• Frank's Lesson's Contest

    We want to see your skills! Post a video between now and November 1st showing what you've learned from Frank's lessons and 3 people will be selected to win a free shirt. Good luck everyone!

    Create a channel Learn more
  • Having trouble using the site?

    Contact support

New 2024 MPVO Options

Tictacticaltimmy

Sergeant of the Hide
Full Member
Minuteman
Oct 17, 2018
145
145
This is a thread for those of us looking for a lightweight MPVO. I've been watching videos from SHOT and haven't seen much, but this Steiner 4S caught my eye:



Its a 4-16 with illumination and adjustable parallax, illumination, and only 18oz! However, it is SFP, capped MOA turrets, and comes in a lame BDC reticle.

If they took this scope body and made it a 3-12 or 2.5-10 with a Mil-tree reticle that also draws the eye to the center for quick shots, I would be really interested. This could be like an optically superior version of the SWFA ultralight, with illumination and adjustable parallax.
 
I was really hoping to see an actual MPVO, but this Steiner Predator 4S is anything but, it is clearly designed for hunters and doesn't really offer anything more than what other SFP scopes offer today. The Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42 is supposed to come out with a mil/mil version soon but how soon is anyone's guess. The new Leupold Mark 4HD 2.5-10x42 appears to be the only true MPVO style scope I've seen thus far.

My biggest gripe is that many scopes "fit" the MPVO criteria but the greatest hindrance is the reticle, design a reticle that is usable at lowest mag and highest mag and we're in business, the LPVO world has already refined this, why mfr's can't look to these reticles and make some minor tweaks for mid range performance baffles me 🤷‍♂️
 
This is a thread for those of us looking for a lightweight MPVO. I've been watching videos from SHOT and haven't seen much, but this Steiner 4S caught my eye:



Its a 4-16 with illumination and adjustable parallax, illumination, and only 18oz! However, it is SFP, capped MOA turrets, and comes in a lame BDC reticle.

If they took this scope body and made it a 3-12 or 2.5-10 with a Mil-tree reticle that also draws the eye to the center for quick shots, I would be really interested. This could be like an optically superior version of the SWFA ultralight, with illumination and adjustable parallax.

And no washout. For its purposes, I can handle whatever reticle, but if it washes out completely when dealing with normal lighting conditions, hard pass.

We not at SHOT appreciate the updates.
 
I was really hoping to see an actual MPVO, but this Steiner Predator 4S is anything but, it is clearly designed for hunters and doesn't really offer anything more than what other SFP scopes offer today. The Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42 is supposed to come out with a mil/mil version soon but how soon is anyone's guess.
They’re saying Spring ‘24 for mil reticle H6Xi line according to @gr8fuldoug.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
I was really hoping to see an actual MPVO, but this Steiner Predator 4S is anything but, it is clearly designed for hunters and doesn't really offer anything more than what other SFP scopes offer today. The Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42 is supposed to come out with a mil/mil version soon but how soon is anyone's guess. The new Leupold Mark 4HD 2.5-10x42 appears to be the only true MPVO style scope I've seen thus far.

My biggest gripe is that many scopes "fit" the MPVO criteria but the greatest hindrance is the reticle, design a reticle that is usable at lowest mag and highest mag and we're in business, the LPVO world has already refined this, why mfr's can't look to these reticles and make some minor tweaks for mid range performance baffles me 🤷‍♂️
Getting ready to pull the trigger on the Leupold 3.6-18x44 with the PR2-Mil reticle because of this. Not perfect, but those 0.5mrad line mil markers seem like they should be fairly visible. Wishing they released that 2.5-10x42 Mk4 with the PR-2 reticle, cause at 12.5" and 21oz it would be a strong contender for me on gas guns.

Been playing with the Athlon 2-12 and it's proving to be one of my favorite reticles in this class with 0.15mrad mil tree (albeit it some quirks like a strangely large 0.3mrad center dot). Tree is functional around 5x, which is when those holds start being relevant for me anyways, and at 12x they aren't as overblown as the .2mrad dots of the Razor 1-10 or Atacr 1-8. Would love to see them make that scope with nicer glass and a smaller center dot.
 
Getting ready to pull the trigger on the Leupold 3.6-18x44 with the PR2-Mil reticle because of this. Not perfect, but those 0.5mrad line mil markers seem like they should be fairly visible. Wishing they released that 2.5-10x42 Mk4 with the PR-2 reticle, cause at 12.5" and 21oz it would be a strong contender for me on gas guns.

Been playing with the Athlon 2-12 and it's proving to be one of my favorite reticles in this class with 0.15mrad mil tree (albeit it some quirks like a strangely large 0.3mrad center dot). Tree is functional around 5x, which is when those holds start being relevant for me anyways, and at 12x they aren't as overblown as the .2mrad dots of the Razor 1-10 or Atacr 1-8. Would love to see them make that scope with nicer glass and a smaller center dot.

That’s why I like the Eotech LE5 reticle so much with the .1mil crosshair and dots. They’re not thick AF and obscuring like most on the top end but you can still pick them up starting around 4x. IMO it really is the best LPVO reticle. I wish they had put it in the Vudu X 2-12 because that scope would be a perfect MPVO.
 
Getting ready to pull the trigger on the Leupold 3.6-18x44 with the PR2-Mil reticle because of this. Not perfect, but those 0.5mrad line mil markers seem like they should be fairly visible. Wishing they released that 2.5-10x42 Mk4 with the PR-2 reticle, cause at 12.5" and 21oz it would be a strong contender for me on gas guns.

