DLO Reviews: High End Tactical, Part 6. Optics of the "Best of the Best"
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 06. 2019
- Here is the first video for my new High End Tactical comparison. This is the 6th installment in the series. The test is by no means done, by I am done with a portion of the side-by-side.
- Sport
Love these videos man. Great taste.
Great review sir! Much appreciated
Fantastic review ILya, 24 minutes well spent to give me a good idea of how some of these high end optics compare. The ZCO is the biggest surprise since it is one of the shortest and has a 5-27x mag range but still able to get close to the TT in regard to overall optical quality. Seems like the ZP5 has the best price per optical performance, but in a category of $3000+ scopes, does it really matter... reticle choice will be the basis for decisions with most of these scopes.
I like the message on your shirt, Ilya.
Thank you.
Just picked up a ZCO 527 optically it's pretty sharp. I had been running a Atacr 7-35 and liked it as well. Before then ran a Razor Gen 2 for two years
What was the difference between the nf7-35 and ZCO 527? Im on the fence for my mrad 338 lapua.
@@lobsterlipps well mag range on these 2. I found I like the mpct2 reticle in the zco a little more then the mil xt and that’s saying something as I very much liked the mi-xt from night force.
ZCo glass picks up mirage a touch better as well as little more contrast then the nf735 but they are both amazing scopes. It takes a sharp eye to notice the difference
I have a secon ZCo 527 with the mpct 1 reticle and use it for hunting and hunting style rifle matches like the NRL hunter series. Mpct2 reticle for prs type competition
What did you prefer? I’m currently debating the zco and Atacr. Which is clearest?
@@rickydowning7557 ZCO has slight better glass across the board but the atacr’s is very nice. Have to do a side by side of each to tell the difference to my eyes anyway.
Have 3 ZCO’s now 2 527’s and 1 420.
Ilya, thank you very much for the video series, incredibly informative and useful! It would be fantastic to see where the Steiner M7Xi stacked up in your opinion.
Thank you again!
I just received three more M7Xi scopes from a friend of mine. I do not usually get to see four samples of the same high end scope side by side, so I want to do that before I publish my impressions.
@@DarkLordOfOptics I will certainly keep my eye out for that video, I’m torn between the Steiner and Minox optics, unfortunately both scopes need to be imported in to Australia so informed opinion carries much weight in these instances. Cheers, Dan
@@danmacdonald1291 What is important to you? Also, what type of a reticle do you prefer?
@@DarkLordOfOptics I’m a details oriented person... ultimately I favour field of view, I absolutely adored the optical system in the Zeiss V8 scopes I fitted to my hunting rifles, the colour, depth of view and resolution were outstanding, the turrets however were lacking. To my eye, the Zeiss V8 scopes are the gold standard optically. IOR Crusader not too far behind optically but mine had soft, shit turrets.
I’ve sent two S&B 3-20’s back this year with the same failed elevation turret seals, allowing debris in and spattering the reticle lens with dust... They’ve not returned from Germany yet.
I still own 2 March optics on my bench rest/fclass rifles 5-40 an 10-60 models and am very happy with their performance mechanically and optically.
Currently I’m looking for something with big FOV numbers, a reticle such as MSR2/Tremor type equivalents, precise turrets and decent colour... I saw the M7Xi had the numbers correct, but the lens system was still a question mark. I have only just started considering the Minox as the $$ value seemed ok with all the tech numbers meeting my requirements... again, the optical properties are an unknown and difficult to research. Professional opinions have been essential for my decision making processes.
@@danmacdonald1291 Interesting. I did not like the V8 I saw, so I decided to not do a thorough test. Minox is better than Steiner optically, but I prefer the mechanics of the Steiner. If you like MSR2, Steiner is your best bet. Tremor3 is not my cup of tea. That is easily one of the worst reticles I have seen recently. Do keep in mind that March 5-42x56 will be out fairly soon.
Second time watching this in 2 weeks. Last week I was considering the Minox ZP5. Now I'm seriously considering a ZCO, do you think it's a legitimate 20 year scope? Sounds like they arent doing anything new but they are just doing everything right where as everyone else has at least one draw back. Is that accurate?
