OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Scopes > Rifle Scopes
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Test of two new scopes
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

Test of two new scopes

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 7>
Author
Message
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote John Barsness Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Test of two new scopes
    Posted: March/03/2009 at 11:53

This is the second monthly article written for OpticsTalk.com by John Barsness. His own website is riflesandfrecipes.com, where his books and those of his wife, Eileen Clarke, can be ordered, along with various other shooting/hunting items.

 

 

TESTING RIFLE SCOPES

 

            When I get a new rifle scope it gets run through a series of tests to see if it lives up to its advertising. Most of these can be done by anyone at home, with a little patience and equipment, but they do reveal things about scopes that many shooters never find discover. Recently I tested two new scopes, a Sightron 3-9x40 SII Big Sky and a Leupold 3.5-10x40 VX-3.

            The first thing I with any new scope is mount it on a rifle. This not only reveals potential mounting problems (believe it or not, more than one manufacturer has introduced scopes that didn’t have a long enough tube to fir in the rings of a standard Ruger 77 rifle, one of the most popular rifles made) but with the help of a collimator, allows some basic tests of run-out and adjustments.

            “Run-out” is any change in the reticle’s position at different magnifications. This can’t happen with a 1st focal plane reticle, but most scopes are 2nd focal plane. Any noticeable shift on the collimator screen is rare these days, but still occasionally shows up.

            I check the adjustments by centering the reticle on the collimator’s screen, then move the adjustments 16 clicks to the right, 16 clicks up, 16 clicks left, and 16 clicks down. The number of clicks isn’t really important, except that there need to be enough to find any problems; I’ve just been doing 16 so long that it’s second nature.

            I watch through the scope as it’s adjusted, to see if each click results in reticle movement, or if movement is different than it’s supposed to be. Also, the collimator’s grid helps me see if horizontal movement is just horizontal, and not partly vertical. In the end the reticle should be right where it started out, in the center of the grid.

            Next I make some brightness/resolution tests. These start in evening just as the sun goes down, and at first are the kind of casual tests many of us make between different scopes. Can we see and aim at various objects, both near and far? Is the reticle visible as long as the target is visible? Is the view sharp enough to prevent eyestrain?

            But as the light grows dimmer I start aiming at an optical chart of my own design. About any optical chart will do, or even the front page of a newspaper, but this specific chart is a series of black and what lines that start out 1” thick and get thinner toward the bottom of the chart, ending up 1/8” thick. How far down the chart I can differentiate black and white lines indicates both the brightness and resolution of the scope.

            One thing I do, however, that many casual shooters don’t is set the magnification the same for various scopes of a certain class—and I only compare scopes with others in a certain class. Both magnification and objective diameter make a difference in how well we can see with a scope, so it doesn’t make sense to compare a 1-4x20 with a 3-10x40.

            With scopes in the 3-9x40 class I generally set the magnification at 6x, in order to have an exit pupil of about 7mm. After all, I am comparing the optical qualities of the scope, not whether one has a larger exit pupil than another. Also, while the optical system can change a little at 3x and 9x, I’ve generally found that a quality image at 6x also results in a quality image at 3x or 9x as well. During these tests I also fiddle with the magnification and focus slightly, since what’s marked 6x isn’t exactly the same on all scopes, and fooling with the focus can make a real difference.

            Also, each rifle is placed on a steady rest inside a darkened room. Comparing a hand-held scope with a mounted scope is futile, due to wiggles. The darkened room prevents side-light from interfering with the view.

            Eventually even the optical chart becomes too dim to see in natural light. At that point I turn on a 100-watt light bulb outside the room to illuminate the target.

            After those tests I actually shoot the rifle. Sometimes the rifle is a hard-kicker, in order to test the recoil worthiness of some scopes, at least a .300 magnum and maybe even a .416. Sometimes the scope is obviously not meant for a true big game rifle, in which case I test it on a varmint or deer rifle. In any case, the basic accuracy of the rifle must be already well-known, because one common problem is a scope that won’t hold zero. This often results in groups opening up, or shifting, or “two-grouping.”