Been playing with the Athlon 2-12 and it's proving to be one of my favorite reticles in this class with 0.15mrad mil tree (albeit it some quirks like a strangely large 0.3mrad center dot). Tree is functional around 5x, which is when those holds start being relevant for me anyways, and at 12x they aren't as overblown as the .2mrad dots of the Razor 1-10 or Atacr 1-8. Would love to see them make that scope with nicer glass and a smaller center dot.
Smaller companies seem to have a better ear to the community and able to address faster than larger companies who are driven by marketing teams who get so caught up in the bottom line they lose focus on who they're actually marketing to, unless they are driven by .mil in which case they are laser focused on meeting a spec and if we're lucky they release to the civilian market and we have to live with what some bozo with stars on his shoulder thought would be good for the troops (this of course is a very crude analogy and only meant to be taken lightheartedly ;) )
 
I was really hoping to see an actual MPVO, but this Steiner Predator 4S is anything but, it is clearly designed for hunters and doesn't really offer anything more than what other SFP scopes offer today. The Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42 is supposed to come out with a mil/mil version soon but how soon is anyone's guess. The new Leupold Mark 4HD 2.5-10x42 appears to be the only true MPVO style scope I've seen thus far.

My biggest gripe is that many scopes "fit" the MPVO criteria but the greatest hindrance is the reticle, design a reticle that is usable at lowest mag and highest mag and we're in business, the LPVO world has already refined this, why mfr's can't look to these reticles and make some minor tweaks for mid range performance baffles me 🤷‍♂️
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe there is an MPVO (min 2.5X or less, max 10x or more) which has all of the following:
useful reticle at low and high end
decent eyebox
decent FOV
decent glass
MIL/MIL 0.1 or 0.2
good turrets, intuitive, locking, zero stop, rev counter
below 28 oz.
illum
adj parallax
 
  • Like
Reactions: Journeyman1234
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe there is an MPVO (min 2.5X or less, max 10x or more) which has all of the following:
useful reticle at low and high end
decent eyebox
decent FOV
decent glass
MIL/MIL 0.1 or 0.2
good turrets, intuitive, locking, zero stop, rev counter
below 28 oz.
illum
adj parallax
Pending what your standards are for each of those criteria, the Athlon 2-12x44 Helos BTR is a good fit (https://athlonoptics.com/product/helos-btr-gen2-2-12x42-dmr-scope/). I've sold my Razor 1-10 and Atacr 1-8 in favor of this, which is saying a lot that this $500 market price scope is serving me better than those $2000-2600 market price scopes.

FOV: Good. 2x 55.7', 12x 9.6'. Notably better than the Primary Arms GLX 2.5-10.
Eyebox: Excellent, very forgiving.
Glass: Good overall, excellent for the price range. For practical gas gun shooting glass hasn't been a limiting factor. At <400yd the glass quality is obviously lesser than the Atacr or Razor, but at 500+ sidefocus/parallax adjust alone results in clearer images than either of those two. Add in a 44mm objective and the image is significantly brighter even with the lower quality glass.
Reticle: Great. Missing a point for the center aiming dot being an unusually large 0.3mrad which sacrifices some precision. But donut of death and that .3mrad center point are excellent at lower mag. 0.15mrad mil holds are usable by 5x and not obnoxiously large at 10-12x like the .2mrad dots are for the Razor.
Turrets: Good. Audible and tacticle clicks. Definitely a little mushy, but not in a way that makes me doubt my clicks. Alignment of lines is okay, could be better, tied to that mushiness.
Weight: 25.4oz
Length: 11.8"
Illuminated: Yes. I also appreciate the whole tree is illuminated rather than just the dot, so holds are usable in lower light or darker backdrops.
Adjust Parallax: Yes, down to 10yd.
Other: Only two complaints.(1) The tunneling is on the worse side of scopes I've used. Notable black ring around the image at all magnifications. Not unusable, but annoying. (2) The illumination dial is hard to manipulate separate from the parallax and the battery cap is hard to secure. I frequently end up untwisting the battery cap rather than dialing the illumination. May try just adding a drop of lightweight thread locker.

I've already emailed Athlon telling them if they made a Japanese ED glass version along the lines of their Cronus line, use a smaller center dot, removed some slop from the turrets, reduce tunneling, and maybe found a way to slightly boost FOV and/or cut weight I'd happily pay them $1500-2000.
 
Last edited:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe there is an MPVO (min 2.5X or less, max 10x or more) which has all of the following:
useful reticle at low and high end
decent eyebox
decent FOV
decent glass
MIL/MIL 0.1 or 0.2
good turrets, intuitive, locking, zero stop, rev counter
below 28 oz.
illum
adj parallax
IMO, other than the March 1.5-15 which is out of my price range, the PA GlX 2.5-10 is the closest. Fulfills all of the above criteria except these downsides:

1. center chevron is super coarse on the high end. I solve this by dialing -1 and using the top of the mil tree instead. Or I dial -2 if I want windage marks.

2. awful zero stop system where the turrets depend on the zero stop being set to lock. The reason this is awful is, when set, you cant dial over -.3 below zero. This is a problem because it makes it impossible to use my above method for overcoming the coarse center chevron. It also makes it unworkable if you switch between different loads. So I just don't set the zero stop and as a result I have a non locking elevation turret. Hasn't moved on me yet but I feel this is a no go for a tactical scope. Honestly if they just resolved this issue I would buy two more of them and call it good.

