TT's, they are just different. What I did like over anything else was the tool less zero on the TT which is without peer.

If I were to pay the hefty price for a TT I'd need a nice tree reticle and close focus, reasons besides price which dissuades me. TT is probably at the top of the heap in most ways but approaching $5000, crazy.

I haven't messed with Minox so no comment but I would look over some imperfections to save the difference in price from TT. Applaud them for turning out a nice modern reticle but I'm done with 50Y min parallax scopes as well. I just like the versatility.

It gets to the point where this fancy scope thing gets silly anyway. Not being rich I'm pretty much done sacrificing for $3000+ scopes when a scope half that price does 98% the same thing and mostly in the refinement arena. If I had the money some of you guys have I'd try both or all just for fun.

S&B's are paid for so there's that.

That's me though...

 

[jfk]

I had a chance to compare the Minox ZP5 along side the Kahles with Mike at CS Tactical. Glass is subjective because both looked good to me with the distance and objects I looked at. The turrets were positive for both. I seemed to be able to get a quicker image once I looked through the scope with the Kahles no matter settings and adjustments I made. Both prices were the same and I went with the Kahles. I don't think one was completely better than the other and it boiled down to was preference. I've never had the opportunity to handle a TT, yet.

 

[FourT6and2]

It could be the Minox 46+2 tried was a dud in the turret department, that happens too

I was told, compared to the first run Minox sent out, it was much improved. Looked to be brand new, out of the box.

I haven't owned a TT but played with them at Shot a couple times, of course they were very nice but I didn't think they were WOW awesome. Actually I liked the 315M feel the most but it's only 6 mil rev. I liked the S&B DT feel just as much as the P TT's, they are just different. What I did like over anything else was the tool less zero on the TT which is without peer.

Yeah, I think that between two scopes of the same family, the one with fewer clicks crammed into a revolution is going to feel better. The clicks are probably spaced farther apart. I know that the windage knob on my TT feels better than the elevation simply because there are less clicks and they are farther apart. But the actual detent and spring and all that are most likely the same.

I haven't messed with Minox so no comment but I would look over some imperfections to save the difference in price from TT.

Yeah, the price difference (and reticle) is what's tempting for sure.

Applaud them for turning out a nice modern reticle but I'm done with 50Y min parallax scopes as well. I just like the versatility.

I think I asked this in another thread. But in what situation would you need to focus on something closer than 50 yards/meters with a 25x tactical scope? I just haven't ever encountered a situation where I personally needed to do that. Maybe if you put the scope on a BB gun or .22 for practice or something? But I don't think scope manufacturers spend R&D on something like that when it comes a "tactical" scope. Or maybe they do? I dunno.

If your target is at 10 yards, I think I'd just throw the bullet at it haha

 

[ICU22250]

I guess when I said shitty turrets and shitty reticle I started a debate, I guess what I really meant is, that was each companies weak point in their product... I could use the gen2 XR just fine, same as I can use the Minox turrets just fine..

 

[cageli]

I had a chance to compare the Minox ZP5 along side the Kahles with Mike at CS Tactical. Glass is subjective because both looked good to me with the distance and objects I looked at. The turrets were positive for both. I seemed to be able to get a quicker image once I looked through the scope with the Kahles no matter settings and adjustments I made. Both prices were the same and I went with the Kahles. I don't think one was completely better than the other and it boiled down to was preference. I've never had the opportunity to handle a TT, yet.

Kahles has a slightly better field of view if I remember correctly. I would have a hard time to choose between the two as well, so looking through them is ultra important but impossible for most folks here. I do like the clicks on the AMG a lot, and really think 10mil per rev is the right way to do this.

 

[FourT6and2]

I guess when I said shitty turrets and shitty reticle I started a debate, I guess what I really meant is, that was each companies weak point in their product... I could use the gen2 XR just fine, same as I can use the Minox turrets just fine..

Nah, I completely agree with you about that.

 

[TheOE800]

Kahles has a slightly better field of view if I remember correctly. I would have a hard time to choose between the two as well, so looking through them is ultra important but impossible for most folks here. I do like the clicks on the AMG a lot, and really think 10mil per rev is the right way to do this.

Kahles (or AMG) is 24x at the high end, it has a small amount more FOV than the Minox does at 25x. The Minox of course has more FOV at 5x than the Kahles (or AMG) at 6x.

 

[hk dave]

It's like arguing about the best type of french fry (curly fries, btw). .

I dunno man... tater tots are pretty amazing when done right.

 

[steve123]

I was told, compared to the first run Minox sent out, it was much improved. Looked to be brand new, out of the box.