            I also test the adj

Back to Top
BillyWayne View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: February/27/2009
Location: New Hampster
Status: Offline
Points: 408
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BillyWayne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 12:12
Thanks John.  I really appreciate your opinions and reviews. 
I was going through my old Nosler reloading manual for some loads on the 6.5x55 and I noticed it was you that did the review.  Since you like the 6.5 swede I trust everything you say.  Smile 
I might have to check out the VX3 now.  My uncle is a big Leupold fan.  He hates the fact that I have Bushnell Elite scopes.  How would you compare the new VX3 to a 4200?
John 11:35
The're taking the hobbits to Isengard!!
Back to Top
hunter12345 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: November/21/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 470
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hunter12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 12:14

I'm finding it hard to believe that the VXII beat the Sightron S2 Big Sky.It seem's your using a 3-9x40 Big Sky ? I thought they only made a 3-9x42 S2 Big Sky.I used to have Leupold VXIII on my hunting rifles and replaced them with the Big Sky for the better quality of optics.I believe Koshkin knows who the real winner would be if a Sightron S2 Big Sky was up against a Leupold VXII.  

Back to Top
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4853
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jonoMT Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 12:14
Wow, John, that doesn't say much for the Sightron line. I'm glad now I went with a Nightforce, since that scope fit the rings on the Direct Mount like a glove.

Jon
Back to Top
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Roy Finn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:17
Thanks John. I was actually thinking of trying a Sightron Big Sky after hearing all the praise and I think I'll pass knowing what I already have to be very good.
Back to Top
rifle looney View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: November/21/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2553
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rifle looney Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:19
Originally posted by hunter12345 hunter12345 wrote:

I'm finding it hard to believe that the VXII beat the Sightron S2 Big Sky.It seem's your using a 3-9x40 Big Sky ? I thought they only made a 3-9x42 S2 Big Sky.I used to have Leupold VXIII on my hunting rifles and replaced them with the Big Sky for the better quality of optics.I believe Koshkin knows who the real winner would be if a Sightron S2 Big Sky was up against a Leupold VXII.  


Dude, this was through Johns testing and what he concluded each individual will have different views he's just stating what he came up with .....I think your last comment was a little rude as well......Shocked


Edited by rifle looney - March/03/2009 at 14:20
Back to Top
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22034
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pyro6999 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:21
Originally posted by rifle looney rifle looney wrote:

Originally posted by hunter12345 hunter12345 wrote:

I'm finding it hard to believe that the VXII beat the Sightron S2 Big Sky.It seem's your using a 3-9x40 Big Sky ? I thought they only made a 3-9x42 S2 Big Sky.I used to have Leupold VXIII on my hunting rifles and replaced them with the Big Sky for the better quality of optics.I believe Koshkin knows who the real winner would be if a Sightron S2 Big Sky was up against a Leupold VXII.  


Dude, this was through Johns testing and what he concluded each individual will have different views he just stating what he came up with .....I think your last comment was a little rude as well......Shocked

i agree i dont read any where in that post that  jb wrote that says dont buy a sightron. he gave his review, and its just one man's view if you dont agree with it fine.


Edited by pyro6999 - March/03/2009 at 14:43
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"
Back to Top
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote John Barsness Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:46
hunter12345,
 
You can blame my typing for the error on the objective size. It was a 3-9x42,
 
As several people have already pointed out, I merely reported the results of my tests. Ilya reports his.
 
Individual eyesight not only differs, but individual scopes can as well. In my test the difference between the optics was quite obvious.
 
JB
Back to Top
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9318
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rancid Coolaid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:14
John, thanx for the report.

This is the Z6 you spoke of earlier?  And the VX-3 had comparable brightness to the Z6?

Leupold must have upgraded the glass - or your Vx-3 has great glass, or your Z6 doesn't.  For the price difference, I'd expect the Z6 to be brighter.


And let us all remember that scopes, like women, are measured differently by all eyes.  Except for Kate Beckinsale: if you don't think she's hotter than 2 rats humping in a wool sock, youa re an idiot.  Or something.
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.
Back to Top
swtucker View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: September/03/2008
Location: Low Moor
Status: Offline
Points: 1430
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote swtucker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:17
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

John, thanx for the report.

This is the Z6 you spoke of earlier?  And the VX-3 had comparable brightness to the Z6?

Leupold must have upgraded the glass - or your Vx-3 has great glass, or your Z6 doesn't.  For the price difference, I'd expect the Z6 to be brighter.


And let us all remember that scopes, like women, are measured differently by all eyes.  Except for Kate Beckinsale: if you don't think she's hotter than 2 rats humping in a wool sock, youa re an idiot.  Or something.
 
Roll on Floor Laughing   That's the funniest saying I've heard in a long time!  
Back to Top
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 300S&W Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:21
     Shocked     TWO WHATS HUMPING A WHAT!  Hit the(COLD) showers RC!
Back to Top
Idaho Scot View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/16/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Idaho Scot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:28
Thanks for the info John. 
 
I must admit I am surprised to hear about Sightron's issues with runout and adjustment problems.  Of all the things they based their company on it has been reliability from the beginning.  Very interesting.
 