Is it worth the extra money when the rest of your equipment is sufficient but fairly entry level? Or is there a better distribution of funds?
I've had a Bushnell for almost 9 years now and it's time to take the next step. Just want it to be the right one. Thanks!
I can't predict which brand will survive and which won't. ZCO seems to be doing the right things, but on the high end the stuff that is on my rifles is usually Tangent Theta or March. In terms of distribution of funds, the ultra high end scopes like these are definitely a case of diminishing returns, but if you can spare the coin, they are wonderful. Personally, as an overall full size precision scope, Tangent Theta 5-25x56 is still my favourite. ZCO has a wonderful eyepiece, but its 25 yard focus is arguable a more important point in actual use. March focuses closer yet, so I stick with March for applications where that matters. Am I going to own a ZCO in the future? I might. I want a more compact scope and it will likely come down to ZCO 4-20x50 or the upcoming March 4.5-28x52. Once both are available, I will make a decision at that point.
Great video and great information. I think a lot of it is based on opinion though. You may like a certain feature , but I may not, etc. but regardless good info.
Hoping for a reply lol. I’m neck deep in a custom 338 Lapua build and the last thing to buy is a scope. I’ve been looking the zco over for weeks now. This video is a year old have you had any more time looking them over since. Mpact 2 ret is a strong favorite of mine. What’s your thoughts as of now. Thanks.
ZCO is as good of a choice now as it was a year ago. If you like the reticle, go with that.
How new is the minox you’re resting? Cause I’ve herd the newer minox scopes shipping out have a better sound and more tactile crisp feel then Schmidt, but that’s was not what you thought?
Good review
This ZP5 is not new, but it is a very good sample. From my experience recent Minox ZP5s are not so much better, but rather more consistent. Earlier ones had a lot more variability with the turrets.
Any plans on reviewing the Minox 5-25x56 LR? The limited info on it on the Hide says it's nearly indistinguishable from the ZP5 for $1000 less which simply sounds too good to be true.
That is definitely a scope I'd like to look at.
Have you had a look at the K525 DLR? I bought a K525 even after your review (simply because I got a great price and wanted the left wind). Once you notice the thick black ring around the eye box it is pretty difficult not to notice it. I also bought a k525 dlr and I feel like it gets around some of the problems. At 25 power the DLR has 16 mil fov vs about 14.6 for the normal K525 and by the looks if it, its because the black ring is gone. However it seems like it now tunnels at the low end?
I have not seen the DLR. I reached out to Kahles with a couple of questions a while back, but never heard back. Until I get my hands on it, I don't really have any insight on it.
@@BB-xz5gv Both ZCO and Tangent are really excellent scopes. Personally, when choosing between the two I went with the Tangent: I have both the 5-25x56 and 3-15x50. They agree with my eyes a little better and I slightly prefer the reticles. The turret feel on the TT525P is also unrivalled so far. As far as durability goes, both TT and ZCO are exceptionally well built. As well or better than anything else out there.
Would the Minox ZP5 3-15x50 have similar performance as the Minox ZP5 5-25x56 in terms of optical quality? What should I expect?
Yes. I have tested one a while back and it is an excellent design. I do not thin they offer a tree reticle in it, but optomechanically it is really nice.
Any optic reviews by a guy that looks like a young Dr Evil with a thick European accent demand immediate respect.
I am not really that young any more...
@@DarkLordOfOptics lol. I’m enjoying your videos. I’m trying to decide between a Mark 5HD 3-18, Kahles K318i and NF ATACR 4-16 for a long range hunting rifle that also will shoot steel targets 1K yards. Low light performance along with tracking accuracy is key. I like more simplistic reticle designs. The Mark 5HD TMOA reticle is like a duplex with MOA hashes which I like. Can you help me decide?
