• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Rifle Scopes Tangent Theta 3-15 with Gen 3XR - how is it?

Glassaholic

Optical theorist and conjecturer
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Nov 30, 2012
    8,128
    9,374
    Panhandle, FL
    So now that the TT315P and TT315M scopes are getting the Gen 3XR reticle and showing up in stock, just curious if anyone has received one and what you think of the reticle. I've had the mildot and the Gen 2XR, mildot was best for low magnification use and Gen 2XR was better for higher mags but difficult to see at lower mags without illumination. Just curious if TT executed the Gen 3XR better and the reticle is more usable at lower mags vs. the Gen 2XR. Does the Christmas tree in the Gen 3XR at 15x seem to obscure a lot of the image or does it tend to disappear in the background. Any through the scope images would be great (not for image quality, but to see how the reticle looks) with some background. Thanks in advance.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Secant
    I have a 5-25 with the Gen 3 XR reticle. I can’t comment on the difference between it and the 2XR as I don’t own a 2XR. I can try and take a pic with my cell phone.
     
    Were looking for the 3-15 with the Gen3xr rericle experiences. I have the 5-25 with Gen3xr and love it. I appreciate your offer for pics regardless. The gen2xr seemed small in the 3-15 but wondering if the gen3xr is any better in that 3-15 scope.
     
    I have little to offer, but I think the outer stadia are the same thickness as the Gen2 (0.3mil?) so probably much-a-muchness at 3 power.
     
    If you think you're going to be able to use that 3XR under 10x, you might get a reality check once you get it... I'm a 2XR whore, and that reticle is laughable to see under 10x in my 3-15. Let alone the 5-25's
    If you struggle using holdovers cause the reticle might be too thin to differentiate which hash mark you're holding from, stick with the Gen2 Mil Dot.
    IMO, If you got old eyes (or young), don't bother with the 3XR in a 3-15x. Especially if you think you want to use it under 10x.
    But, at the end of the day, it's your money, do as you please....
     
    If you think you're going to be able to use that 3XR under 10x, you might get a reality check once you get it... I'm a 2XR whore, and that reticle is laughable to see under 10x in my 3-15. Let alone the 5-25's
    If you struggle using holdovers cause the reticle might be too thin to differentiate which hash mark you're holding from, stick with the Gen2 Mil Dot.
    IMO, If you got old eyes (or young), don't bother with the 3XR in a 3-15x. Especially if you think you want to use it under 10x.
    But, at the end of the day, it's your money, do as you please....
    Really? My Gen 2XR was usable under 10x, I'd say I could begin to pickup around 5x, but that was when I was younger and my eyes were better.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: ZG47A
    @wjm308 I thought my eyes were degrading, but I still got a 20/15 lol.

    I'm competing more with my gas guns, so using the 3-15x a lot. Don't ever see myself going below 10x. Heck, no even below 12x, so I can still know where I'm holding, if I'm holding, under time constraints.

    If you're one of those that plans to use a clip-on, I'd go Gen2 MilDot route.

    The illumination makes it that much harder use precise holdovers on low power.

    Again, I'm a 2XR groupie, been using it for 6yrs now... under 10x is a no-go for me.
     
    Really? My Gen 2XR was usable under 10x, I'd say I could begin to pickup around 5x, but that was when I was younger and my eyes were better.

    Are you saying that the whole reticle couldn't be seen under 5x or just can't make out the finer details?

    I'm growing more and more puzzled at my manufacturers put such fine reticles in lower power scopes, if you need to be on 8x plus before you will actually use the reticle for it's intended purpose, why bother making the scope go down to 3x?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: ZG47A
    Are you saying that the whole reticle couldn't be seen under 5x or just can't make out the finer details?

    I'm growing more and more puzzled at my manufacturers put such fine reticles in lower power scopes, if you need to be on 8x plus before you will actually use the reticle for it's intended purpose, why bother making the scope go down to 3x?
    In general this is my issue with thin reticles, under certain conditions they can be seen, but get a very contrasty background and they can get lost, in these situations illumination can help but it has to be bright enough to help. This is also why mfr’s offer multiple reticles that cater to different needs. I’m an advocate of the circle of death, that is a quadrant that looks like a circle similar to what Bushnell did with the G2H reticle; however, this was done on a 4x scope and I truly think the idea is even better served on the 5-8x magnification FFP scopes. Something like the March 3-24 could really benefit from this, but also on something like the TT 3-15. If illumination is done right and done bright enough then it serves a similar purpose.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Archerfish21
    Putting this back on the radar in case someone has been able to get some time on the reticle.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Gilly
    Mounted the 3-15m on a rifle today. Barrel isn't here yet (hoping next week) and so far I'm impressed with this thing. Turrets are way above my expectations. Glass is TT quality. The reticle I think will be still be useful from my first 30 minutes with it. 5x you can still make out pretty well and I don't see myself having an issue making a inside 100 yd shot on 5x. It's still plenty distinguished between the background that you can, and will make hits. 8x is plenty useful and no complaints really. Between light and dark backgrounds I still can very clearly and visibly make out each dot and hash mark throughout the reticle.

