Print Page | Close Window

Varmint-PD scope 1k-1.5k range

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Rifle Scopes
Forum Description: Centerfire long gun scopes
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=41031
Printed Date: May/24/2018 at 16:21
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Varmint-PD scope 1k-1.5k range
Posted By: signals678
Subject: Varmint-PD scope 1k-1.5k range
Date Posted: January/04/2015 at 13:14

Hello all,


I am sure this is a redundant post of some sort, but I need help selecting a rifle scope mainly for PD and paper shooting. Scope will be mounted on one of my Coopers. I have had a SHV nightforce and I thought it left a lot to be desired and quite frankly didn't care for the 56mm obj. I am currently looking at the Z5 swaro, leica ER and the zeiss HD. What I need to know is will the leica or the Swaro be ok for PDs? Is there any other scopes in the price range listed that would suffice? Target turrets, tactical turrets? I also like the looks of the Steiner GS3 but have not been able to look through one.

BTW I have other scopes in the 4-800 price range, I want a better one this time!

Thoughts? comments?




Replies:
Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/04/2015 at 13:31
 I also would like to stay with Euro glass of possible


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 12:21
Heinsoldt the tactical Zeiss scopes.

-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 12:44
Originally posted by Urimaginaryfrnd Urimaginaryfrnd wrote:

Heinsoldt the tactical Zeiss scopes.

They are nice, but are 3k. 


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 12:46
Welcome to Optics Talk. 



-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 12:56
Both the Leica and the Swaro will work fine for you.

Personally, I prefer the Leica, but both are good.  it sorta depends on what magnification you want.  Swaro offer higher magnifications, so that may be a factor.

ILya


-------------
http://www.opticsthoughts.com - www.opticsthoughts.com
http://fb.me/DarkLordOfOptics - Facebook
The greatest obstacle to discovery is the illusion of knowledge


Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 13:01
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Both the Leica and the Swaro will work fine for you.

Personally, I prefer the Leica, but both are good.  it sorta depends on what magnification you want.  Swaro offer higher magnifications, so that may be a factor.

ILya

Yes I seen your posts on the Leica before, I just wonder about the 14x ceiling, I do like the looks of the IBS reticle though. Unfortunately where I buy my scopes they do not have the Leica, only the swaro, NF, leupold and zeiss


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 13:10
Originally posted by signals678 signals678 wrote:

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Both the Leica and the Swaro will work fine for you.

Personally, I prefer the Leica, but both are good.  it sorta depends on what magnification you want.  Swaro offer higher magnifications, so that may be a factor.

ILya

Yes I seen your posts on the Leica before, I just wonder about the 14x ceiling, I do like the looks of the IBS reticle though. Unfortunately where I buy my scopes they do not have the Leica, only the swaro, NF, leupold and zeiss

Magnification is something you have to decide for yourself.  That depends on how small your targets are and how you shoot.

ILya


-------------
http://www.opticsthoughts.com - www.opticsthoughts.com
http://fb.me/DarkLordOfOptics - Facebook
The greatest obstacle to discovery is the illusion of knowledge


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 13:48
I have no experience with the NF SHV scopes, but significant experience with their NXS and compact models.  Might I ask specifically what you did not like?  Was your issue with the 56mm objective its size or was it not as bright at high magnification as you expected?  What mag range was your NF?

Beyond that, Leica has quite nice glass, as does Swaro and Zeiss.

If you look back over prior posts, you will find 2 things I frequently say, and re-say, and re-re-say, I really like dead horses. And beating them.

1.  Better glass beats more magnification.
2.  Personally speaking, I reach a point in magnification where more is absolutely not better.

The majority of my long guns, even the long range ones, wear optics that top out in the 12-15X range, it's just where I shoot best.  I have a 24X and have owned a few more >20X optics, I find that my shooting suffers due to distractions like watching my heart beat, eye strain when on the scope for awhile, and the narrow eye box makes certain positions more difficult to shoot.  Stupid as it sounds, I shoot much better when I concentrate on the target rather than bullet holes in/around the target.  

Nothing sucks like thinking your scope/rifle/ammo/something else is wrong because your rifle isn't grouping well, only to find that when you turn down the mag, you shoot much better.  It is referred to as chasing bullet holes and I do it subconsciously: if my first round was a little low, I'll compensate a little high, then I'll compensate for that shot with a subconscious correction on the reticle: it goes to hell quick.

All that said, I tend to shoot at things that move about as often as I do static targets like gongs and paper; and field of view is important to me. Along with field of view is resolving power, target identification, and that is good glass.

Finally, I own Nightforce and Hensoldt, both have a place and a circumstance where they do something better than the other.  With the Hensoldt, the image is so pristine it is genuinely difficult to not get a good sight picture. And it is bright, hella bright, so low light shooting is almost no impediment at all. Conversely, the Nightforce is smaller, more svelte, less bright, and could take a direct hit from an RPG and still function as it should.

For PD and the like, I prefer SFP: you aren't ranging with the reticle and you usually have time for dope changes.  For faster shots or on moving targets and unknown or changing distances, I much prefer FFP.  The issue with FFP is that many reticles are all but useless at the top or the bottom, balance is everything and few get it just right.

I would look at NF NXS, they are fine scopes with very serviceable glass.  If you are set on top tier glass, you are in the right ballpark with Leica/Zeiss/Swaro, just decide what features you want/need and narrow accordingly.


-------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."


Posted By: Kickboxer
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 14:23
Check out the SWFA Samplelist…

http://www.samplelist.com/Riflescopes-C3391.aspx - http://www.samplelist.com/Riflescopes-C3391.aspx




-------------
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 14:39
Wow, the USO 1.8-10X, dammit, I need that.  I NEED it!

-------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."


Posted By: Kickboxer
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 14:44
I was kind of thinking that, some, but not highly motivated… Though that is not exactly what I have in mind for my 6.5Grendel (nothing is)… it is certainly an option...

-------------
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 15:08
If I did not have a comparable scope inbound, I would buy this.  Right now.  It does have the objective parallax - which, at least with USO, I find more forgiving; and it has the digital illumination.  And 1.8-10 is about as good as it gets.  And parallax from 50 yards...

Awesome scope, pretty good price.  

EREK is still my favorite elevation turret.

Damn, not sure if I am talking myself out of it or into it!


-------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."


Posted By: Kickboxer
Date Posted: January/05/2015 at 15:10
You don't want it… you NEED it...

-------------
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living


Posted By: Maverick2
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 00:12

I had a Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20 on my varmint rifle, and found that I very rarely shot at 20x -- seemed like the scope was usually camped at 14-15x...  (This is for ground squirrels at 200-300 yds, as well as general purpose spotting out to ???)  I bought a Leica ER 3.5-14 with IBS reticle last spring for another rifle, and after a little use found myself wishing I had a second Leica for my varmint rifle.  When shooting those two rifles side by side at targets, I found myself using the Leica (at 14x) to spot bullet holes that I couldn't see with the Zeiss (at 20x).  When shopping for the Leica, I also looked hard at the Zeiss HD5 scopes.  I felt the HD5 glass was a noticeable improvement over the older Conquest glass, but not in the same league as the Leica.  I had limited opportunities to look at the Swaro Z5, so don't have much feedback (other than I like Leica's IBS reticle better than Swaro's BRX for anything/everything, including varmints.  Reticles are very much personal preference, but Leica struck a nice balance with the IBS -- thin enough to aim very precisely, but crisp enough that it's very visible.  The IBS reticle also uses simple MOA spacing for the holdover graduations, rather than graduations spaced to approximate given yardages.)  One thing you might consider when choosing your mag range, if you like shooting long range using the reticle rather than twisting turrets, it's nice to pick a scope where the SFP reticle is calibrated at a magnification that you can use extensively.  20x or 25x may be nice to have at times, but I don't want a reticle that is calibrated for that magnification range since environmental conditions (especially mid-afternoon varmints) can make those magnifications hard to use, which is probably one of the reasons I find myself liking the 14x-16x top ends...    Bottom line, I think the Leica 3.5-14x42 with IBS reticle and target turret would make a great varmint scope.  The only limitation I've found with mine is that the Leica target turret limits the elevation adjustment to about 22 MOA -- if you need more than that for long range endeavors, you might want to look at something else.



Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 08:42
Thanks for all the replies, you guys are the best. As for the SHV I kind of bought it on a whim knowing that I dislike any objective bigger than about 50mm(I actually prefer 44 the best) the shv I thought was very fuzzy past about 12x on any type of day, cloudy or sunny. With the larger objective there was a lot of mirage, this I knew going into the 56mm though. If I do my part I can typically shoot fairly well, am I going to win the next BR national competition, hell no but I consistently shoot my rifles well under half moa as long as the loads and rifle and I will allow. I have a couple vipers pst and hs-t and thought these were actually better to my eye and liking than the SHV. For the SHV price point I think you get a lot of scope, I just didn't get along with it. I do agree that better glass beats more magnification, and I am not looking at any FFP scopes as the majority of the shooting I do works better with SFP. 


Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 08:44
Originally posted by Maverick2 Maverick2 wrote:

I had a Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20 on my varmint rifle, and found that I very rarely shot at 20x -- seemed like the scope was usually camped at 14-15x...  (This is for ground squirrels at 200-300 yds, as well as general purpose spotting out to ???)  I bought a Leica ER 3.5-14 with IBS reticle last spring for another rifle, and after a little use found myself wishing I had a second Leica for my varmint rifle.  When shooting those two rifles side by side at targets, I found myself using the Leica (at 14x) to spot bullet holes that I couldn't see with the Zeiss (at 20x).  When shopping for the Leica, I also looked hard at the Zeiss HD5 scopes.  I felt the HD5 glass was a noticeable improvement over the older Conquest glass, but not in the same league as the Leica.  I had limited opportunities to look at the Swaro Z5, so don't have much feedback (other than I like Leica's IBS reticle better than Swaro's BRX for anything/everything, including varmints.  Reticles are very much personal preference, but Leica struck a nice balance with the IBS -- thin enough to aim very precisely, but crisp enough that it's very visible.  The IBS reticle also uses simple MOA spacing for the holdover graduations, rather than graduations spaced to approximate given yardages.)  One thing you might consider when choosing your mag range, if you like shooting long range using the reticle rather than twisting turrets, it's nice to pick a scope where the SFP reticle is calibrated at a magnification that you can use extensively.  20x or 25x may be nice to have at times, but I don't want a reticle that is calibrated for that magnification range since environmental conditions (especially mid-afternoon varmints) can make those magnifications hard to use, which is probably one of the reasons I find myself liking the 14x-16x top ends...    Bottom line, I think the Leica 3.5-14x42 with IBS reticle and target turret would make a great varmint scope.  The only limitation I've found with mine is that the Leica target turret limits the elevation adjustment to about 22 MOA -- if you need more than that for long range endeavors, you might want to look at something else.


Great info here and appreciate you taking the time to break it down. 


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 08:51
I have known mirage to be a function of magnification, never heard of it as a function of objective size.

-------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."


Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 08:58
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

I have known mirage to be a function of magnification, never heard of it as a function of objective size.

So the larger the objective does not matter for barrel mirage? I've actually heard that the mirage will get worse the larger the objective? And in fact a smaller objective is actually better to fight barrel mirage? Same rifle with a 44mm objective scope on the same day and didn't have the horrible mirage?


Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 09:19
Originally posted by signals678 signals678 wrote:

Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

I have known mirage to be a function of magnification, never heard of it as a function of objective size.

So the larger the objective does not matter for barrel mirage? I've actually heard that the mirage will get worse the larger the objective? And in fact a smaller objective is actually better to fight barrel mirage? Same rifle with a 44mm objective scope on the same day and didn't have the horrible mirage?

I am wrong and I know that magnification is the issue, but I was told at some point in time that objective size is an issue as well....


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 11:57
I am not saying you are wrong (maybe yes, maybe no), I am just saying I never heard that.  I have used a scope in some very warm placed, never worried about comparing same mag scopes with different objective sizes.

-------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 17:25
I am not aware of any effect that the objective lens diameter has on the mirage.

Are talking about the effect of a hot barrel? or about the mirage downrange?

ILya


-------------
http://www.opticsthoughts.com - www.opticsthoughts.com
http://fb.me/DarkLordOfOptics - Facebook
The greatest obstacle to discovery is the illusion of knowledge


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 17:29
Now that I think about it, if you are talking about the mirage due to the barrel getting hot, the large objective being closer to it, might pick it up more.

ILya


-------------
http://www.opticsthoughts.com - www.opticsthoughts.com
http://fb.me/DarkLordOfOptics - Facebook
The greatest obstacle to discovery is the illusion of knowledge


Posted By: signals678
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 17:46
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Now that I think about it, if you are talking about the mirage due to the barrel getting hot, the large objective being closer to it, might pick it up more.

ILya

Yes this is what I am saying/thinking. 


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: January/06/2015 at 17:55
Here is an option at the bottom of your budget.

http://swfa.com/Meopta-4-16x44-MeoStar-R1-30mm-Rifle-Scope-P8001.aspx - http://swfa.com/Meopta-4-16x44-MeoStar-R1-30mm-Rifle-Scope-P8001.aspx

Glass is competitive with your other options, and should tick all the boxes on your list.

If you want TAC turrets it is available with them also.  You can call SWFA...

972-SCOPE-IT


-------------
-Matt



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net