@@charltonlwalker That sorta sounds like you want Tangent Theta TT315M or Hunter 3-15x50. That's what I use, but it is more money. I have a few rifles set up this way and one has the Tangent TT315M, Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50 and March 3-24x52 on them. In my experience, all three scopes you mentioned will track fine. On an off chance you draw the short straw, any of those manufacturers will make it right. I hear of very few service quality issues with any of these companies. If you are concerned about low light, you should be looking for a larger objective and properly illuminated reticles. Aside from that, pick a reticle you like and go with that.
@@DarkLordOfOptics Any reviews of the new Zeiss LRP scopes? I am looking at the Zeiss LRP S5 3.6-18X50 and reviews are good
@@charltonlwalker czcams.com/video/d--9hhhVe8Q/video.html
czcams.com/video/sanqUYYIGhM/video.html
I enjoy your reviews but always wonder were you would rank the iors, and valdadas new g2 in the mix. If not here in the best of best where would you put them?
I stopped looking at IORs. The quality is all over the place and for a guy like me who makes recommendations, that is a major problem. Generally, they are quite decent optically and a little shady mechanically. The G2 has nothing to do with IOR. It is made by LOW in Japan and is effectively the same scope as Delta Stryker except in a 40mm tube and for more money. I expect it to be more reliable than the Romanian scopes. They claim that they use different lenses in the G2, but the optical design is clearly the same. The new Tract Toric UHD 4.5-30x56 that is coming out shortly is also the same basic design with some minor lens changes. I would take either Stryker or Toric before having anything to do with Valdada.
Due to the seeker paint job on the TT is it more prone to ring marks? I just mounted my TT in a spuhr mount only torqued to 15 pounds for only two weeks and it has ring marks..? My S&B was in a spuhr mount fir a year with no ring marks
I don't know, to be honest. I have a couple of TTs, and I have not had any issues with ringmarks. However, I use Aadmount and I have never used Spuhr mounts.
Nice array of optics there . Hensoldt will always be the most expensive imho .
Hensoldt is driven entirely by the military market. They seem to not care about the civilian world in the slightest, hence the pricing. They do make some unique and interesting products, but honestly, while I like some of their older designs (3-12x56 and 4-16x56) a lot of other stuff really leaves me cold.
ZC doesn’t track. The only 2 scope tracks perfectly are the Tangent and Kahles, or so I’ve heard.
Also in my area the Leupold is the same price as the Kahles DLR, and that’s just crazy. So I just got the DLR lol.
ZCO tracks just fine. They may have had a couple of early issues that got resolved. Pretty much everything on the high end tracks fine: TT, S&B, ZCO, etc.
Is the TT usable at 25-35yds if the magnification is kept lower like 10x???
Looking to possibly buy a used 5-25 TT for rimfire PRS rig
I just went into my backyard with an LRF and TT to see how far away things look nice and sharp on 10x. At 27 yards, everything is sharp. At 21 yards, I lose a little sharpness. Looking at the neighbors' slate roof, I see the fine details on the edges of the slates at 25yards very comfortably. I'd say on 10x, you should be fine down to 25 yards or so, or at least I would be perfectly comfortable with it.
Best low light hunting scope?
Very thorough review, thanks for taking the time to do this.
How would the Vortex Gen 2 Razor and AMG compare with these?
I have the AMG here and I have a lot of mileage with Gen 2, so I will have a better idea in a bit.
Dark Lord Of Optics I’m not the original guys who asked, but any any thoughts on how the Razor compares to these yet? Also, any thoughts on where the ATACR would fit in here?
Followed you over here from Sniper’s Hide - thanks for all your content!
Also curious how you rate the Vortex AMG in comparison!
@@mspiredm3 any update?
TT vs ZCO, has your opinions changed at all? I’m leaning more towards the TT but I wish it had that impct 3x reticle like the Z. But the gen3 reticle is still great too.
Not really. Both are quite nice, but I do lean toward the TT a bit more.
One year later from my reply and I still haven’t purchased a tangent. Have you had a chance to look at the gen3xFINE? Fine vs the standard 3x
What about the newer PM II's? For instance the 3-27 and 5-45 schmidts. To me the 3-27 has better glass than 5-25.
I actually prefer the 5-25x56 to 3-27x56. I think it renders contrast better and has better depth of field.