    If someone was trying to use the tree on 3x you would have some issues. But finding the center is pretty easy. You may not pick up the center dot but your eyes can see the horizontal and vertical lines well enough find center.

    I'll have to test the illumination this evening and see how it does. During the day right now even on 11 setting its not visible. But I wasn't expecting it to be.

    I'll get different reticle pics up this afternoon.

    20210215_082952.jpg
     
    Last edited:
    Mounted the 3-15m on a rifle today. Barrel isn't here yet (hoping next week) and so far I'm impressed with this thing. Turrets are way above my expectations. Glass is TT quality. The rericle I think will be still be useful from my first 30 minutes with it. 5x you can still make out pretty well and I don't see myself having an issue making a inside 100 yd shot on 5x. It's still plenty distinguished between the background that you can, and will make hits. 8x is plenty useful and no complaints really. Between. Light and dark backgrounds I still can very clearly and visibly make out each dot and hash mark throughout the reticle.

    If someone was trying to use the tree on 3x you would have some issues. But finding the center is pretty easy. You may not pick up the center dot but your eyes can see the horizontal and vertical lines well enough find center.

    I'll have to test the illumination this evening and see how it does. During the day right now even on 11 setting its not visible. But I wasn't expecting it to be.

    I'll get different reticle pics up this afternoon.

    View attachment 7557483


    Awesome setup! We have one more left if anyone wants it :)
     
    If someone was trying to use the tree on 3x you would have some issues. But finding the center is pretty easy. You may not pick up the center dot but your eyes can see the horizontal and vertical lines well enough find center.
    That's what I was hoping for with the Gen 3XR in the 3-15, wasn't expecting to use the tree at 3x or even 5x, but hoping center could be identified, I look forward to seeing this one.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: CSTactical
    I'm trying to get some pics but they look so bad I'm not going to post them. When I meet up with @Glassaholic we can get some better ones with nicer camera equipment on tripods. This phone thing just doesn't work.
     
    I’m very used to the 2xr reticle and using on low power. The 3xr measures out the same it appears, and I know there wouldn’t be any issue finding center since the duplex does that so well. My biggest question is how it looks in the 5-8x range with being able to pickup the full mil dots, along with are they just as pronounced as the .8 tall hash mark? Or does that tall hash somewhat overshadow the dot as far as drawing your eye in? The way I’ve come to use the 2xr is kind of a reverse p4... I pick up on the .5 hash and use those as a reference as opposed to the full mil dots since they’re hardly there. Obviously get above 8x and it’s a non-issue.
     
    I'm trying to get some pics but they look so bad I'm not going to post them. When I meet up with @Glassaholic we can get some better ones with nicer camera equipment on tripods. This phone thing just doesn't work.

    IME, these newer multi lens phones seem more difficult to focus through a scope unless you have an app to have manual control over the camera.
     
    Hard to get the reticle in focus and still a clear picture. But this will have to do for now. In person, the reticle is nice and crisp even though the photos may show otherwise.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Glassaholic
    I see horrific edge distortion, worst CA ever, terrible contrast and suspect resolution with these images, clearly the Tangent Theta is inferior to the Quigley Ford. :ROFLMAO: JUST KIDDING everyone. Too many times do I see comments from posters on internet images through a scope criticizing, CA, clarity, etc. I try to always have a disclaimer on my images indicating this is for reticle purpose only, do not attempt to judge quality of the scope by the image because it simply cannot be done, you are dealing with a completely separate optical system that has it's own inherent issues taking an image through another optical system it was not designed to pair with.

    With that said, thank you MNTC for taking these shots to give us an idea of how the reticle looks. To be honest, this looks to be better than the Gen 2XR at low magnification and cannot wait to see it myself.
     
