Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Nightforce glass vs. Zeiss & Swarovski |
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Author | |||||||
Jon A
Optics Journeyman Joined: March/14/2008 Location: Everett, WA Status: Offline Points: 670 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||
I don't remember exactly, 1/2 dozen, a dozen, somewhere in there. Enough it's pretty hard to spin it into being a coincidence. |
|||||||
rifle looney
Optics Master Joined: November/21/2008 Status: Offline Points: 2553 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||
OK already! (opinions)
|
|||||||
optik
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/02/2009 Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||
It never ceases to amaze me how many people get on message boards and speak with authority, but really dont have a clue as to the most basic of specifications.
Nightforce scopes are made in Japan and have decent glass with this being considered. Nightforce claims excelent resolution and I suppose this is true for the black and white resolution chart that they test with. Unfortunately we do not live in a black and white world. NF glass is the leaded compound and I believe is corrected for one or two of the main spectrums of light; there are three. As a result, these optics suffer from chromatic and slight spherical abberation.
The highest grade of european optics use fluorite lenses, not glass, or at the least apochromatic glass. They are corrected for chromatic abberation in all three spectrums, spherical abberation, and can achieve light transmission rates as great as 99.8% per air to glass surface. NF has nothing to compare with this.
The NF FFP uses the same glass as the other models so tell me why the image is better.... It isn't. This model is more expensive because it is a profit horse and it is more difficult to make FFP scopes. The tiniest of trash on the reticle is amplified with the zoom ring so cleaner building techniques must be applied.
Optical evaluation is not "subjective" it just requires a little research.
|
|||||||
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||
Jus tto point out that some Japanese scopes (not Nightforce, to the ebst of my knowledge) now also use ED glass. THe two I can think of off the top of my head are SIghtron S2 8-32x56 and Nikon Monarch 8-32x50ED.
On Nightforce: I have not yet seen the new FFP Nightforce scopes, so I can not comment on those. The other Nightforce scopes I have spent some time with (mostly NXS ones) and their glass is quite good, but not in any danger of beating the better Euro scopes (IOR, Zeiss, Swaro, Khales, etc). It does deliver good resolution and good depth of focus. THe resolution, however, was notably worse closer to the edges (probably not especially important on riflescopes though). Contrast is not quite up to par in my opinion. Flare is typically well controlled, but chromatic aberrations are quite visible. On the plus side, Nightforce scopes are superb mechanically with a good combination of precision and durability. Nightforce scopes I have looked at were clearly tactical scopes. There are not all that many similarly specced scopes coming out of Europe and the ones that do exist are typically a lot more expensive (S&B and Henslodt). Nightforce's most direct European competitor is IOR. I think IOR has a definite edge in glass quality. As for weaker internals, a few of IOR scopes with 35mm tubes had teething problems, but that had gotten a lot better. Core 30mm scopes (2.5-10x42 and 4-14x50) have been pretty rock solid, to the best of my knowledge. Up and coming Ellis scopes will also compete directly against Nightfore, but it is too early to say where they fit. On the lower price end, Sightron's redesigned S3 scopes, I think, optically have an edge over the Nightforce scopes I have seen. ILya |
|||||||
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||
What prompted this rather condescending comment?
Spherical aberration isn't related to the glass formulation used; it's related to lens design. Many manufacturers' HD glass contains (or until recently, used to contain) heavy metals like lead -- on purpose -- because like fluorite, these elements imparted refractory characteristics on the lens that improves image quality. The newest trend toward "lead and arsenic-free" glass is geared toward being eco-friendly, not due to any optical improvements as a result of removing these elements. Since NF scopes are made by L.O.W., one of the major Japanese manufacturers, I have a hard time believing they too haven't gone entirely to eco glass.
Very rarely are fluorite or apo lenses used in riflescopes, though.
How do you know this? Also, I don't place much stock in manufacturers claims of transmission % per air to glass surface, because those claims don't specify which light spectrum the transmission values are valid for or how this was measured.
How do you know this? Do you own one of each? I haven't seen the new NF scope, but superb image quality is the result of the combination of good glass, coatings, precision of the lens grind, alignment of lens elements, and optimized optical design, not just the quality of the lenses themselves. The new Swarovski Z6 uses the same glass and coatings as all the previous Swaro scopes, yet reportedly it is optically superior to the PH and AV.
Actually, the reverse is true -- SFP scopes are more difficult to manufacture, because a higher level of precision is required to prevent the reticle from shifting during power change, since the reticle cell sits in the zoom tube and the reticle focal plane is independent of the target image focal plane. They even explain this in the "Facts" section of the Schmidt & Bender site.
Please cite the source of yours for the claims you make in your post.
While I agree somewhat, a great deal of subjectivity will always play a part in optics evaluation, because different people's eyes perceive images differently.
|
|||||||
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|||||||
Jon A
Optics Journeyman Joined: March/14/2008 Location: Everett, WA Status: Offline Points: 670 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||
I agree with much of what you said. However, this part:
On the site they do reiterate the well known fact FFP scopes don't suffer from POI change throughout the power range, but I don't see where they say that means the entire FFP scope is cheaper to make. Did I miss it? Nightforce themselves, says FFP is more expensive and difficult to make:
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f18/nightforce-first-focal-plane-information-34964/index2.html I don't know for a fact either way, but had always assumed FFP was more expensive to make. Just the reticles themselves would have to be more expensive since they're relatively minuturized and any flaw will be magnified (though I suppose modern technology has closed the gap on this somewhat). |
|||||||
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||
Here is the excerpt I was referring to (emphasis added):
I think it is noteworthy that they emphasize the "utmost precision" required of SFP when discussing pros and cons of both systems, while not mentioning same about the FFP scopes, even though FFP scopes are the majority of what they make, and they do provide both reticle options.
In reality, probably neither is really any more demanding to manufacture than the other given modern manufacturing processes. I was speaking in an absolute sense, since FFP cannot shift POI during power change and SFP can if the scope isn't well designed. Additionally, if a FFP reticle is a tad non-concentric from the i.d. of the erector assy, it really doesn't matter much as long as the reticle doesn't move since the reticle is on the same focal plane as the target image and the reticle will be adjusted for W & E anyway. The same cannot be said about a SFP reticle, since it is on a separate focal plane from the target image and the amount of error from non-concentric placement with the erector c/l increases proportionally with increase in magnification.
|
|||||||
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|||||||
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |