The APR-2D MIL, I really like it. I wish they made a christmas treeless version. https://element-optics.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/RETICLE-SHEET-APR-2D-MRAD-THEOS.pdf
Best Sub $750 optic for target and varmint - 2025
- Thread starter Freedom Thirty-Five
- Start date
I think you'd be a fool to overlook Meopta. The optika 6 in 5-30×56mm is a spectacular scope. I've used mine to shoot prs matches, tracks perfectly, and the glass is spectacular. Nothing in that price range is going to be as good as the meopta (it's my opinion, and it's correct). I think they are about $1,100 new, but I've seen them used for $750-$800.
Ill def give it a hard look. Which reticle do you like? I assume you like the eye box and FOV?
Heres one for $999 (like new demo)
Quality per $ my vote is the latter Gen ETR or MT, that is if you haven't ruled out a used Cronus G2.
I have the Ares BTR G3 2.5-15x50 and I'm pretty well convinced it's as well built as my Cronus G2's and superior to these scopes in this price range category or even more expensive - the Bushnell's, Vortex's, Vector, and Meopta I own now or have owned in the past.
I kept trying various scope brands out and so far I wasn't as happy with these and it was always that there were notable downsides. Basically I found Athlon had the best balance of positive attributes and by far had the best turret feel, most distinct, the least lash, and lines on the turret lining up well with the line on the housing.
If you wanted to save more money I've found the Helos G2 6-24x56 a really good scope as far as bang for the buck but it doesn't have the IQ that the higher end Athlons have. It's been good enough that I kept it on my expensive 22rf.
I have the Ares BTR G3 2.5-15x50 and I'm pretty well convinced it's as well built as my Cronus G2's and superior to these scopes in this price range category or even more expensive - the Bushnell's, Vortex's, Vector, and Meopta I own now or have owned in the past.
I kept trying various scope brands out and so far I wasn't as happy with these and it was always that there were notable downsides. Basically I found Athlon had the best balance of positive attributes and by far had the best turret feel, most distinct, the least lash, and lines on the turret lining up well with the line on the housing.
If you wanted to save more money I've found the Helos G2 6-24x56 a really good scope as far as bang for the buck but it doesn't have the IQ that the higher end Athlons have. It's been good enough that I kept it on my expensive 22rf.
Yeah, the eyebox and fov are surprisingly good for what they cost. I'm not sure on the reticle, they offer a hundred of them. Mine is similar to a leupold varmint reticle, but with a fine illuminated center dot. The dot is very crisp and bright. The turrets are good, but I don't like them as much as you'll find on $2k+ tactical scopes, but they work just fine. There really isn't much else about it that I don't like.
Thanks for the input Steve. One thing I just learned recently was the TAC Gen2 5-30 has the UHD glass (same as ares ETR). The original marketing material showed it having HD glass like the rest of the Tac Gen2 line. This puts it at the top of my list along with a few others
Natchez
www.natchezss.com
Last edited:
For me, there are 4 parts to consider when choosing a scope and what you wind up with will be a compromise. Only you can determine where you're willing to give sacrifice to get more in some other area.
I value build quality, image quality, turrets and reticle. There's been lots of talk about glass quality, but very little of what it's like to field all of the scopes mentioned.
Since you're shooting at small things, far away, you'll likely be dialing a lot. It should be a consideration.
Although it seems that there isn't a whole lot of love for Arken around here, I have one on top of my Lilja barreled CZ 457 in .22lr. I shoot that out to 300 a lot, dialing all the way. The glass is decent and the turrets on mine have been spot on.
I value build quality, image quality, turrets and reticle. There's been lots of talk about glass quality, but very little of what it's like to field all of the scopes mentioned.
Since you're shooting at small things, far away, you'll likely be dialing a lot. It should be a consideration.
Although it seems that there isn't a whole lot of love for Arken around here, I have one on top of my Lilja barreled CZ 457 in .22lr. I shoot that out to 300 a lot, dialing all the way. The glass is decent and the turrets on mine have been spot on.