Great review! Could you explain what you mean by s&b has a flatter image? I own a mp5, would i be disappointed in the image quality of the s&b if i added it to the collection?
Flatter, in this case, means a little less image pop, but not by much. I am not sure what MP5 is in this context, but I do not think I have ever seen anyone disappointed with S&B's image quality.
What?
Scope on an mp5? 😹
@miguel alarcon lmao that's funny! Correction minox zp5 scope not an mp5
Dark Lord of Optics, thank you for the great information!
I am surprised that the Nightforce ATACR and the Vortex Razor Gen II didn't make it into the list. Is there any particular reason? From what I've read the ATACR is great and is more expensive than the Mark 5. The Razor Gen II is no slouch and costs about the same as the Mark 5.
I am very well familiar with the Razor Gen2, so know where that fits. As far as Nightforce goes, I tried to get my hands on one, but they do not want to have anything to do with me. Generally, I like the ATACR scopes and Mil-XT reticle, but with the price hikes it is not at all clear to me where they will fit in terms of bang for the buck. Definitely competitive though
.
@@DarkLordOfOptics thank you for the response. My main concern is tracking, and I'm prepared to spend extra to get good tracking.
I get the impression you don't think as favorably of the Vortex Gen II 4.5-27x56. is there a particular reason for that? It was, and still is, a very popular scope for PRS and the long range events.
The ATACR has certainly caught my eye, and is actually now the most popular scope among the top 100 PRS competitors. Have you had a change to examine one for tracking?
@@bencollins7684 I check tracking on all scopes I test. Generally, aside from occasional products that slips through QC, most high quality scopes track just fine. As far as Vortex Gen2 goes, I actually happened to like that scope quite a lot. However, optically, it is not in competition with Tangent Theta and ZCO, so it did not really belong as a test subject in this group. In practical terms, I was looking to examine whatever scopes in the $2200+ range I could get my hands on.
@@DarkLordOfOpticshi lord how are you? I have been looking for dedal scopes, they look very good the dhf 5-20x56 cost 1850 dollars from russia with MRH-DGW1 which looks a very nice reticle. But for that money is there something better? Well that AA battery below magnification ring it's terrible. May be you should do a ranking of your reviews with an score from 0 to 100 and explanation for that, I would pay to see that documentations, you should show more your feathers you design scopes, you know a lot. What do you think to put a lantern in the objetive and a lightmeter or luxometer to measure light transmission in reviews?
@@manueladolfoholzmannillane3050 I reviewed that Dedal scope and did not like it too much. czcams.com/video/nCsGq1zdRsk/video.html As far as numerical rankings go, I am not a huge fan of that approach. It is really not a linear scale. That dumbs it down a bit more than I like. General ranking of different scopes I recommend is viable and I'll give it a little thought. As far as light transmission goes, I have a lightmeter and I can do it. However, overall light transmission is not particularly important with modern scopes, so I do not think it is worth the effort.
Any update comparing them to the gen2 razor? Thank you
Razor Gen2 is hard to beat for the money, but it is not quite as good across the board as the scopes in this video (nor should it be given the price).
Honest question...not trying to be a smartass, but why is kahles the brand used by most pro shooters according to precision rifle blog if it’s on the lower end of the top end scopes?
Which brand top shooters use depends heavily on who is sponsoring them or providing major discounts. For a while, they had some of the better reticle options which makes a big difference in PRS. Now that most brands have competing reticles Kahles' popularity is going down a bit. I think they screwed the pooch with the K525 to be honest. Also, keep in mind that the people who made Kahles popular with PRS are no longer with Kahles. They got kicked out (to the best of my knowledge) and started Zero Compromise Optics.
Dark Lord there are published comparisons of tactical scopes where IOR Recon 4-28x50 comes on top mechanicly, how do cheaper scopes like ior recon and rito x7 (3-24x56) compare to Khales and others?
I stopped reviewing IOR scopes some years ago for a variety of reasons, primarily because there was so much sample variation. I have not tested the Riton X7 either, so I can not talk to that.