Yeah, I think that between two scopes of the same family, the one with fewer clicks crammed into a revolution is going to feel better. The clicks are probably spaced farther apart. I know that the windage knob on my TT feels better than the elevation simply because there are less clicks and they are farther apart. But the actual detent and spring and all that are most likely the same.



Yeah, the price difference (and reticle) is what's tempting for sure.



I think I asked this in another thread. But in what situation would you need to focus on something closer than 50 yards/meters with a 25x tactical scope? I just haven't ever encountered a situation where I personally needed to do that. Maybe if you put the scope on a BB gun or .22 for practice or something? But I don't think scope manufacturers spend R&D on something like that when it comes a "tactical" scope. Or maybe they do? I dunno.

If your target is at 10 yards, I think I'd just throw the bullet at it haha

I've been to 3-4 tactical matches with targets as close as 11Y and some other stages at less than 50Y. The 11Y stage I tied another guy for 1st for that stage. Others were offhand shots on clay pigeons and such. I like a sharp focused image up close.

Ha, i've been teased about my so-called BB guns, actually one was a $2400 PCP pellet rifle and a few others aren't much less. The S&B 5-25 which focuses at 10M has been on a couple of them. I've shot a bunch of sub half inch groups at 50y and won plenty of state matches.

Then there's the rimfires. 25Y min parallax does fine on them for the most part but once again we have had 10y cold bore shots, many competitors missed, lol.

It's the have and not need, than need and not have thing. Why I like illume too.

 

[cageli]

Kahles (or AMG) is 24x at the high end, it has a small amount more FOV than the Minox does at 25x. The Minox of course has more FOV at 5x than the Kahles (or AMG) at 6x.

What I meant, was Kahles has more FOV at exact same magnification as Minox. Say both at 20X, FOV in Kahles is bigger than Minox. But it was just my memory, and I know my old head is no longer than accurate...just saying...

 

[Clint E.]

Could someone who owns a MP5 please take a quick measurement of the objective for me? I have one coming to replace my ERS and I am trying to determine if I will need new rings.

Thanks!

 

[FourT6and2]

I dunno man... tater tots are pretty amazing when done right.

There's a place here that totchos! Tater tot nachos with chili and cheese and all that good stuff.

 

[Glassaholic]

Could someone who owns a MP5 please take a quick measurement of the objective for me? I have one coming to replace my ERS and I am trying to determine if I will need new rings.

Thanks!

I'm assuming you mean ZP5? The rings mount on the tube so I'm confused why you need an objective measurement? The tube is 34mm so you're fine with the rings on your ERS now as it too has a 34mm tube...

 

[Covertnoob5]

I'm assuming you mean ZP5? The rings mount on the tube so I'm confused why you need an objective measurement? The tube is 34mm so you're fine with the rings on your ERS now as it too has a 34mm tube...

I think he's referring to ring height perhaps?


On another note, in my personal opinion, yes the Minox were the worst I've turned. No they weren't completely unusable, they dial, and track, but being that this thread was only meant to compare the TT and the Minox I was trying to point out differences between those 2 scopes. My NF has much better turret feel than the Minox. It's a very firm click and extremely positive. There's no question as to what mil I'm on.
For me the NF is a true winner in my book. Not to derail the thread but man the 7-35x56 is amazing.
And despite the turret feel, I too am considering a Minox because a whole lot of extra money with a better reticle and equal glass sounds awfully nice!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tunnuh]

I think he's referring to ring height perhaps?


On another note, in my personal opinion, yes the Minox were the worst I've turned. No they weren't completely unusable, they dial, and track, but being that this thread was only meant to compare the TT and the Minox I was trying to point out differences between those 2 scopes. My NF has much better turret feel than the Minox. It's a very firm click and extremely positive. There's no question as to what mil I'm on.
For me the NF is a true winner in my book. Not to derail the thread but man the 7-35x56 is amazing.
And despite the turret feel, I too am considering a Minox because a whole lot of extra money with a better reticle and equal glass sounds awfully nice!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You feel the NF and Minox glass are similar? I'm asking because I'm considering both, and possibly a vortex amg.

 

[Clint E.]

I'm assuming you mean ZP5? The rings mount on the tube so I'm confused why you need an objective measurement? The tube is 34mm so you're fine with the rings on your ERS now as it too has a 34mm tube...

Yes sorry ZP5, my ERS is 50mm and the ZP5 is 56mm, so I am just trying to figure out if I will have enough clearance with the current height rings or if I will need to go higher.
Thanks.

 

[hk dave]

there's a place here that totchos! Tater tot nachos with chili and cheese and all that good stuff.

errrmmaargghheeeerrdddd i desire it! ::breathing heavily::

 

[Covertnoob5]

You feel the NF and Minox glass are similar? I'm asking because I'm considering both, and possibly a vortex amg.