    Thanks MNTC! That actually looks better than I had imagined. Open center-like reminiscent of the old-style Leupold TMR, and while the .8 hashmarks are the most pronounced, the overhead whole-mil numbering tells me where everything is at. I had forgotten about the numbering added to this reticle. From the looks of everything in just the picture, it all draws my eye in well.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: MOUNTIC
    Anyone go from loving it to hating it or the other way around?
    I got to see @MNTC TT315M but only briefly as he sold it before we could mount and shoot it :( I can't say how I liked the reticle at 3x because I never tested that, but I did get to play with the turrets some and as much as I love the 5-25 turrets, I honestly think the feel of the 315M turrets were even better if you can imagine that, probably because of the spacing (6 mil per rev). I never used to be a turret purest, but it is fun to spin TT turrets :p
     
    Well that isn’t very convincing for like-ability. I think I want it but don’t wanna regret it. It’s not priced to regret... haha
     
    308 (bolt action) sub 20” barrel shooting at steel. Typical ranges of 600 give or take. Shot my first match with that gun. I sucked ass of course but would like to do the occasional steel match with it. Could see where the reticle may be of use. Many of times I’ve thought I’d like a 315P. Gun currently wears a 4-16 Atacr with a Mil-R reticle. Hope that wasn’t too much info...
     
    308 (bolt action) sub 20” barrel shooting at steel. Typical ranges of 600 give or take. Shot my first match with that gun. I sucked ass of course but would like to do the occasional steel match with it. Could see where the reticle may be of use. Many of times I’ve thought I’d like a 315P. Gun currently wears a 4-16 Atacr with a Mil-R reticle. Hope that wasn’t too much info...

    All good. More the better. A lot of comp guys typically shoot at 12-18x. So having 15x on max isn't hindering much. It being a sub 20", shooting at 600 or in, makes it a good choice. Only issue you might run into is, the reticle can be a tad thin, especially if you have to move around a lot during a stage and you're using holdovers.

    If it was 20x on top end, I'd have more
     
    I had spent most of my time in the x10 range during this particular one and liked the benefit of the extra FOV with multiple large targets. Even in a more recreational environment I’m hardly ever at max power. Only when it makes sense. I’m sure the Tangent at 15 is miles ahead of the Atacr at 16.

    Do you find yourself wishing for thiccer reticle more often than not with this particular scope? I guess personally if I only thought that sometimes I could deal with it. Most of my shooting happens in the desert or in well maintained fields.

    For a 4-20 I’d have jumped off the fence haha.
     
    Yes and no. I like the thin reticle, but it sucks at lower power. Especially holding over. You'll tend to take more time to make sure you're at the correct subtension
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Squibbler
    Well if beats holding in space with the Mil R... I don’t know if I want to use the term “better” but is there another option in the mag range I should take a look at? Not to thread derail.
     
    Well if beats holding in space with the Mil R... I don’t know if I want to use the term “better” but is there another option in the mag range I should take a look at? Not to thread derail.

    ZCO420. MPCT 2 reticle thickness is 0.035mil. TT315M with Gen 3XR is 0.025mil, and the 4-16 ATACR with Mil-R is 0.043 mils. That’s from memory, so I could be off a little. The MPCT2 is easy to pickup on 4x. I can use full tree and reticle at about 6x(ish).

    I’ve mentally wrestled over the TT315M with Gen3XR. For me, I think it’s a poor fit since it’s pretty thin for that mag range. I’d love to see 0.043(ish) mil thick Gen3XR reticle in the TT315M. Can’t please everyone 😆
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Squibbler
    Unless something ground breaking comes along in the next several months or so, that’s what the next rifle is getting. Here I was dicking with the NF zero stop clutch and a friend of a friend is zeroing his TT 5-25 before I had the 4th screw loosened. Pretty jealous. Image phenomenal. I wanted to shoot the Kraft targets with that instead
     
    Unless something ground breaking comes along in the next several months or so, that’s what the next rifle is getting.
    Depends on what your definition of "ground breaking" is ;) Realistically, what could give the Tangent TT315M a run for it's money, I'd say maybe a new lightweight ZCO? Minox adopting the Blaser 4-20x58 design and putting their ZP5 turrets and reticles on it. Maybe a new Vortex AMG 4-20x50... but I don't see any of these becoming reality anytime soon. For alpha glass and light weight (under 30oz) in FFP you're looking at the TT315M. March has lighter weight scopes with some excellent glass, but in FFP the 4.5-28x52 is the only one IMO that has the features we want - generous eyebox, DOF and parallax. Would love to see a Gen II 3-24 series...
     