@@DarkLordOfOptics thanks for the comment
How do these compare with Nightforce ATACR and NX8? I am liking the compactness of the nx8 but dont want to sacrifice a lot of light or clarity. Cheers
NX8 does not belong with these, but it is a lot less expensive, so it is not supposed to. ATACR is a good scope, but I have not done a full test since Nightforce people would not touch me with a ten foot pole. I think Tangent, Minox, ZCO and S&B are a little better than ATACR.
@@DarkLordOfOptics thanks for your fast reply. Have you looked through the s&b ultra short? How does it compare to the pmii?
@@phillipmullner5335 PMII is optically a little better. There are compromises involved with making a scope very short.
Maybe it was the microphone but the Kahles turrets sounded the loudest not the quietest.
Perhaps.
Any ior 40mm scope videos included or what do you think of ior
I have not looked at any 40mm scopes in this tst and I do not think very highly of IOR.
@@DarkLordOfOptics they are fantastic.....
No NF Atacr? That's my overall pick. Bombproof epoxied in glass, 100 percent true tracking , excellent glass, lifetime warranty. TT edges it in pure optical clarity, then the rest is all NF. 2 decades in military theater , overall most used brand in competition across the board for a reason.
ATACR is a very nice scope. I do not know if it is my overall pick, but there is certainly very little wrong with it. A couple of notes: it has more than two decades in the military theater, but that really means very little other than Nightforce knowing how to win military contracts. That specific expertise does not have a ton to do with the quality of the scope. Besides, many companies make scope widely used by the militaries all over the world. As far as optical elements being epoxied, that is not unique to Nightforce.
the ATACR sucks. Ive looked through plenty and the glass sucks
@@angryraylangivens1281 Which ATACR?
@@DarkLordOfOptics looked through both the 5-25 and 7-35 at a local PRS match after it was over (memorized the diopter for the owner’s setting and changed it to match my eyes). Not a fan of the glass, way too cool of a temperature and compared to ZCO/TT (also present) it wasnt even close tbh.
@@angryraylangivens1281 I do agree that optically TT and ZCO are definitely a step up from Nightforce, but I thought that the 7-35x56 ATACR was quite nice optically and a bit better than the 5-25x. If the 7-35x56 was closer to $3k (as it was originally, I think), it would be an even more compelling option. Now, with Razor Gen3 out, it is a tougher call. I'll probably get a 7-35x ATACR just to compare it to Gen3 side-by-side.
Any plans to discuss the NF 7-35x ATACR?
I have been trying to get my hands on one, but no luck.
I was surprised to not see the night force ATACR
@@B4maslowski Trying to get so many fancy scopes here at the same time is always complicated. I try to borrow these from the manufacturer whenever I can, but at some point I get tired of chasing them and give up. I may still be able to borrow one from a private party, but I am not going to put too much effort into this. I already have a ton of scopes to look at.
Yes I would love to see the ATACR compared to these scope please please please
Spot on, as usual, Your Unholiness.
Thank You.
Im stuck trying to decide between a Kahles 624, NF ATACR and Mk5. And suggestions?
Which specific models are you looking at? Also, do you have a strong reticle preference?
@@DarkLordOfOptics SKMR3, and most likely the H59 or maybe a Tremor 3 if I got the Mark 5 or ATACR. Is the Kahles really that disappointing? All the PRS shooters rave about them.
@@lucuix9901 Optically, the competition has mostly passed Kahles by for the money. Mechanically, it is very good though. They got popular because they got modern reticles before other. Now, things are different. For the money, I really like the Mark 5. I do not dig their reticles, but if you like H59, Leupold is a good option.
Question if I may. Being used to the IOR shorter depth of field the ZCO and TT sound in some ways appealing. With the IOR if its focused clearly I'm parallax free no questions asked. With the longer depth of field on the ZCO or TT is it putting all the picture on the same plane or do you run into it looks good but you have a parallax problem? I have a couple of vortex which well they do have a larger depth of field I feel that simply focusing the image doesn't necessarily mean your parallax free. Regards John
I use TT 5-25x56 as my primary precision scope and I do not seem to run into any parallax issues. Theoretically, there could be some, but I am not experiencing any of that. With short depth of field scopes, parallax issues are exacerbated by the fuzzy image.