I might catch some heat for it, but I think it's pretty close. I got the 7-35 at an amazing price though so that plays a factor into it as well. But I think you'd be really pressed to notice a significant difference in glass if they aren't next to each other.
Mine has pretty much no CA. And resolves extremely well even at 35x. But I would not get the 5-25 NF over the Minox because I feel it doesn't offer anything for me that would make me want it. I like the extra mag of the 35x and so obviously it's much brighter at 25x than a Minox or TT.

And the AMG has my favorite reticle and the weight is great, but my 7-35 isn't too much heavier. Don't notice a difference between the 2 in spuhrs. Love the features of the AMG though. That is an amazing scope for the money as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hk dave]

I'm with covert in respects to the NF vs Minox. I feel the NF 7-35 glass is pretty close to the Minox 5-25. It's splitting hairs. There are situations where I think the Minox is every so slightly better but then there is the 35x of the NF, and I do think it continues to resolve to 35x.

I know my NF 7-35 was better than my NF 5-25 FFP though but again, splitting hairs.

This is an amazing time to be alive... you can't make a mistake with these scopes.. it's all splitting hairs imo.

 

[Tunnuh]

Thanks for the replies. They're all options at this point, I just need to make a decision.

 

[TheOE800]

As another data point, my AMG has different feel between elevation and windage turrets - if elevation felt like the windage, it'd be 100%.

I think he's referring to ring height perhaps?

Objective bell measurement is my guess. I'd be interested in knowing it as well. Lens is 56mm, but what's the diameter of the bell?

On another note, in my personal opinion, yes the Minox were the worst I've turned. No they weren't completely unusable, they dial, and track, but being that this thread was only meant to compare the TT and the Minox I was trying to point out differences between those 2 scopes. My NF has much better turret feel than the Minox. It's a very firm click and extremely positive. There's no question as to what mil I'm on.
For me the NF is a true winner in my book. Not to derail the thread but man the 7-35x56 is amazing.
And despite the turret feel, I too am considering a Minox because a whole lot of extra money with a better reticle and equal glass sounds awfully nice!

Ah that's a bummer. I expect the feel will be quite a bit worse than my AMG then, which I felt was ever the slightest bit worse than the Razor 2 that preceded it.

 

[dino67]

Clint E.

Objective - 2.44"
Obj with scope cap - 2.580"

 

[Covertnoob5]

Ah that's a bummer. I expect the feel will be quite a bit worse than my AMG then, which I felt was ever the slightest bit worse than the Razor 2 that preceded it.

I didn't have my AMG on hand to compare directly but playing with my AMG at home I would say those are better, but again the spacing is also very different.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Glassaholic]

Clint E.

Objective - 2.44"
Obj with scope cap - 2.580"

dino provides some good info here, if you plan on using the Minox with the Tenebraex caps you'll have to account for those, especially if you're concerned about the scope fitting above your barrel. Here's a shot of my Minox using ARC M10 24mm high (.94") rings and a custom contour medium palma barrel, I would not want to go shorter than this.

 

[TheOE800]

So how much total slope are folks running on these for short action cartridges?

 

[Covertnoob5]

I run 30-40 moa on all my scopes just because I like to try to maximize the amount of elevation travel I have available.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheOE800]

I run 30-40 moa on all my scopes just because I like to try to maximize the amount of elevation travel I have available.

No concerns about being near the bottom of the range of travel? e.g. clarity, true 0.1 mrad adjustment per click

 

[dino67]

Mine is mounted in an ARC M10 20 MOA mount and that sits on a EGW HD 20 MOA rail. No issues with clarity that I can see. 100 yard zero and have 28 Mils of up elevation available.

 

[Covertnoob5]

No concerns about being near the bottom of the range of travel? e.g. clarity, true 0.1 mrad adjustment per click

I have yet to encounter any of those problems. I run my NF 7-35 with a 40 moa mount and it's great clarity even at 35x with 28.5 mils of elevation. My TT525 in a 40 moa also gave me 28 mils of elevation with no issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[benk]

Down here in Aus the TT's are around $6000 AUD. My Minox ended up at $3200 landed here. Haven't had a chance to look through a TT but I much prefer the MR4 reticle than anything currently offered in Nightforce, TT, Vortex, S&B. Personally find the centre dot reticles fractionally faster and more precise for the type of shooting I do. The fact the Minox has very good glass is a bonus. Already moved on a Nforce 4-16 F1 and if Minox brings out the MR4 ret in the 3-15 I'll likely grab one.

Where did you buy your ZP5 mate??

 

[alfmoonspace]

Try CS Tactical

 

[gr8fuldoug]

FYI, We just got in another delivery of Tangent 5-25's in Tremor III and Gen 3 XR