To me optics and resolution, brightness etc. are very objective due to all the variables and each individuals eyes! But reliability, adjustment, runout, etc. is'nt so much.  Let's hope that you maybe experience the Barness curse, isn't that what you called it in a previous thread! Smile
 
I have only had experience with a Sightron II but has very happy with it.  I have a friend that owns 5 or 6.  I will have to find out his thoughts on this.
 
Thanks for sharing!
 
Scot E.
 
 
Back to Top
Idaho Scot View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/16/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Idaho Scot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:30

Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

John, thanx for the report.

This is the Z6 you spoke of earlier?  And the VX-3 had comparable brightness to the Z6?

Leupold must have upgraded the glass - or your Vx-3 has great glass, or your Z6 doesn't.  For the price difference, I'd expect the Z6 to be brighter.


And let us all remember that scopes, like women, are measured differently by all eyes.  Except for Kate Beckinsale: if you don't think she's hotter than 2 rats humping in a wool sock, youa re an idiot.  Or something.

 

Kate who?  Not sure I know who you are talking about!  Big Grin hehe  Just playin with ya!

 

Scot E.

Back to Top
hunter12345 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: November/21/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 470
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hunter12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:40
In no way was I being rude, it's a matter of opinion.I own many types of scope including the Leupolds and the Sightron in which John tested.I believe there was a typo error,anyone who owns a Sightron Big Sky and Leupold VXII know that the Sightron is a better scope.I happen to think that Leupold is over priced and that many companies like Nikon, Bushnell & Sightron have taken away from Leupold with there line of scopes which have better optics and value.If you believe that a Leupold VX-II is better, than thats your opinion.My opinion on the VX-II compares to a Nikon Prostaff.Excellent    
Back to Top
rifle looney View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: November/21/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2553
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rifle looney Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:52
What I was referring too was your statement saying Koskin knows the real winner!... And you say anyone who owns both knows the sightron is better guess what .....not me....again opinions fair enough.  Wink


Edited by rifle looney - March/03/2009 at 15:54
Back to Top
lucytuma View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: November/25/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 5389
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lucytuma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:53
I haven't spent any time with a VXII lately, but I have compared the vxIII with the new VX-3 and came to the same conclusion as Mr. Barsness, there is a visual improvement that doesn't take long to detect.
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson
Back to Top
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote John Barsness Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 16:03
Rancid,
 
The VX-3 and the Z6 tested very similarly for brightness and resolution. Now, my test does not test brightness to the tiniest degree, but I couldn't see any noticeable difference between the two scopes. They were tested by alternately, and both mounted on rifles that were rested steadily. I also fiddled with the magnification slightly, and the focus.
 
I would also like to point out that the DEVA tests printed in my book, OPTICS FOR HUNTER, had some very interesting numbers. DEVA is a quasi-governmental German organization that tests lots of products as scientifically as possible. In 1993 they tested a bunch of rifle scopes for various properties, inclduring brightness. One of the tests was for light transmission, done on a "spektral photo meter," which measured overall light transmission down to less than 1%.
 
They tested two basic classes of scopes, small hunting variables and medium-sized hunting variables. In each class Zeiss came in first, but Leupold tied them in one class, and came in a close second in another--and this was back when Leupold has just introduced Multicoat 4 in the Vari-X III's, the coating that is now used in VX-II's. Leupold beat out both Swarovski and Schmidt & Bender in light transmission in both scope classes. Here are the numbers:
 
Zeiss 1.25-4x24:              Daylight  94.5%       Twilight  92.9%
Leupold 1.5-15x20:          Daylight  91.6%       Twilgiht  91.1%
Swarovski 1.5-4.5x20:     Daylight 91.0%         Twilight  87.7%
S&B 1.25-4x20:                Daylight 88.9%         Twilight  85.9%
 
Zeiss 2.5-10x48:               Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Leupold 3.5-10x50:           Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Swarovski 3-12x56:          Daylight 91%           Twilight 87%
S&B 3-12 (obj. unlisted)    Daylight 89%           Twilight 87%
 
Now, these tests are over 15 years old, but even in 1993 the notion that German (or Austrian) optics somehow possesed a magic advantage over everything else was not indicated by GERMAN tests made on GERMAN equipment. Ever since then I have always ben very skeptical of any claims of such-and-such a scope being vastly "brighter" than another, especially when the evidence is a shooter who just paid over $1000 for his very first Euro-scope.
 