So I picked up a Midas tac gen 2 and was able to compare it to the arken. I think the midas tac is the best of the three I originally posted about and was able to get it for $511 after taxes and shipping... I just wish the windage was exposed but it's not a big deal as I always hold for wind... Definitely some compromises but for $511 I think it's better than arken and strike eagle. The arken reticle is nice but the illumination is bad it's really fuzzy unlike the Midas tac, very sharp. The epl4 is a great value optic but not sure about the EP5 maybe at one point it was a good deal. This will keep me distracted for a good bit eventually I'll acquire some nicer glass. The meopta sounds promising.
Main thing is the illumination and magnification. I would also argue the Midas maybe had slightly better glass and bigger eyebox. SE has it beat in locking turrets, the windage is capped on the Midas tac which is fine as I don't touch windage but it is nice to be able to make quick adjustments if wind is persistent... Can't have everything...
Last edited:
I got the 5-30 UHD FFP IR MIL. It's a good value for sure. As discussed earlier in this thread the differences between SE, Midas Tac and the EP5 are marginal as I expected. I would not recommend the arken mainly due to how it handles stray light never seen anything like it. Midas tac and SE are more in the same league. However I was able to get the Midas tac for about $200 cheaper due to it being on sale. DNT is another great value if you're looking for a 7-35... I will probably buy another DNT soon enough that is my favorite optic right now excellent glass and awesome features. I hear they are coming out with a 5-25, 3-18 and 2-12... Should be exciting if they can replicate features of the one.
The 5-30 UHD is at the top of my list. You are probably the only person on the internet that has used one that I’ve come across. Glad to hear you like it. Im holding out bc Im really curious about the 5-25 and 3-18 DNT’s that you mentioned.
I got the Midas tac for $511 including tax and shipping during a flash sale on expert voice.
I think that is a good call. I bought the Midas tac due to the crazy sale $500. I'll be buying a DNT when they release to put on a rimfire PRS rifle to replace my venom. I am thinking it should be soon that the 5-25 is released but we shall see. I'm hoping prices stabilize or go down... DNT 7-35 went from 599 to 769. It's still within reason but dang thats a good markup (28%)... I'm really hoping the 5-25 comes in below 599. I'll be taking the Midas tac and my DNT to the range on Friday to shoot them side by side to really start to pick them apart. Big thing I noticed on my DNT vs Venom the image at 25x on the DNT is much bigger you can see so much more detail. It's like having a 32" TV vs a 48" tv and the image is sharper as well. We'll see how it stacks up to the Midas Tac.
Everything checks out with the Midas Tac I think it is a great varmint/target scope mainly due to how much lighter it is than similar scopes and the 5-30 range is great. I definitely prefer it over the EP5. The DNT is overall better for target, the Midas tac has it beat on weight and cost with the expert voice sale. Only thing I could ask for is having an exposed windage. I almost never touch my wind but for a target gun it's nice. This will primarily be for varmint so I'm not too concerned but I'm more likely going to replace my venom with the DNT 5-25 for my rimfire PRS due to the DNT having really nice turrets not to mention weight is welcome on my target gun.
Have you heard any chatter about when the 5-25, 3-18, etc DNT’s are coming out?
Cc: @gr8fuldoug in case he might know.
I agree. Accurate and repeatable turret adjustments, accurate reticle subtensions (if you're a holder) and durable overall design (what good is ANY of the attributes you pay for if it all goes to shit with one jar or drop?) is the most important.
A lot of people forget a TON of successful target competitions and warfare was done with a hundred year old glass. Those old school dudes misses were from Im guessing bad wind readings, complete crap ammo, shitty friction adjustments causing inconsistent dialing, or the shitty mounts they used to use more so than bad image quality.
Of course there's always some hard engagements you're going to miss or not even see with anything less than alpha glass when competing on the fringe of any scopes capabilities like really small, dark colored targets/plates at a long range and at limited visibility or high mirage conditions, but those conditions are few and far between if ever for most shooters here.
Super nice glass is a nice luxury, but not necessary imo.
Similar threads