I had the Athlon 2-12 but the reticle wasnt fast enough on 2X for me, and the extra weight penalty over the PA made it poor by comparison.
 
Drip - appreciate the detailed rundown on the Athlon. I have an Athlon 1-4.5, given to me, on an AR for Service Rifle comps. It punches above its weight for sure. I try not to spend money on Chinese products. it’s inevitable, I know, but we can limit it, especially in areas where we want western companies to thrive, like shooting sports.

That said, my chief complaint would be the 0.15 mils turrets. Why .15? I don’t want to be thinking 1.05, 1.20, 1.35…
 
Drip - appreciate the detailed rundown on the Athlon. I have an Athlon 1-4.5, given to me, on an AR for Service Rifle comps. It punches above its weight for sure. I try not to spend money on Chinese products. it’s inevitable, I know, but we can limit it, especially in areas where we want western companies to thrive, like shooting sports.

That said, my chief complaint would be the 0.15 mils turrets. Why .15? I don’t want to be thinking 1.05, 1.20, 1.35…
Sorry, the .15mrad referred to the actual size of the dots in the reticle's tree. The turrets themselves are .1mil adjustments.

I can't think of any USA made optics that would check all of these boxes at the moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blue_ridge
IMO, other than the March 1.5-15 which is out of my price range, the PA GlX 2.5-10 is the closest. Fulfills all of the above criteria except these downsides:

1. center chevron is super coarse on the high end. I solve this by dialing -1 and using the top of the mil tree instead. Or I dial -2 if I want windage marks.

2. awful zero stop system where the turrets depend on the zero stop being set to lock. The reason this is awful is, when set, you cant dial over -.3 below zero. This is a problem because it makes it impossible to use my above method for overcoming the coarse center chevron. It also makes it unworkable if you switch between different loads. So I just don't set the zero stop and as a result I have a non locking elevation turret. Hasn't moved on me yet but I feel this is a no go for a tactical scope. Honestly if they just resolved this issue I would buy two more of them and call it good.

I had the Athlon 2-12 but the reticle wasnt fast enough on 2X for me, and the extra weight penalty over the PA made it poor by comparison.
If PA would replace the chevron with a dot and could fix the awful FOV on the 2.5-10 it'd probably be my top contender. Super narrow FOV and hating the chevron was why I ended up selling mine.
 
Sorry, the .15mrad referred to the actual size of the dots in the reticle's tree. The turrets themselves are .1mil adjustments.

I can't think of any USA made optics that would check all of these boxes at the moment.
Ok, makes more sense. I’ve considered the following: (asterisks for the ones I’ve owned)
Vortex PST G2 2-10x (and G1 2.5-10x)
*Vortex Razor HD LH 2-10x
Nightforce NXS 2.5-10x
Trijicon Credo 2-10x
*Trijicon Credo 2.5-15x
Trijicon Accupoint 2.5-12.5x (and older 2.5-10x)
Eotech Vudu 2-12x
*Swampfox KYLR 2-12x
Swampfox Warhawk 2-10x
Steiner T6Xi 2.5-15x
Leup MK5HD 2-10x
*USO TS-20x 2.5-20x
Leica Amplus 2.6-15x

They all have warts IMHO. Are we asking for too much? How about a scope as good as a Razor G2 HD-E 1-6x but in 2-12x? 🤷‍♂️
 
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe there is an MPVO (min 2.5X or less, max 10x or more) which has all of the following:
useful reticle at low and high end
decent eyebox
decent FOV
decent glass
MIL/MIL 0.1 or 0.2
good turrets, intuitive, locking, zero stop, rev counter
below 28 oz.
illum
adj parallax
Maybe the new Leupold Mark 4HD 2.5-10x42 with illum. TMR reticle, the Athlon Helos BTR G2 2-12x42 if you don't mind Chi Tech (joke from another thread). The best attempt thus far is the March 1.5-15x42 FFP with DF-TR2B reticle, reticle is outstanding for MPVO/Crossover work and the scope has it's finickyness but makes up for it with build quality, turrets and mag range.
 
I don’t mind chi-tech as much if there’s a USA HQ and USA jobs, even some American engineering. Swampfox has some local support and they are involved in the product design. PA is American design, I think, and support for Chinese products. I don’t know what Athlon’s deal is.
 
I don’t have any industry contacts, but for those of you who do, could we start a petition for this scope and send it to Vortex?
I have an ear very high up with Vortex and have been trying to encourage this for sometime. Maybe someone should start a thread called "New Vortex Razor Gen3 2-12x42 with EBR-9 reticle" and see how many hits it gets, sure it's clickbait but I would imagine it would get quite a bit of interest, similar if a thread read "New Nightforce ATACR 2-12x42 with FC-DMx reticle". Leupold's Mark 5 2-10 is interesting but not exciting, same with the Mark 4 2.5-10, but a serious contender in the upper class would be really nice.
 
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe there is an MPVO (min 2.5X or less, max 10x or more) which has all of the following:
useful reticle at low and high end
decent eyebox
decent FOV
decent glass
MIL/MIL 0.1 or 0.2
good turrets, intuitive, locking, zero stop, rev counter
below 28 oz.
illum
adj parallax
March 1.5-15 Shuriken does 100% of the things on this list. It has a few minor quirks but I think it’s the best MPVO I’ve ever used.
 
