Another dmr optic thread

NX8 2.5-20x50 MIL-XT all day long.

Why do you need adjustable parallax oit of interest?

PST Gen2 2-10, Mark 5hd 2-10 it that bill. There is also the 2.5-15 Maven, Tract and Trijicon.
Supposedly the Mil based Steiner H6xi will be out soon also.

Blackhound Emerge has no zero stop and capped turrets, narrow ish FOV and is heavy. Not sure I'd buy one.

I’d assume the upcoming Steiner or ZCO 210 would take the cake for an optic for your use need.

Hoody2shoes said:

Nx8 2.5-20
Pros: great package
Cons: reticle is overkill and not really useable in lower magnification ranges (mil xt). Absolute top of my budget

Click to expand...

I have this on my SP-10 6.5C and love it. Disagree that the reticle is not usable on low mag. The illuminated reticle is very bright, red or green and great for fast shots and good FOV at mid to lower light. Full sun is more of a challenge but I don't find myself struggling to see the reticle then either.

Hoody2shoes said:

I just like it.

The trijicon doesnt have adjustable parallax and im not interested in the mk5hd's reticle choices.

Yeah thats kinda what i was weary of on the blackhound

Not really interested in the zco210. Not sure about the Steiner

Click to expand...

I was referred to the Trijicon 2.5-15 rather than the 2-10. It's not exactly a DMR/MPVO type scope but then neither is the NX8.

Sounds like you are looking for the perfect DMR/SPR/crossover/MPVO like many other people.
Other than the Athlon Helos the Steiner is about the only thing with any real promise, reminds to be seen if they mess up the reticle though.

march 1.5-15.
The trijicon 2.5-15 is a solid scope, I have the 56mm one, what you would need is the x42 one.

Honestly I've had no complaints with two Helos G2's, super good scope for the cost, but yes I'd like even higher quality as we all would. I sold one last month to friend and regretted it when I ran across a need for it last week. All I had was a old Nikon 3-9 to mount. Quite backwards from what I'm used to.

Find a used HG2 DMR 2-12, try it out, and sell it if you don't like it for hardly a loss. If anything it'll make a good stopgap.

Hoody2shoes said:

I looked at the March but glassaholic makes a better case for the nx8 (which is why I left it out)

Click to expand...

Seemed like he liked his reworked and returned model better atleast from 1.5 - 10ish? Disappointing that it's worse optically than an NX8

Hoody2shoes said:

18"
223

Looking for something that dials down to around 2. Needs adjustable parallax

Athlon btr 2-12
Pros: like the reticle and specs on paper
Cons: China, heavy

PA glx 2.5-10
Pros: Good overall package
Cons: narrow fov, reticle is ok.

Nx8 2.5-20
Pros: great package
Cons: reticle is overkill and not really useable in lower magnification ranges (mil xt). Absolute top of my budget

Anything else I should be looking at? Maybe the blackhound emerge 2-12? I can't find anything on it but from the specs it is HEAVY.

Click to expand...

If you look at the "SPR" threads a lot of people have the NX8 or the Mark 5HD. Reticule is dependent on how you want to shoot (holding or dialing).

Sullypants1 said:

Seemed like he liked his reworked and returned model better atleast from 1.5 - 10ish? Disappointing that it's worse optically than an NX8

Click to expand...

I do like my "re-worked" March 1.5-15 a lot! I've never had the NX8 2.5-20 side by side with the March 1.5-15 so hard to say, might be something to consider later this year. Later this year I'd like to do another full evaluation of the March 1.5-15, especially if Steiner ever gets out their Mil version of the 2-12x42. Not sure how long it'll take ZCO to get their new 2-10x30 to market and even though it fills a different niche (with the smaller objective) I think this scope will do quite well as an alternative to the 1-10 LPVO trend of late...

steve123 said:

Honestly I've had no complaints with two Helos G2's, super good scope for the cost, but yes I'd like even higher quality as we all would. I sold one last month to friend and regretted it when I ran across a need for it last week. All I had was a old Nikon 3-9 to mount. Quite backwards from what I'm used to.

Find a used HG2 DMR 2-12, try it out, and sell it if you don't like it for hardly a loss. If anything it'll make a good stopgap.

Click to expand...

It's too bad Leupold can't figure out how to make something like that in their 3HD lineup. I guess they just don't give a shit and want people to splurge for the 5hd models.

I have the GLX 2.5 and for the money its pretty hard to beat.

BCP said:

It's too bad Leupold can't figure out how to make something like that in their 3HD lineup. I guess they just don't give a shit and want people to splurge for the 5hd models.

Click to expand...

You mean a 2-12 scope? That would have a 6x erector and would not "fit" into their 3HD line with 3x erector???

BCP said:

It's too bad Leupold can't figure out how to make something like that in their 3HD lineup. I guess they just don't give a shit and want people to splurge for the 5hd models.

Click to expand...

I'm convinced Leupold don't put any thought into their product lines at all.
They use a random number generator to spit out a SKU and make the scope as per their SKU numbering conventions.

