Looks interesting. Video is a little...
Last edited:
- Thread starter gamewarden
- Start date
The fact that anyone still buys Kahles scopes blows my mind.
They mount kind of odd...turret housing is in a weird location, only way they could get the FOV and mag range. Other than that, i love it@Euro.Connor I think I need a DLR CCW/RSW Mil reticle.
Connor
40% wider field of view… compared to their 5-25 LOL.
I bet the eyebox on that thing sucks ass.
I bet the eyebox on that thing sucks ass.
Yeah, I definitely need a DLR CCW/RSW SKMR4 version. Would be an amazing hunting scope for crossover work. DM me with a price…
This is probably the most interesting thing to be announced around Shot show so far. I'm curious to see how the eyebox and depth of field perform. I'm also hopeful that their "new generation optical design" means optical IQ that is now competitive at their retail price point. If the performance is there, a DLR is in my future.
DLR has SKMR+ and SKMR4+.
Non-DLR has AMR, MSR2, SKMR+ and SKMR4+.
Haven't seen a single legitimate review, so who knows if there are any issues or not. With a release date of March 2024, we probably won't hear an independent review until at least late spring/early summer. I don't have my hopes too high for an 8x mag scope to dethrone my Tangent/ZCOs, but who knows. I mean, Kahles is calling it THE Game Changer.
All that needs to be listed is the degree of the eyepiece, apparent fov, most wide fov’s like tt,zco, sb, zeiss v8’s, nx8’s, burrris xtr3’s, swaro 8’s/6’s are between 23 and 24 degrees with most being 24. I’m to the point now I loath a small pvp pipe straw fov and be damed if I pay a premium for a sub 23 degree scope reguardless of how good the glass is.
If this scope has a 25-28 degree eyepiece that’s huge, especially for hunting. Unless they botched the edges to get it I’ll definitely be trying one. I’m sure swaro will have same thing in their hunting line which is what I’ll probably end up going for.
If this scope has a 25-28 degree eyepiece that’s huge, especially for hunting. Unless they botched the edges to get it I’ll definitely be trying one. I’m sure swaro will have same thing in their hunting line which is what I’ll probably end up going for.
In Area419's video, they mentioned they weren't overly impressed with the eye box. And that's a semi-hype video.
So, take that how you will.
Bummer, but not surprising. Can you link that video?
All the other issues? 
You mean those imaginary hear-say ones from haters bitching about 2nd to 100th-hand knowledge that they read online from other people bitching? 
I’m not saying they don’t, or haven’t had issues in some previous generations, or that things don’t fail, because they do…Every product does. But I’ve sure heard a whole bunch of bitching about Kahles, and yet to see equal the evidence from those same people, of their own personal Kahles scopes that failed…
You mean those imaginary hear-say ones from haters bitching about 2nd to 100th-hand knowledge that they read online from other people bitching? I’m not saying they don’t, or haven’t had issues in some previous generations, or that things don’t fail, because they do…Every product does. But I’ve sure heard a whole bunch of bitching about Kahles, and yet to see equal the evidence from those same people, of their own personal Kahles scopes that failed…
28.7 degrees average apparent field of view from 3.5x-28x is impressive, but I wonder if there will be any weird image distortion or edge effects or eye relief issues to go along with that extra wide FOV.
Also, hopefully they've stepped up their glass quality in general. I tried an early 624i many years ago and was very, very disappointed in the glass quality for the price paid. Haven't bothered to try anything else from Kahles since then.
Also, hopefully they've stepped up their glass quality in general. I tried an early 624i many years ago and was very, very disappointed in the glass quality for the price paid. Haven't bothered to try anything else from Kahles since then.
That's equivalent to 150' @ 1x. An optic is usually called "wide angle" at 120" @ 1x, so that is impressive.
I'm willing to give it a shot. The FoV on the K525i wasn't great, but I liked the optic quite a bit.....until ZCO came out and did most things better.
This looks not too bad. The eye box will the the deciding factor. I'm so used to the "big picture" of the ZCO, it'll be hard to use anything significantly worse.
This looks not too bad. The eye box will the the deciding factor. I'm so used to the "big picture" of the ZCO, it'll be hard to use anything significantly worse.