Yes, the science of optics was pretty much developed in Germany. I have visited the towns and the factories. So were rifles. But that doesn't mean that in the modern world there are certain magical secrets, protected by European elves, that no other industrial nation can ever possess. In fact a lot of Germans trained in optics emigrated to the U.S., the origin of such names as Bausch & Lomb and Leupold.
 
Now, maybe if had been looking at Kate Beckinsdale instead of an optics chart, then the test might have turned out differently. But in this case it didn't.
Back to Top
big boar View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/26/2009
Location: ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 77
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote big boar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 16:04
Rancid Coolaid, very funny, sounds like something from Redneck comedy Tour.
Back to Top
big boar View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/26/2009
Location: ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 77
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote big boar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 16:18
Mr Barsness, thanks for your input, I have your optics book and REALLY recommend it. I refer to it every time I'm looking at getting a new scope or binoc, big help. This site helps a lot, nice to get other opinions. BB
Back to Top
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9318
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rancid Coolaid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 17:18
Originally posted by John Barsness John Barsness wrote:

Rancid,
 
The VX-3 and the Z6 tested very similarly for brightness and resolution. Now, my test does not test brightness to the tiniest degree, but I couldn't see any noticeable difference between the two scopes. They were tested by alternately, and both mounted on rifles that were rested steadily. I also fiddled with the magnification slightly, and the focus.
 
I would also like to point out that the DEVA tests printed in my book, OPTICS FOR HUNTER, had some very interesting numbers. DEVA is a quasi-governmental German organization that tests lots of products as scientifically as possible. In 1993 they tested a bunch of rifle scopes for various properties, inclduring brightness. One of the tests was for light transmission, done on a "spektral photo meter," which measured overall light transmission down to less than 1%.
 
They tested two basic classes of scopes, small hunting variables and medium-sized hunting variables. In each class Zeiss came in first, but Leupold tied them in one class, and came in a close second in another--and this was back when Leupold has just introduced Multicoat 4 in the Vari-X III's, the coating that is now used in VX-II's. Leupold beat out both Swarovski and Schmidt & Bender in light transmission in both scope classes. Here are the numbers:
 
Zeiss 1.25-4x24:              Daylight  94.5%       Twilight  92.9%
Leupold 1.5-15x20:          Daylight  91.6%       Twilgiht  91.1%
Swarovski 1.5-4.5x20:     Daylight 91.0%         Twilight  87.7%
S&B 1.25-4x20:                Daylight 88.9%         Twilight  85.9%
 
Zeiss 2.5-10x48:               Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Leupold 3.5-10x50:           Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Swarovski 3-12x56:          Daylight 91%           Twilight 87%
S&B 3-12 (obj. unlisted)    Daylight 89%           Twilight 87%
 
Now, these tests are over 15 years old, but even in 1993 the notion that German (or Austrian) optics somehow possesed a magic advantage over everything else was not indicated by GERMAN tests made on GERMAN equipment. Ever since then I have always ben very skeptical of any claims of such-and-such a scope being vastly "brighter" than another, especially when the evidence is a shooter who just paid over $1000 for his very first Euro-scope.
 
Yes, the science of optics was pretty much developed in Germany. I have visited the towns and the factories. So were rifles. But that doesn't mean that in the modern world there are certain magical secrets, protected by European elves, that no other industrial nation can ever possess. In fact a lot of Germans trained in optics emigrated to the U.S., the origin of such names as Bausch & Lomb and Leupold.
 
Now, maybe if had been looking at Kate Beckinsdale instead of an optics chart, then the test might have turned out differently. But in this case it didn't.



From 15 years ago, I would believe it.  there was a time when Leupold made the best stuff; and in my opinion, it was that golden era that Leupold now surfs on.

I would also agree that Zeiss probably would have won it then (and probably now too) but I'd bet a current test with similar criteria and benchmarks would yield very different results.

Finally, one scope is not ever representative of the entire line or even of that model.  There is variation within a product line, sometimes for good, sometimes not.


John, you know far more than me regarding optics, as does ILya; however, I have had optics in the field, I've had optics on the battlefield, and I know what my eyes like and what they don't.  An absolute test is a great thing, but - and I'll bet you agree with this - it doesn't me sqaut to me if I don't trust the optic and if I don't like the way the optic works or looks in the real world.  I am all about statistically valid testing and outcomes, but I don't put too much stock in them.  I've owned $400 rifles that could shoot 1/3MOA out to 500 yards, and that is a rarity indeed, but it happens, and it happens with optics too.  Sometimes the stars align for and align against.


Again, I appreciate your input and your expertise.  I'm just a dumb red-neck stumbling through life trying not to hurt myself too badly or do something too stupid.
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 6.730 seconds.