What are people using a scope like this for? Just curious.
SPR/DMR type application as well as hunting where larger objectives may not be as much a factor. I prefer FFP for hunting, biggest issue is sucky reticles at low mag.

To be clear, LPVO design intent is 1x priority with ability to dial out far, but it lacks the IQ at top magnification (with 8x and higher) and parallax control (for most) that scopes that start above 1x (bottom mag) typically exhibit. While design intent of MPVO is almost the opposite, with high mag priority but ability to use at bottom mag when needed (usable reticle) larger objective (36-42mm) for better low light ability and overall better IQ (vs LPVO). What both LPVO and MPVO share in design is a lightweight and somewhat compact package to keep balance on lighter weight rifles. With many 6x optical formulas these days matching (sometimes exceeding) the 5x designs of the past two decades, 2-12 seems to be a sweet spot, if someone could make a lighter weight 2.5-15x42 that would be a great option as well as long as it has fairly wide FOV. 3x on the bottom end is too high for many especially those who use clipons.
 
I wrote up a longish post about the S&B Meta rifle scope, only to belatedly notice it was second focal point.

I guess I’ve never really quite understood the fascination with adjustable parallax in this mag range and for these applications. It seems that these types of shots (DMR/hunting) are pretty quick; not LPVO quick, but not thousand yard considered shots.

For shots in which you have time to dial in parallax, buy a 3-15/18 with a wide FOV at the bottom end.

Heck, Henry at 9 hole reviews is shooting steel with iron sights (600yd+) and crappy vintage scopes (800+) and doing it pretty quickly.

There’s a post somewhere on the Hide about just how little parallax error there is out to reasonable distances.

It just feels like some people want to use a scope like this for literally everything?
 
Last edited:
I wrote up a longish post about the S&B Meta rifle scope, only to belatedly notice it was second focal point.

I guess I’ve never really quite understood the fascination with adjustable parallax in this mag range and for these applications. It seems that these types of shots (DMR/hunting) are pretty quick; not LPVO quick, but not thousand yard considered shots.

For shots in which you have time to dial in parallax, by a 3-15/18 with a wide FOV at the bottom end.

Heck, Henry at 9 hole reviews is shooting steel with iron sights (600yd+) and crappy vintage scopes (800+) and doing it pretty quickly.

There’s a post somewhere on the Hide about just how little parallax error there is out to reasonable distances.

It just feels like some people want to use a scope like this for literally everything?
Because I want a rifle that i can do both with. Quick shots inside 100 in dark hardwoods and an an animal that may be running, but also some longer more precise shots at distance. I might be hunting in hardwoods, no shots beyond 75 yds in the morning and might be overlooking a mountainside where I can glass for deer/elk at 600-800 yds in the afternoon. Sucks to have a blurry image of a deer that looks like it has huge rack but I can’t resolve the image to see. Everything said above can be applied to SPR/DMR defensive situations as well.

what makes this frustrating is the technology is clearly available in other scopes, but no one has put it all together yet. Some very close ones, but90% of the MPVO’s either have poor reticles, don’t offer mils or they’re too big and heavy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LRRPF52
First, I’m not saying this it technically impossible. I mean, I’m not sure why you don’t buy the March. Eurooptic will let you return it if it’s unmounted.

But it definitely doesn’t seem like a huge market that wants such a thing. However, the PST II 3-15 with the 2d reticle has a 41.2 ft FOV @ 100yds, as big or bigger than some 2.5x scopes. @koshkin likes this scope a lot.

The crosshair is .034mils thick vs .03 with the other variants. Illumination is bright enough. 28.1oz. My only ding is not locking turrets. It was a special run, not sure if you can find them new.

1708812806318.jpeg

I might be hunting in hardwoods, no shots beyond 75 yds in the morning and might be overlooking a mountainside where I can glass for deer/elk at 600-800 yds in the afternoon. Sucks to have a blurry image of a deer that looks like it has huge rack but I can’t resolve the image to see.
You glass with your scope and not with a spotter or 15x/18x binos?

Typically with a fixed parallax scope for centerfire it’s fixed at ~150yds. Everything past that is usually clear. It’s the stuff closer than that gets blurry. Typically much closer. As in you could tell if the deer had a huge rack with your naked eye.

What scope have you used that you’ve had this problem?
 
2018-2019 i got several mpvos
nxs 2.5-10x42 sfp
trijicon credo 2-10x ffp
vo pst g2 2-10x ffp
l&s mk4 2.5-8x sfp

I got the nxs first and got it because it had zero stop and parallax knob.
I work in the day, so shoot/critter control mostly at night.
Since sfp, I figured, if I would dial at night, needed zero stop, and thought I needed parallax knob also. But after shooting that scope a lot, I realized the parallax adjustment at 100yds waa so minute, I didnt need it afterall.
I liked the nsx a lot, very clear glass and good reticle, I had mil-r.
But somebody asked for it and I sold it.


The trij credo 2-10x was almost perfect.
Clear image and good reticle, but NOT day light bright. How could that be, didnt Trij invent DLB ? Sold it.

The pst g2, tunneled under 3x and had dark image, sold it

The L&S was a great dialing scope, this was the new one for the m38 with the good turrets.
Best dialing scope i every had, Total confidence out to 750yds. With my ammo, some how the meters turret was dead on for yards. And it was light, 15oz iirc.
Only sold it cause someone asked.