That's the only way to explain their product offerings and the lack of consistency throughout their entire catalogue.

Glassaholic said:

You mean a 2-12 scope? That would have a 6x erector and would not "fit" into their 3HD line with 3x erector???

Click to expand...

If the chinese can crank them out for 400$ retail why can't leupold produce one for 800$ or something. I've got one of their 4HD scopes, it's fine, but still charging for illumination and no christmas tree reticule is kinda lame in the current market.

BCP said:

It's too bad Leupold can't figure out how to make something like that in their 3HD lineup. I guess they just don't give a shit and want people to splurge for the 5hd models.

Click to expand...

One would think Leupold would have someone higher up that watched threads like this.

Heck I could be mostly happy with a higher quality simple lightweight scope of 2.2-13.2x38 with capped windage, low profile locking elevation turret, a decent holdover reticle with .7mil line thickness and a .2 mil center dot that was daylight bright.

I also have a Athlon Heras 2-12 SFP that's pretty good but no illume and thin reticle, in SFP so the reticle doesn't get too thin. The elevation turret is amazing by having very distinct clicks, with hardly any lash, also the .1 mil line's line up well with mark on housing, ZS system, and good IQ.

Glassaholic said:

I do like my "re-worked" March 1.5-15 a lot! I've never had the NX8 2.5-20 side by side with the March 1.5-15 so hard to say, might be something to consider later this year. Later this year I'd like to do another full evaluation of the March 1.5-15, especially if Steiner ever gets out their Mil version of the 2-12x42. Not sure how long it'll take ZCO to get their new 2-10x30 to market and even though it fills a different niche (with the smaller objective) I think this scope will do quite well as an alternative to the 1-10 LPVO trend of late...

Click to expand...

Was it you who said the higher end magnification on the 1.5-15x42 was not really usable/had very narrow exit pupil?

If so, was it still useful on 12-13x?

I’m looking for more compact overall scope profile, with higher magnification. I also want Marylin Monroe alive again and eternally-young, unmolested by the Mafia, Kennedy bros, and dirtbags of that era who defiled her.

Great thread topic. I am interested myself, and have read conflicting info about the nxs 2.5x20 and the March 1.5x15.

Happiness Is A Warm Gun said:

Great thread topic. I am interested myself, and have read conflicting info about the nxs 2.5x20 and the March 1.5x15.

Click to expand...

My guess is if both were 2.5-15 and not quite so compact the visual experience would be improved.

I was just thinking a minute ago about my March Genesis 4-40 that even though it has a high magnification ratio and is somewhat compact it has quite a bit of optical prowess which is superior to my S&B 5-25. The Genesis has external adjustments for windage and elevation so somewhat like a variable spotting scope with a reticle in it and it doesn't get any better visually than looking through those higher quality spotters, right?!
I bring this up because maybe that could be a path that should be explored by the scope makers in a lightweight form factor. Could this be done and how would it actually be??
It's like there needs to be a breakthrough for MPVO's to get the most out of them.

Ilya might have opinions on this he could share.

I really want to look through the March Fx to see the IQ for myself. I really like the dual focal / dual reticle concept and even more how they implemented it. I like the weight and size and the locking turrets. I just wish they would "give up" on the 10x erector. The same march Fx in 1.5x low with an 8x multiplier or even 2x low with a 6x multiplier I think would have a much better image quality throughout. Seems like the high ratio is part of their brand identity however.

The Mil steiner H6x could be a good option I hope. A PLXc with from 2x-16x could be interesting as well.

Hoody2shoes said:

Breakthrough? The only breakthrough we need is for manufacturers not to put dumb reticles in them.

Click to expand...

That would help wouldn't it but optical compromise in 'the standard' very short scopes with high magnification ratios can hinder the visual experience. I'm not unfamiliar with this having had or having, 1-10's, 3-24, 5-42. I sold the two latter scopes because of this.

I'm guessing that the ZCO 2-10 will have stellar IQ, why is that, a major part is 5x mag ratio. BUT only 10x. 10x is the reason I don't want it, and I've already mentioned why I don't want the March 1.5-15 "in other MPVO threads". These scopes cost a lot of money and I'm not spending that much anymore until I find most of what I want.

Why was/is my Genesis so nice in IQ, compared to my 5-42, I'm thinking it must be because Genesis is external adjust and optically centered because they both have HM glass in them???

I'm just publicly pondering why.

YMMV

I have a Seekins SP 10 in 6.5 CM. I have never had a scope more expensive than $700 (Vortex PST 6-24x50) until now. For this rifle (SP10) I bought the NX8, 2.5-20 in 2nd FP. I primarily hunt and prefer 2nd FP MOA reticle mainly due to the FFP reticle getting thinner on low powers. The wider field of view on powers lower than 6x is nice for closer hunting shots. The illuminated reticle is nice and I use it early and late. The XT reticle (MOA or Mil) would be better for PRS application. But for hunting, I really like this MOAR CF2 reticle. Not too busy, but everything I need. And on Black Friday sales it was $1700.