Tell us how you checked the "resolution" as you put it ... ? Give us a run down of your process, and how are you sure you are "removing parallax" if you are holding it ? (or resting it on a bag) You know what parallax is right, and it's not "focus" so maybe we can start there. Explain the parallax issue to us.
What was your test target ? Throw us a image of the resolution chart you used ... we all want to try it.
I have consistently used it without any issue, and believe me if it had an issue sending it back would be a piece of cake. In fact I would just say, "something it wrong Kahles, take this back and give me a Gen 2" however it works flawlessly.
Now I will be the first to say that the MOST important feature of a rifle scope is that it is mechanically sound, actually I have said this many times.
Your words, yet you never mounted it...So tracking wasn't an issue. I stand behind my assertion that Bay Windows Reviewers are clueless and don't know what they are looking at. That hand holding the scope, even being off centered a bit can and does cause a problem. Not my fault you can't adjust it correctly. Maybe you thought it had to be perfect inside the detent and not between, cause sometimes you do need to put it between numbers. The detent can be deceptive.
Hell, 2 days before the Oregon Sniper Match I was using a different scope, cause I knew we'd be shooting inside 100 yards, down to 25 yards so I wanted a scope that would focus down that far. However getting my dope to distance I noticed I was 1.3 Mils off my known Dope (scope was mounted on Monday, wheels up Thursday) so checking tracking this scope was off and removed. I replaced it with the Kahles and voila it was dead nuts. Dope worked out perfect. Checked Zero in OR, never had to touch a thing. So your "known quantity" wasn't so perfect, yet the sub par Kahles, rocked the cat box.
Maybe the S&B you compared it too resolved to 2.8 and this resolved 3.0, maybe it was more, maybe less, but who the fuck cares as long as it works 100% Was it resolution, was it contrast, was it something else, a cloud that covered the sun when you were looking out your backyard. Who knows, could have been anything. But I will say the scope suits me perfectly and to constantly come on the board and say:
"I tested the Kahles again my S&B and it was noticeably darker" blah blah blah... how is "resolution" darker, resolution controls brightness now ? If you said blurry, not sharp, then maybe you have a point -- Darker ? That sounds an awful like contrast, and coatings, not resolution. Same thing guys confuse with the NF, no color, no pop, so the resolution is off, when it has nothing to do with resolution.
And please don't patronize me with your BS about what I do for the sport.
But please, explain your resolution test to us. And PS I do have resolution charts from Edmund, I have several kinds in fact, to include color ones.