==

For me, after that fun 2 yr foray into the land of mpvo, and after resisting the lpvo due to the idea "why pay more for 1x when 2x is low enuff" I finally went all in on LPVO and now I have 5 and plan for more. They are smaller, lighter and inside 750yds have plenty of magnification and i dont need parallax knob for these low power critters.
I want light and small and hit what I am aiming at night or day, rain or shine , hot or cold and they get it done.
2xatacr 1-8x
1xnx8 1-8x
1xvo 1-10x
1xvo 1-6x pst g2 on 22lr


My big boi scopes now are
l&s mk6 3-18x
nx8 2.5-20x

If I was buying to day

nx8 1-8 for stoners
nx8 2.5-20x for bolt guns
 
Just as other have stated. I’d be looking at something in this range for hunting. Needs to have a big enough objective to gather light in timber, big enough FOV for close shots(closest elk shot was around 15yds), thick enough reticle to be useful at the lowest mag without illumination, anything over ~12x I’d prefer FFP, anything under ~12x and it’s less important, compact enough package to fit on a trim hunting rifle, clear enough glass to count tines at 500yds.
What are people using a scope like this for? Just curious.
 
I wrote up a longish post about the S&B Meta rifle scope, only to belatedly notice it was second focal point.

I guess I’ve never really quite understood the fascination with adjustable parallax in this mag range and for these applications. It seems that these types of shots (DMR/hunting) are pretty quick; not LPVO quick, but not thousand yard considered shots.

For shots in which you have time to dial in parallax, by a 3-15/18 with a wide FOV at the bottom end.

Heck, Henry at 9 hole reviews is shooting steel with iron sights (600yd+) and crappy vintage scopes (800+) and doing it pretty quickly.

There’s a post somewhere on the Hide about just how little parallax error there is out to reasonable distances.

It just feels like some people want to use a scope like this for literally everything?
For me it's as much as having a perfectly focused image as having the parallax dialed out.

Having won a few Vintage Sniper matches with two different authentic systems I can tell you first hand that the inexpensive Athlon 2-12 DMR is so much more refined and user friendly that any comparison of old vs new is much like an old Model T vs a modern mid sized 4x4 SUV.
As far as using these for dynamic shooting at varying distances quickly the old scopes would suck in comparison to this Athlon DMR.

Concerning the adjustable parallax one specific application I am thinking of personally is using that Athlon for Pistol Field Target matches on 12x. We use the focus to determine distance so if one doesn't know the distance, well, you won't do well in this sport. I won state with this scope in PFT division in 2022. I knew the scope was nice but using it in this match totally sold me into another aspect it excels in "as a crossover"

Then in a Ultimate FT rifle match which is out to 100Y with air rifles on kill zones which are a bit difficult in size. I got a 2nd place using this same scope. Everyone else was using 5-25's or similar and so do I normally. I don't blame the scope though, I was just outshot is all, but it didn't hold me back in the least.

And there are the rimfire applications for a crossover scope. I can imagine walking through the junipers and shooting a rabbit while its running away on 2x, or crossing over to shooting long range jacks or prairie dogs at whatever distance.

Or general hunting for a centerfire. Good up close and okay far away.

For me the main purpose is of course versatility which a crossover scope is fantastic for. Hunting, plinking on steel, faster shooting scenarios, a wide FOV on low magnification, and needing to see the reticle plainly in dim light quickly because illume might not be on or a battery might be dead. Or even used as scope in a rifle match.

For long range duties I have this scope on my AR in 6mmFatRat. Comparing hit ratios at 1143 yards a few months ago my 6mmBR bolt rifle was only slightly easier to hit steel with and I put the reason being because its a very precise bolt gun, in 6mmBR needing less windage, and has a 5 oz trigger. Not specifically because of the 29x of the Cronus although that helps a little.

Also I don't know why but there's something cool about putting a big black dot on something and nailing it. That's a personal preference.

My favorite thing is using this scope on a semi auto plinking at a quicker pace on steel knock downs. It's much like a prism scope experience except I'm using 6x or higher.

Plus we've already got our high magnification target scopes on guns for F-class and Benchrest and 5-25's coming out our ears for PRS, etc. Some of us don't want these for various types of shooting whether that be because of size, length, weight, thin reticles in FFP, etc.

I can think of some improvements for the Athlon DMR 2-12 as far as another clean sheet higher quality version but this scope is so good as is the improvements would be on the "not much" side of things and the price would quadruple.
 
@steve123 Don’t take any of this personally. I appreciate your calm tone.

TL;DR
On a 1-10x or similar the zoom ring acts like a focusing apparatus because target type/size/distance usually corresponds to a magnification which has an appropriate apparent DOF for the task.

In other words, “appears in focus” is good enough for what these scopes are designed for.

I know that “focus” and “parallax” are not quite the same thing. @koshkin, I believe, mentions that the parallax knob is more accurately called a focus knob. See this video of his:


Know that in this post when I say parallax or focus, I mean the same thing: the image appears in focus to your eye…even though technically they are not the same thing.

Back to your scenarios: It does seem like you are moving the goalposts quite a bit here.

For me it's as much as having a perfectly focused image as having the parallax dialed out.
This is sorta what I’m getting at when I give people crap about acting (vs. being) autistic about this stuff. Yeah, I like a perfectly focused image too.

But we’re talking about snapshot hunting and DMR roles here (people shooting back). Not sniper stuff.

