So for the guys that have actually ran both of these optics, who's the clear winner in this fight... As far as glass quality, turret feel and eye box cause they both have good reticles and are at 28 and 34 ounces.. I've skipped the Bushnell and USO and moved on to bigger and better things.. Now I have owned the Minox once before, but never been behind the AMG. I actually kinda miss the MR4 reticle, damn fine reticle.. Thoughts????
Rifle Scopes AMG vs ZP5, Thoughts??
- Thread starter ICU22250
- Start date
Well.....I have both, I've posted a few times in the minox thread and I think we have pm'd about these two before. After a bit of use I decided something was t right with my AMG. Sent it in and low and behold, my scope was replaced. After some use with a properly performing AMG this question becomes even harder now than it was before for me. To me, the AMG wins on the click feel and sound, the reticles are a wash for me because they are both great, the weight is close enough to not matter, the eyebox and relief is a wash, the glass is a tad better in the Minox to my eye but at this level it's really splitting hairs and could boil down to diopter adjustment being a little off on one or the other. The parallax is a wash, both being a little tight in adjustment. The minox seems to max out sooner but not positive yet. The minox reticle is a little finer and may not be quite as easy to find in dark areas as the A!G but I imagine the illumination could fix that if I put the battery in. All in all, I will be keeping both for the foreseeable future.
I remember our conversation, what was wrong with the AMG? One thing that bothers me about them is i always see them for sale, don't see too many ZP5's for sale in the PX... But that could mean absolutely nothing as there are probably way more AMG's out in the hands of the shooters... I wish I could just have them both...
I would personally probably go AMG. I've had 2.
One prevailing factor is I've been pretty turned off by the fact that for the Minox to get fixed it has to go back to Germany, even for little problems. And while I can appreciate their good warranty policy, I personally don't want to wait ~8 weeks to get my scope back.
If you have other scopes that you can use if something does happen to it then maybe that isn't an issue for you.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One prevailing factor is I've been pretty turned off by the fact that for the Minox to get fixed it has to go back to Germany, even for little problems. And while I can appreciate their good warranty policy, I personally don't want to wait ~8 weeks to get my scope back.
If you have other scopes that you can use if something does happen to it then maybe that isn't an issue for you.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No it isn't, but it's not bad by any means. I just think the razor 2 is above average in that department.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is something to consider, I'd hate to wait 8 weeks... I also like the locking turrets on the AMG...
I have both and really like both. Amg on my hunting rig minox on target/fun gun.
Minox has an edge with glass, reticle (mr4), eye relief.
I like the amg turrets better and it's overall size is a little more compact. I think you'd be happy with either both are great
Minox has an edge with glass, reticle (mr4), eye relief.
I like the amg turrets better and it's overall size is a little more compact. I think you'd be happy with either both are great
Thanks man, but both are great isn't helping me much.. Just yankin your chain, I guess the eye box sensitivity is what worries me the most about the AMG. I know the Minox has a forgiving eye box...
My guess is that the plethora of AMGs in the px is due more to the anticipation frenzy that happened than to problems with the scope. I wouldn't let it worry you.
I loved the MR4 on the first Minox I had, the best reticle to date in my opinion...
I think my Razor was a better scope in nearly every way than the AMG, except the weight and maybe the reticle. I don't love the EBR-7 - open center with .2 mil hashes would have been better than a floating crosshair IMO. Splitting hairs really, but I thought the clicks on the Razor were better than the AMG. The Minox still hasn't been out so I can't compare them directly, but I do own both scopes you're asking about...
My advice is, get both in hands, use some, then sell one that you like less. If you buy used, the loss would be minimum but ZP5 is a lot rarer so you may have to buy new, but you will be able to spend quality time with them and make a decision after full experience. Scope is very personal and everyone has different feelings about the same scope.
I have used most mass produced scopes for extended period of time, except TT as I could not convince myself. After all these years, here is my stash of scopes: AMG, premier 3-15 tactical, SB pm2 and one heck of IOR 6-24 (don't laugh). I sold K624, razor 2, ZP5, tango 6, atacr, some leupold and bunch of others. And if I regret I buy it back. But in the end I get to own scope I really love no matter what others say about them, as I made the decision through period of time and I allowed my mistakes to be corrected.
I have used most mass produced scopes for extended period of time, except TT as I could not convince myself. After all these years, here is my stash of scopes: AMG, premier 3-15 tactical, SB pm2 and one heck of IOR 6-24 (don't laugh). I sold K624, razor 2, ZP5, tango 6, atacr, some leupold and bunch of others. And if I regret I buy it back. But in the end I get to own scope I really love no matter what others say about them, as I made the decision through period of time and I allowed my mistakes to be corrected.
Last edited:
ive compared them both side by side...buddy owns an AMG and i have a ZP5
if you like turrets with a more mechanical, clicky, feel and big audible clicks, go AMG
if you prefer slightly better glass (agreed by everyone who looked thru them both), and turrets that are slightly less tactile, but smooth, go Zp5
if you like turrets with a more mechanical, clicky, feel and big audible clicks, go AMG
if you prefer slightly better glass (agreed by everyone who looked thru them both), and turrets that are slightly less tactile, but smooth, go Zp5
I had both and don't have either one anymore. To me the AMG was a disappointment. I'm not exactly sure why but I just felt cheated by it. Maybe because it's only a 30mm tube or the fact that I waited a year for it. Don't get me wrong the glass was good, eyebox was great, turrets were very noticeable just something I didn't like about it.
Now, I'm probably one of the few who doesnt love the minoxes. The glass is nice and bright, but for me it was hard to focus. I didn't like the turrets at all. They were hard to count and keep track of, and the eyebox was a little off for my eyes.