That's my same experience moving from the K525i to ZCOs. The "Big Picture", better optical IQ, and slightly better reticles made it a no-brainer (unless you budget shop in the PX). I do miss the left side windage tho.I'm still hopeful that the 3-28 is badass and that the eyebox is good, depth of field is good, and optical IQ is improved.
If the weight is decent it would make for an excellent hunting optic assuming the glass is up to par. Obviously not the intended market. We’ll see though
The newest gen K624i is noticeably better than the old ones. I was told by a rep they were updated to be identical in every way to the K525i when it was developed, except the magnification, obviously. My 3 current gen K-series are nice. FOV could be a bit better, but it appears they are now fixing this on newer models.
I'm still hopeful that the 3-28 is badass and that the eyebox is good, depth of field is good, and optical IQ is improved.
I'm the opposite. I do all dialing with my right hand. So, I'd love to have right side windage and right side parallax.
I do almost nothing with support hand except supporting the rifle. Unless it's moving between positions, then I'll dial with my left hand.
36.7oz is the listed weight.
Was driving when i posted. Thats kinda a bummer. Sub 30oz would made it perfect assuming everything else checks out.
I preferred to see the location of the windage. I'd dial with my right hand as well, but just give it the ol' reach around, haha.
is that the downside when it comes with large FOV?
I’m sure they did something fucky to get it assuming they’re talking about the whole range and not just comparing the 5-25 on 5x and the new one on 3x
The 8x erector is what’s most likely for it to have a shitty eyebox and DOF though unless Kahles has really innovated and figured out how to eliminate those issues which I highly doubt.
I've personally owned 3 and had 1 loner. Two of my K624s had to go back to Kahles because they couldn't hold zero. Both confirmed and repaired by Kahles. The loner had the same issue and was returned. The k525 I had for a short time had worse image quality and CA than my k624s and my friends k624. They claimed the k525 had upgraded glass at that time too.All the other issues?
I’m not saying they don’t, or haven’t had issues in some previous generations, or that things don’t fail, because they do…Every product does. But I’ve sure heard a whole bunch of bitching about Kahles, and yet to see equal the evidence from those same people, of their own personal Kahles scopes that failed…
At the time I was shooting 5-7 2 day prs matches a year and heard about nothing but issues from the majority of non-sponsored shooters using them. I hope they got their shit together but they'll never see another cent of my money. Nightforces have their quirks but of 7 ATACRS I've owned I've had to send 0 back.
Ironically, my Kahles scopes were perfect out of the box, and have not given me a single issue. While my ATACR F1 5-25x56 kind of sucks. The glass is extremely subpar for the price tag, and the parallax is WAY off. It should be a $2,000 scope, not $3,100. I’ve thought about sending it back for subpar glass and the parallax being way off, but after reading other CS experiences, I think I’ll just live with it, and not waste my time and money. Their CS seems to have a pretty shit reputation with “it’s within spec” being their motto.
Granted, what I paid for it brand new, it’s worth that much, but I wouldn’t pay remotely near list price.
Spec wise, this seems like a great scope. I do love my Khales, they've been a great scope for me and sit on almost all of my rifles.
Hopefully the eye box isn't too unforgiving.
Hopefully the eye box isn't too unforgiving.
Cool, that dude is probably also shooting more in a week on one of his rifles for a train up and 2 days PRS match then you shoot in a year.
Kahles scopes suck ass. It’s just the nicest thing you’ve owned so of course when you’re shooting low volume and a year ago were talking about how great your Arkens are Kahles is going to seem like a great optic. Report back when your training wheels come off and you have beyond the worst example of ATACR’s from the line to compare them to.
Well, I believe your experience with your 1 NF. The parallax numbers being off is a quirk but I don't know anyone that's an experienced shooter that doesn't adjust parallax by looking through the scope. As far as the glass quality goes I've never owned a 5-25 but they are rumored to have the worst IQ of the ATACR line and the couple I've looked through I believe it. All that said I'd much rather have those 2 issues than a scope that won't hold zero and has poor IQ.
And you don’t even own any guns, scopes, or do any shooting… I mean, you never post any pictures, so I’m just assuming you’re a random nobody that runs his mouth and just loves to bitch about things he perceives he doesn’t like, since he obviously doesn’t own any firearms. Until you post up proof of what you own, I’ll take advice and opinions from people who do actually own guns and shoot.
Also, you don’t know me, and it’s not the nicest scopes I’ve ever owned. Just the most expensive ones you know about. You only know what I want you to know…Remember that.