I’m curious to see how the IOR crusader stacks up against the zero compromise? I really like the ZCO but the IOR 5.8-40x mag range is very tempting…. Will you be comparing these to an IOR?
I stopped reviewing IOR scopes a few years ago. Consistency was all over the place, so i figured it to be a waste of my time. If you want something with a large magnification range, March 5-42x56 is your huckleberry.
@@DarkLordOfOptics thanks, ive been hearing amazing things from certain people that think IOR is the best, but also tons of negative things about QC on the hide, and just don’t know who to believe lol. Have you put that march through a test or comparison? Funny you mentioned that cause i just discovered it yesterday, im wondering if there’s a good reason other scopes like the Zcomp dont have a high mag range? Maybe it has a negative effect in other ways? Or else why wouldn’t they all be using 40 power on the high range?
@@zoidelux Generally, the usability of very high magnifications for practical PRS-type shooting is somewhat exaggerated. There are compromises made to achieve high erector ratio with either the scopes getting very big or depth of field getting a little shallow. I think March has a very good solution, but you will have to work the parallax turret a little more since the depth of field is shallower.
@@DarkLordOfOptics thanks for all your knowledge and replies on these, it’s really tough to weed through all the BS out there, i dont shoot PRS but id like to in the future, but also would use the scope for hunting, f class, fine tuning load development etc… I just basically want the best glass first and foremost, but high mag would be nice, if you think the zcomp blows the march out of the water in terms of resolution and clarity/ low light, id definitely rather go zcomp, but I have no way to look through them and compare.
@@zoidelux March is absolutely an alpha class scope competitive with anything out there, be it ZCO, S&B, TT or anyone else. If you want the best overall optical performance, I would still give an edge to Tangent Theta overall, with March,, ZCO and S&B being just behind. However, if you plan to hunt with it, weight and size matter. For that, and given that you like a little more magnification for load development, the best compromise out there right now for you is likely March 4.5-28x52.
Literally just subscribed becbecause of your channel name...
Thank You. I did not come up with the name. Someone called me that. I thought it was hilarious and adopted it.
If you had 4k to spend which would you purchase between the SB and ZCO? or something else?
That sorta depends on what magnification range you want and what your reticle preferences are.
Clearly ZCO, is definitiv the best scope on the market.
Что Вы думаете по поводу Vortex Rezor Gen2 4.5-27x56?
Очень приличный прицел и их довольно много, так что мы точно знаем его надежность. Немного тяжеловат, а так особых проблем с ним нет.
Смотрю в сторону zco
Where would the IOR Crusader or Recon land in this review. Surprised it isn't included
I am decidedly not a fan of IOR, so I stopped looking at them.
@@DarkLordOfOptics ha you haven't a clue
@@coops9871 I apologize that I have not been able to reaffirm your pre-existing opinions
What is the best long range scope for clarity at 1000yrds
Generally all the top end scopes are pretty good. Tangent probably has the edge as the air gets worse.
Vortex AMG just as good as those in the same class/price?
It is competitive with similarly priced 50mm objective scopes.
@@DarkLordOfOptics can you recommend one in AMG price range that you think is best?
NF atacar vs Leica
Are they in the league?
D you not like NIghtforce very well?
I like some Nightforce scopes and don’t like some others. Same as with almost any other brand
How would the Swarovski X5 compare?
Not sure as that would be a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. X5 is a Second Focal Plane scope. I am sure it is excellent optically and mechanically, but for long range/precision shooting I am firmly in the FFP camp, so I don't really have any interest in testing the X5.
It would compare the Kahles K525i with less options as they are the same company.
Why wasn’t Nightforce compared with any of those scope?? Is Nightforce just crap ?
Nightforce makes nice scopes, but I was not able to get one for the comparison.
Thanks for your help
How would the steiner m5xi 5-25x56 sit with these?
Hard to say for sure. I tested M5Xi 5-25x56 for the 4th installment of the High End Tactical series and liked it overall, but above 15x or so, Schmidt and a few others were better ( opticsthoughts.com/?page_id=1254 ). I am hoping to have the new M7Xi soon to add to this test.