Concerning the adjustable parallax one specific application I am thinking of personally is using that Athlon for Pistol Field Target matches on 12x. We use the focus to determine distance so if one doesn't know the distance, well, you won't do well in this sport.
See hunting/DMR roles. Of course I’m not saying a 1-10x or 2-10x scope should never be designed for the likes of you, just that for Pistol Field Target…well, if that isn’t a super-super niche then I don’t know what is? 🤷‍♂️

Then in an Ultimate FT rifle match which is out to 100Y with air rifles on kill zones which are a bit difficult in size. I got a 2nd place using this same scope.
Again, super-super niche. Not hunting/DMR.

And there are the rimfire applications for a crossover scope. I can imagine walking through the junipers and shooting a rabbit while it’s running away on 2x, or crossing over to shooting long range jacks or prairie dogs at whatever distance.
You’re not adjusting parallax after you see a rabbit, right? You’ve pre-set it, and guess what? It’s almost certainly going to be off. Odds are the rabbit will not appear exactly where are you preset your focus.

With a non-adjustable parallax scope, you just pre-set the zoom at 1x or 2x. The zoom functionally acts like your parallax/focus!

In other words, because it’s on such a low mag everything is going to appear in focus already. Wide angle lenses (ex. 1x) have greater apparent DOF, even though, just like a 600mm telephoto, technically only one distance is actually in perfect focus.

You just won’t be able to visually determine that perfect focal point when looking at photo taken with a wide angle lens or while looking through a riflescope at 1x mag*. Or you’ll have great, great difficulty figuring out that exact plane of perfect focus and would need to take significant time to study the image carefully in order to do so.

Meanwhile the rabbit has escaped!

To be crystal clear, I am not saying the zoom is mechanically identical to your parallax/focus knob, only that the practical result in the rabbit situation is the same.

And if you want to take a longer shot, the parallax is fixed on 150yds. But stuff past 150yds is going to look in focus and the parallax error will not be enough to matter for the situations the scope was designed for (shooting coyotes or larger…or people…out to what? 400, 600, 800 yds?).

For stuff up close the lower zoom settings sort of forgive less-than “perfect” parallax/focus settings.

You get what I’m saying?

Or general hunting for a centerfire. Good up close and okay far away.
See the “using the zoom to negate out of focus game” when it is close to you. You’re not shooting a deer at 25yds at 10x, you’re going to be at 1x or 2x, and at that range the deer is going to look in focus.

For example, at 1x with my Razor 1-10x stuff in my house at 3/4yds looks like it’s in focus. Heck, even closer. That’s what I’m trying to get at here.

A 1-10x or 2-10x in general is about speed-to-target. Zoom functionally works like your focus and that corresponds to how far your target is away from you.

Target is close? Zoom out and it looks like it’s in focus.

Target is far? It’s going to look like it’s in focus at any zoom setting.

It’s the difference between knowing that, technically, only one distance can be in perfect focus at any one time but that, depending on zoom setting, there can be a very wide range of acceptable focus that gets the job done.

In short, the fixed parallax 1-10x/2-10x scope is telling you to…


And I think this is what drives some people wild.

Of course I’m not saying you don’t get to have preferences and that some options on some scopes aren’t super helpful to you in your competitions. It’s just these situations are extremely niche.

I’m just describing, broadly, what this sort of scope is typically used and designed for.

If you have an edge case, just state that preference (like you did) and hope that a manufacturer is listening or write to them. Looks like you luckily found the perfect scope for your application.

Some people (not you) just spazzzzz out and are offended by the mere idea that a scope has a fixed parallax. They throw out a bunch of hypotheticals that don’t hold water. Then they go Reeeeee!

Those people are acting autistic.

The same people also usually want an extremely light scope…but adding adjustable parallax adds weight Reeeeee!

*I’m ignoring f-stop. Hopefully you get the drift.
 
Last edited:
I have a bad habit of constantly revising some posts after I publish. If you right now are carefully composing a rebuttal, please refresh the page as I might have already rebutted your rebuttal.

so many butts lol
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Shoreglide
Know that when I say parallax or focus, I mean the same thing: the image appears in focus to your eye…even though technically they are not the same thing.

FYI, I do NOT mean the same thing :)

I specifically use the word "parallax" to mean "removing parallax by adjusting the parallax knob" while moving my head back and forth (usually left to right in my case) to judge whether the reticle and target are in the same distance plane.
I've had several scopes where having parallax removed was not equal to being in focus. And when I'm shooting dots and groups at 100yds, I prioritize removal of parallax even if the image is fuzzy. In that use case, being out of focus has a lot less impact on hitting the dots and tight groups than having parallax.

I believe in scopes, they are supposed to be aligned - i.e. if I remove parallax, I am in focus, but as I said, I've had several scopes where this was decidedly not the case and I prioritized parallax removal when trying to hit small dots or get tight groups at 100yds. Further out, at field shooting distances, there is less issue.
 
FYI, I do NOT mean the same thing :)

I specifically use the word "parallax" to mean "removing parallax by adjusting the parallax knob" while moving my head back and forth (usually left to right in my case) to judge whether the reticle and target are in the same distance plane.
I've had several scopes where having parallax removed was not equal to being in focus. And when I'm shooting dots and groups at 100yds, I prioritize removal of parallax even if the image is fuzzy. In that use case, being out of focus has a lot less impact on hitting the dots and tight groups than having parallax.

I believe in scopes, they are supposed to be aligned - i.e. if I remove parallax, I am in focus, but as I said, I've had several scopes where this was decidedly not the case and I prioritized parallax removal when trying to hit small dots or get tight groups at 100yds. Further out, at field shooting distances, there is less issue.