    Depends on what your definition of "ground breaking" is ;) Realistically, what could give the Tangent TT315M a run for it's money, I'd say maybe a new lightweight ZCO? Minox adopting the Blaser 4-20x58 design and putting their ZP5 turrets and reticles on it. Maybe a new Vortex AMG 4-20x50... but I don't see any of these becoming reality anytime soon. For alpha glass and light weight (under 30oz) in FFP you're looking at the TT315M. March has lighter weight scopes with some excellent glass, but in FFP the 4.5-28x52 is the only one IMO that has the features we want - generous eyebox, DOF and parallax. Would love to see a Gen II 3-24 series...
    Not sure if I have one really. The 4-20 Atacr is probably close though. I’m with you though on this 4-20 stuff. Even if I wouldn’t buy all of them I think the market would welcome more options in that range.
     
    Not sure if I have one really. The 4-20 Atacr is probably close though. I’m with you though on this 4-20 stuff. Even if I wouldn’t buy all of them I think the market would welcome more options in that range.
    When I saw the ATACR 4-20 first announced there was a side of me that was really hoping this would be a "lighter" version, but knowing the ATACR line the practical side of me knew it wouldn't be lighter... but heavier than the ZCO, wasn't expecting that... narrow bottom end FOV, wasn't expecting that. Why more manufacturers haven't pursued lighter weight FFP options has me scratching my head a bit.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Moose
    When I saw the ATACR 4-20 first announced there was a side of me that was really hoping this would be a "lighter" version, but knowing the ATACR line the practical side of me knew it wouldn't be lighter... but heavier than the ZCO, wasn't expecting that... narrow bottom end FOV, wasn't expecting that. Why more manufacturers haven't pursued lighter weight FFP options has me scratching my head a bit.

    Most marketing people who work for scope manufacturers are not adventurous by nature and all too many are not really shooters. There are a few out there who carefully look for niches that they can exploit, but most simply jump on the bandwagon that already exists.

    There are some exceptions, of course, and talking to a few companies, I think they realize how saturated the market is and we will see some new things.

    Right now, the market is so active that they are selling everything they make, but as the demand goes down a little (and it inevitably will, at some point) we will see some stuff come out that is targeted at smaller niches that are not currently served well.

    Lightweight FFP scopes is one of those niches that is really not addressed by most companies. Interestingly, Tangent stumbled on it a while back as legacy of Premier Light Hunter and made the TT315M model. I have one of the first ones they made and, on balance, it is still my favourite overall scope of all I own. Now, it is not the best bang for the buck and I would probably appreciate a slightly thicker reticle (mine is the Gen2 XR), but the complaints are minor. Optomechanical quality of this scope is astounding and it has weathered some abuse from me over the years without any issues.

    However, Tangent sells far more 5-25x56 scopes that the rest of their models combined. That is just where their customer base is. Their scopes are expensive and long range guys are the ones who are willing to spend that kind of money. They want a little more magnification than 3-15x50. I am probably the exception to the rule in that sense, since I mostly shoot in the 10x to 15x range. I do own a 5-25x56 with Gen3 XR and I think it is spectacular. It is big and heavy, so it definitely goes after a different market and Gen3 XR is really nicely sized for this mag range.

    March is one of the few manufacturers that has always looked into making scopes lighter, which is how we got the original 3-24x design (I still own the 3-24x52 and like it a lot). On balance, it might be the best of the crossover scope. I think the new 4.5-28x52 is a better scope overall, but it is a few ounces heavier, so depending on the application I might go with one or the other. I think March is well positioned to do more with lightweight scopes, but while their scopes are not quite as expensive as Tangent, they are still up there.

    I really like Nightforce's 4-16x42 ATACR, but it is on the heavy side for the size. The new 4-20x50 is also heavy and tunnels on the low end, so chances are it is aimed at NRL22 or other forms of competition, where weight is not a detriment and going below 7x or so is not happening any time soon. And these are also not cheap. NX8 looks compelling on paper, but I do not like the execution.

    What I really want to see is something in the $1500 or under range that addresses this niche and I think we will see some activity there.

    Leupold's Mark 5 3.6-18x44 is closer to the right price range, but illuminated models are still expensive (over $2k). Also, for some odd reason they refuse to put a good quality illuminated tree reticle into this scope. They even designed a nice tree reticle (PR2), but they are not putting it into the 3.6-18x44 and not illuminating it in the other models. I do not know why. However, if you do not need a tree reticle, the 3.6-18x44 Mark 5 with illuminated PR1-MIL (nice simple mil-scale reticle) is really compelling.

    Will we see something in the $1000-$1500 range? I think so. This price range is increasingly competitive and is within the price range of a lot of people. I am really curious to see what will pop up within the next few months.

    ILya