@@DarkLordOfOptics thanks for the reply. Guess I made the right decision, payed 2.5k for a brand new m5xi, the schmidt I was looking at would have cost me 3.3k and didnt know about tunneling when trying to decide. Would have bugged the hell outta me.
@@DarkLordOfOptics Yes, The M7Xi would be an interesting one to see how it stacks up with the competition
Wish the 5-25 atacr could’ve been in there instead of mk5
Nightforce wasn’t interested in having anything to do with me, so I was not able to secure one.
@@DarkLordOfOptics prob didn’t want the kahles treatment lol
@@ronsanchez2842 Kahles does not like me very much either. To be fair, I think ATACR is a good scope.
No IOR scopes?
I think you found the answer to this question (given your other comments on other videos).
@@DarkLordOfOptics Burris is best.
Judging glass can be very subjective, and I’m totally ok with that. But, when turrets are compared, we need to be totally objective. How they track is way more important than how they feel or sound. I would much rather have the best tracking scope here, even if it was the third best optically. Firing solutions are only as good as your scopes ability to track.
That is generally true, but once you get to the high end, they all have to track. What often differentiates them is the optical performance. Once you get into this price range, aside from an occasional fluke, I see very few tracking issues.
i rate my k525i better than my s&b pm11s
Maybe he got a bad sample of the Kahles 525i...?
March 5-42x56 HM beats them all including Nightforce ATAR.
All would be a bit of a general statement, but I do think it is better than the ATACR.
Would be good if you can rate each of them from 1 to 10 in each aspect and overall.
I might do some sort of a ranking when I do the write-up. However, I do not like 1-10 scales since they usually do not reflect the differences accurately.
@@DarkLordOfOptics cool, just want to get some idea from what you described in the video, try to quantify the difference and how significant those differences are. Any other way would also work. Any chance you might be able to out the camera behind each scope to explain pros and cons with some image or views? You know, some times a picture would explain everything.thanks a lot, good work.
@@iamsomebodynobody I am doing through the scope videos to show the reticles right now. Making images that do the image justice is very involved and I simply do not have the time to do that. The setup is very tricky for that.
@@DarkLordOfOptics all good, thank you for your work.
Amazing work. Your channel is my go to channel on CZcams for rifle scope reviews. Others are simply entertaining compared to you.
Thank You! This means a lot to me.
I just took my Kahles out back and buried it in shame. 😜
Where do you live? I have a sudden need to travel with a shovel... K525 is a perfectly decent scope and I really like the mechanics and the packaging. Its optics do not do great only compared to the other scopes I have here, so it is kinda comparative in nature.
Only a joke, my friend. The SKMR3 reticle is perfect for me across all my Kahles scopes, 624,318 and 525.
I took some advice from you quite some time ago on a forum to figure out what reticle suited me best amongst the higher end scopes and not to let the degrees of separation paralyze my decision making.
Great vid can’t wait for more.
@@DatMammut76 OK. I'll unpack the shovel.
Hey pack up the Fix and come shooting in Michigan if you want I won’t stop you 😂
@@DatMammut76 I might come to Michigan for work in the fall. No shooting though.
😂 I’m
Used to think you were unbiased but now I’ve seen you turn into a price snob . Obviously the tangent is best it’s the most expensive 😡
There are more expensive scopes out there. Do you see me talking about them?
The most expensive scope doesn't neccesarily have to be the best.
I like Ilya's reviews because he is unbiased, and knows what he is talking about.
Fantastic review, pretty unique in the whole (mostly sponsored) youtube/internet reviews.
Dlo is probably next to rex the most unbiased reviewer of anything ever.
He is outstandingly unbiased and always has been. Sometimes the best costs more money and this is a review of the best of the best, it’s literally in the title.
I have seen him dozens of times over the years highly recommend scopes that cost a fraction of the price of these units. Do you think that means they’re the same or better optically? If you do, you have a lot to learn.
@Chris Indermuehle He also kinda likes Athlon