Yep. I had a March 3-24x52 that no matter what I tried getting parallax dialed out, a sharp image, and a sharp reticle wasn't happenin. Besides not being able to get that dialed in, it was a cunt to even get close due to the shallow DOF. Life was better when I replaced it with a bushnell for 1/3 of the price. Ever since i've cursed this short scope/high mag ratio thing people seem to clamor for.
 
@wigwamitus and @wind gypsy I understand. I didn’t want to get bogged down in that discussion so that’s why I linked to @koshkin ‘s video.

In that video, he describes what you guys are talking about, namely, that in a properly put together scope, focusing the image = a parallax free image. Assuming you’ve adjusted the diopter correctly.

I have a lot of sympathy for people like @steve123 who know that a particular LPVO or MPVO is not designed for their application, but wish it was. AND, critically, they can describe in detail what that application is and how having adjustable parallax would (or did) solve that issue.

I’m glad that @steve123 found a scope that works for him.

Sympathy is what I lack for people for whom the lack of parallax adjustment in the scope just… bothers them…for what I charitably describe as “philosophical reasons.”
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: wigwamitus
I believe in scopes, they are supposed to be aligned - i.e. if I remove parallax, I am in focus, but as I said, I've had several scopes where this was decidedly not the case and I prioritized parallax removal when trying to hit small dots or get tight groups at 100yds. Further out, at field shooting distances, there is less issue.
That's right Wig, that is the intended design and I agree with you that not all scopes actually do this, but I would also remind the community that your diopter can also have an effect on parallax and an in focus image. I've had a number of scopes where I've adjusted diopter to what looks good (initially) only to find that at some distance (usually longer distances) I can't get either focus or parallax to "look right" and this is where fine tuning of the diopter comes into play and has resolved some of those minor issues and cleaned up both parallax and image. If I get a scope that seems out of alignment and no matter what I do I can't seem to resolve, that scope needs to go back to the mfr, I realize it is a real pain to buy a brand new scope and immediately need warranty work but it sometimes happens. If you buy from a reputable Hide dealer, quite often the dealer can help out as well with connecting to the mfr for resolution.
 
Sorry to bang on about this, but I think that people that want a LPVO/MPVO with adjustable parallax should simply use a modifier with the acronym. That way they don’t seem to asking for the moon for sometimes dubious reasons.

Like: “I want a MPVO-target scope b/c I shoot close range static targets and this mag range and scope weight works for me.”

Not: “All MPVOs should have adj. parallax b/c Reeeeeee!

Edit: maybe these scopes all need modifiers. MPVO-lightweight hunting, MPVO-sniper, etc. and I do concede that over 10x I can see a need for adj. parallax (I think). I don’t have a fixed parallax scope that goes over 10x so I’m talking without knowing, but I can see critical focus starting to slip over 10x at longer distances.

The Steiner H6Xi 2-12 with STR-MIL reticle looks cool, as noted elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
I get the drift.

Also its the have and not need than need and not have aspect - side fcous.

Carbon, no I didn't take your post as offending to me, and yes, I definitely have niche needs compared to most shooters. I was basically describing how versatile that 2-12 is in a crossover sense in as varied a way as possible. However I forgot to mention shooting flies with it at 10 yards and having the focus perfect so close. It's a fun mini varmint match my friends and I do when the spring fly hatch starts.
Granted who else does this?? But having the image focused at 12x this close is something that once experienced shows it is a neat feature to have.
I've tried this with LPVO's lacking a side focus and on 8x or 10x the image is quite funky though ok on lower mag.

Carbon wrote = "You’re not adjusting parallax after you see a rabbit, right? You’ve pre-set it, and guess what? It’s almost certainly going to be off. Odds are the rabbit will not appear exactly where are you preset your focus."
Me = Like in my example of shooting a running rabbit I can anticipate taking a shot from 20 to 50Y and so setting the focus somewhere in that range, like say 35 yards, and because it's on 2x or 3x its acceptably in focus quite a ways farther out. Your example would apply best if I had the scope on higher magnification which for snap shots on rabbits isn't the optimal strategy.

Backing up a bit to 40 years ago I hunted small game and big game with my old fixed parallax 3-9x32's and lived with the down sides which I was totally ignorant to, but nowadays we have other "options". Did I do fine with them, yes for the most part, and great memories too, but the only one remaining is in the dark recesses of a cabinet. Would I rather have the 2-12, yes absolutely.

For many of the same reasons I've described I like my March DFP shorty 1-10 LPVO with side focus. It remains on 1x/AR much of the time in case of emergency but I find I like 12x on the other scope more than 10x in the March. That extra 2x doesn't seem like much but its enough more that I prefer 12x rather than 10x so I have two of the 2-12's and use them more often.

I do understand to each their own though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: carbonbased
One thing that is annoying whenever this topic is being discussed, is people having dogmatic beliefs of how the ideal MPVO "should" be. Its annoying because MPVO is a broad term and there are different use cases for scopes in this category. These different use cases dictate different balances of features, which are sometimes mutually exclusive.