I adjust parallax looking through the scope, how else would I know the numbers are off?
LOL I’ve posted a shitload of pictures here off some of my rifles and also of me at matches with them.
I know, just pointing out they are way off. For a $3,100 scope, you’d think they could get it closer.Then you don't need the numbers.....
TT, ZCO, and Kahles don’t have that problem…
I just think for the money, they should be a bit more refined. It tracks great, and I love the turrets, I just think they could do better for the price. Also, how did that 1 model end up with shit glass? All the other ATACR models have great glass.
I can agree with this other than the fact it doesn't affect my shooting in any negative way so I don't see it as a problem.I know, just pointing out they are way off. For a $3,100 scope, you’d think they could get it closer.
TT, ZCO, and Kahles don’t have that problem…
That's a good question... The 7-35 is obvious since it's a Japanese scope and definitely has different glass. My 4-16s have excellent glass and they are "US made" so I don't know why they don't have the IQ issues of the 5-25. I'm not claiming NF is perfect by any means, but they check every box I need for shooting especially in reliability. The only complaints I hear about NF at matches and by friends that use them is just personal preference stuff that they don't like about them.
I'm just stating my and many others experiences with Kahles in comparison to my experience with NF.
Damn, that would be nice to have on-hand.I really like my 525 DLR that I’ve been using over 2 years now. Can’t wait to give this one a try. Now to put my 55% off cert to good use.
So I looked at this scope today, not even knowing that it had come out and I picked it up and looked through it and the field of view smacks you in the face like a bag of hammers. It was a real "what the F am I looking through" moment. The only thing way I can describe it is it was like looking through a high magnification k16i. Obviously I can't determine optical quality inside of a building but I just walked away wondering what type of gun I need to buy in order to own this scope.
No, it's unbelievable.
As in I'll wait to see what reviews say before believing it.
That FOV is 9.5% bigger than the March 26° WA eyepiece, which is already considerably bigger than 99% of scopes on the market.
I always loved my kahles. I miss the parallax adjustment location most but their center dot also is a better size for me. The zco is just a tiny bit too small. The kahles 525i is by far my favorite scope to use, the glass just wanst what zco is and zco does everything well. The parallax wheel on the kahles is just way better especially for a lefty shooter. That's some impressive specs but have to wait and see what the glass is like. There's just not anything to complain about with zco.
I was under the illusion this was done by reducing magnification to below 1x. But looks like it's the same eye piece design for both these scopes.Their new 1-8 is 150 ft @ 100 yds on 1x. Looking at the bodies it looks like Kahles has figured out a superwide FOV scope.
Was there any wonky edge distortion or did it look pretty clean?
Someone please tell me they also have a DLR option for the K318i, honestly I’d be more interested in that. 37 ounces puts it out of the crossover running for me. Clearly Swaro finally took advantage of their patent with this design. Should be nice for clipon users wanting a daytime long range option. Specs almost seem too good to be true. Looking forward to hearing @koshkin thoughts on this.
Honestly, I really don't understand why they chose this magnification? How often are the moments when you shoot below 10x in dynamic shooting? Than 8x zoom ratio starting from 3.5, I would always prefer 7× Z.R. or even 6x starting from the minimum magnification of 5. I think that their main objective was to get as large a field of view as possible. It probably also has to do with the optimization of the optics, who knows... but since you already have the DLR525 why cannibalize it with a 3-28? Unless you intend to stop producing 525...
I would really like to know what was the reason for reducing the lens to 50 mm? Just to reduce weight?
Not being a specialist in optics, I can't blame them. But I'm just wondering as someone who wanted to buy an ATACR or a DLR and who was hoping for a real Game Changer from Kahles. But what I see doesn't really appeal to me, so I have to spend my money on something else. If I still had to buy a 36mm mount, then I would go for the ZCO.
We still have to see the price...
I would really like to know what was the reason for reducing the lens to 50 mm? Just to reduce weight?Not being a specialist in optics, I can't blame them. But I'm just wondering as someone who wanted to buy an ATACR or a DLR and who was hoping for a real Game Changer from Kahles. But what I see doesn't really appeal to me, so I have to spend my money on something else. If I still had to buy a 36mm mount, then I would go for the ZCO.
We still have to see the price...
Last edited:
Similar threads