For me, I like MPVOs because I am running an offset dot, and find a 1x scope to be redundant. Id rather take the $ and engineering needed to make a good 1x and put that towards a better high end. I leave the scope on its lowest setting which enables me switch between 1x and 2.5x in a fraction of a second, enabling precision in scenarios where you would have only a 1x if using an LPVO, without taking my hands off the gun to adjust anything. This also gives a great setup for passive aiming.
For that use case I need a bold center reticle to quickly engage targets at the low end as close as possible. I don't want to have to rely on scope illumination with its short battery life, so the reticle itself being bold is essential.
On the high end I want markedly better performance than I could get from an LPVO. A mil-tree is pretty much a necessity. I feel adjustable parallax helps to a great deal here. Its not so much about removing parallax error as it is about focusing on the target, such as to resolve a camouflaged target from the background.

I like this setup so much that LPVOs no longer interest me. if I want to save weight/bulk, I would rather go all the way down to an RDS and QD magnifier.
 
ZCO announced a 2-10x30mm coming soon. 27.2oz with only a 30mm objective is hefty though. I want some specs on those reticles, but the HTR reticle looks promising for my uses. 36mm tube cause fuck you. Also probably $3500+ cause ZCO 😭 https://www.instagram.com/zerocompromiseoptic/reel/C3ydHVHvZOM/

View attachment 8360706
View attachment 8360707

View attachment 8360708
View attachment 8360709
That HTR reticle nailed it! Only things I dislike are the 36mm tube, weight, and probably the price tag as you said.
 
SPR/DMR type application as well as hunting where larger objectives may not be as much a factor. I prefer FFP for hunting, biggest issue is sucky reticles at low mag.

To be clear, LPVO design intent is 1x priority with ability to dial out far, but it lacks the IQ at top magnification (with 8x and higher) and parallax control (for most) that scopes that start above 1x (bottom mag) typically exhibit. While design intent of MPVO is almost the opposite, with high mag priority but ability to use at bottom mag when needed (usable reticle) larger objective (36-42mm) for better low light ability and overall better IQ (vs LPVO). What both LPVO and MPVO share in design is a lightweight and somewhat compact package to keep balance on lighter weight rifles. With many 6x optical formulas these days matching (sometimes exceeding) the 5x designs of the past two decades, 2-12 seems to be a sweet spot, if someone could make a lighter weight 2.5-15x42 that would be a great option as well as long as it has fairly wide FOV. 3x on the bottom end is too high for many especially those who use clipons.
I feel myself moving into that phase of life where I want better and better glass, with more FoV, more clarity, and more magnification for lightweight SPR/DMRs.

I had really exceptional eyesight most of my life, then they started going to crap at age 42. I could get away with shooting good 1-4x scopes at distance, and was used to M3As on the M24 in the Scout Platoons I was in, so 10x on the top end was plenty for me most of the time.

The Hensoldt 3-12x56 FF I used for FinnSniper in 2008 on a GAP-built AR-10 was an awesome scope, as were all the S&B PMIIs, but I’ve always been chasing as compact as possible with good glass, specific features, and durability.

I really like the form factor of the Leupold Mk.6 or Mk.V HD on an AR for the SPR role. Something with capped low-profile windage and low-profile locking elevation that doesn’t get in the way of offset MRDS is good for SPRs.

I’m wanting something even more compact but with a 14-18x top end, with wide FoV, great glass, tree reticle, large exit pupil, and gas gun durability.

I’ve been shooting with the Vortex 1-10x Razor Gen 3, Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x32, and GRSC 1-6x24 LOW mainly on my 12” and 18” Grendels.

Something like that new March 1.5-15x42 seems like it might be idea if it will hold up and if they have the right reticle options.

I’m not sure if anyone makes anything compact with great exit pupil. The March runs from 8.7mm to 2.7mm, so about 6mm in mid-range magnification.
 
I feel myself moving into that phase of life where I want better and better glass, with more FoV, more clarity, and more magnification for lightweight SPR/DMRs.

I had really exceptional eyesight most of my life, then they started going to crap at age 42. I could get away with shooting good 1-4x scopes at distance, and was used to M3As on the M24 in the Scout Platoons I was in, so 10x on the top end was plenty for me most of the time.

The Hensoldt 3-12x56 FF I used for FinnSniper in 2008 on a GAP-built AR-10 was an awesome scope, as were all the S&B PMIIs, but I’ve always been chasing as compact as possible with good glass, specific features, and durability.

I really like the form factor of the Leupold Mk.6 or Mk.V HD on an AR for the SPR role. Something with capped low-profile windage and low-profile locking elevation that doesn’t get in the way of offset MRDS is good for SPRs.

I’m wanting something even more compact but with a 14-18x top end, with wide FoV, great glass, tree reticle, large exit pupil, and gas gun durability.

I’ve been shooting with the Vortex 1-10x Razor Gen 3, Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x32, and GRSC 1-6x24 LOW mainly on my 12” and 18” Grendels.

Something like that new March 1.5-15x42 seems like it might be idea if it will hold up and if they have the right reticle options.

I’m not sure if anyone makes anything compact with great exit pupil. The March runs from 8.7mm to 2.7mm, so about 6mm in mid-range magnification.
When you say great exit pupil, at what magnification? Outside of scopes that limit exit pupil for various reasons you are looking at a simple calculation between front objective and magnification.

My eyes struggle similar to what you mention and while larger exit pupil does help some I’ve found that scopes that deliver in better micro-contract tend to perform better overall in daytime and especially when light gets low.

Unfortunately most of these scopes tend to be the higher priced scopes. Regardless, there is still a lack of FFP MPVO’s that truly fill the role well.

The March FFP 1.5-15x42 is the best example within the alpha class, but a 10x erector does have its limitations. With appropriate expectations this scope can do very well.