I think if I had to have one of them, it would be the AMG. It seems like a better built scope. That's just my opinion so take it for what it's worth.
Now, I'm probably one of the few who doesnt love the minoxes. The glass is nice and bright, but for me it was hard to focus. I didn't like the turrets at all. They were hard to count and keep track of, and the eyebox was a little off for my eyes.
I think if I had to have one of them, it would be the AMG. It seems like a better built scope. That's just my opinion so take it for what it's worth.
I was pretty critical of the AMG in the minor thread but apparently lots of it was due to the scope being fucked up and me not sure of some of it. It was an early production American reticle model I picked up used. Some of the very first scopes that went out had been assembled without loctite on lenses, the wrong grease on the turrets and that led to lenses coming loose and squealing binding turrets. I had a reticle that appeard to jump when firing and dry firing that was a result of a lense moving and also eye relief and eye box issues that were a result of that movement. I was going to sell it but after contacting Dave on here he speculated what was going on from what I was seeing, had me send it in and they sent me a new one. This thing is phenomenal now and although I still think that if they put this reticle in a gen2 I may go back to one and move the minox, I don't think the there is enough wrong with either of these three to make one stand out over the others. Ultimately boils down to personal preference and time gone if it needs service. From the time I sent the AMG in to the time back on my rifle and zeroed was 2 days. That right there is worth something to me. Especially on a one gun, one rifle situation. I'm not implying the minox isn't as tough or reliable, but if I'm in a position where I have one setup and no backup options, I don't want to have to be down for any longer than I have to and that would sway me to the Vortex. For me, that's specifically the AMG. The reticle is way more useable to me. It's 2017 now, we should all have reticles with .2 holds not .5. Till they make that happen with the gen2 I'm not going back, plus the weight of the AMG lends itself better to playing the role of PRS/hunting/ long range work do all rifle for that one set up situation than the gen2 does. I still think these 3 all boil down to personal goals and preference because they all have some trade offs. In my case, I scraped and sold enough to be able to keep both because as I've found to be more and more realistic as time goes by, two is one and one is none. Three is better.
For me it would easily be the Minox... now if we were comparing the Minox with say a Razor Gen II 4.5-27, that changes it a bit and makes the decision more difficult.
The only thing the AMG has going for it imo over the Gen II, is that it's lighter and made here at home.
The only thing the AMG has going for it imo over the Gen II, is that it's lighter and made here at home.
Dave, what about the AMG don't you like over the Gen2? I currently have a gen2 that's gonna be in the PX soon, this will be it's replacement. The only reason for selling is the weight...
Whatever scope you go with you like.
The AMG has a small footprint low pro turrets and 30mm tube. For hunters the reticle is thinker so at lower power its easier to pickup for the snap shots.
The MINOX is a little heavier but not bad, the glass is better, and the reticle options are great.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
The AMG has a small footprint low pro turrets and 30mm tube. For hunters the reticle is thinker so at lower power its easier to pickup for the snap shots.
The MINOX is a little heavier but not bad, the glass is better, and the reticle options are great.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
It's not that I don't like the AMG, I think its an amazing scope. It's just that in my view, the Gen2 does everything better. The only reason I'd choose an AMG over a Gen2 Razor, would be if I needed a lighter weight optic with a smaller profile. My precision rifles weigh so much, it just doesn't matter if a scope weighs a pound more.
Having said that, if I HAD to run an AMG... oh me oh my, poor me, having to run one of the best optics in the world... what ever would I do with myself?
I was under the impression that the AMG had better glass than the gen 2 Razor, I don't really know how I came to that conclusion though... I'm gonna have to look into the amount of travel each of them have as well, the Minox should be a bit more with the 34mm tube... Decisions decisions.... One plus for the AMG is I can get it for a good bit cheaper, and save some coin...
When we're at this level of scope, the glass is gonna be good. It's usually nitpicking. I mean, I am a total glass whore myself, but it's only one aspect of the scope for me.
Personally more concerned with the reticle, tracking, how the parallax knob responds, eye box flexibility etc, because we already know the glass is gonna be good.
My favorite scope years back was the NF 3.5-15 F1 MLR2. The glass wasn't the cream of the crop by any means, but I just friggin loved everything about the scope. It never failed me and gave me confidence when shooting.
Personally more concerned with the reticle, tracking, how the parallax knob responds, eye box flexibility etc, because we already know the glass is gonna be good.
My favorite scope years back was the NF 3.5-15 F1 MLR2. The glass wasn't the cream of the crop by any means, but I just friggin loved everything about the scope. It never failed me and gave me confidence when shooting.
Last edited:
We have more Minox ZP5 5-2x56 with the MR4's coming in about 2 weeks from now, call us at 916.670.1103 to Pre-Order and mention that you're from the hide.
I love the AMG, but I care about weight - 34oz isn't really anything special in the weight department.
Well, I think I'm going with the AMG on this one, it's going on my T3X Varmint 223 so I'm in favor of the locking turrets and 50mm objective to keep it a little bit lower to the sucky factory stock and to the barrel.. I will own another ZP5 MR4 in the near future.. Any input on what height ARC M10 rings I'd need for this combo? I'm thinking mediums but I'm not sure on that... It's wearing a 20 MOA rail....
LOL! It's a good scope and is basically the best compromise one can make with price, quality, and feature set. You lose out in weight of course.
It's not so much about price, since I could probably go up to $3,000. It's availability, warranty, and eyebox. The biggest thing I'm looking to upgrade from in my Razor 5-20 is the tight eyebox, the AMG is very hard to get ahold of, and I do like the Vortex customer service. Plus my rifle could honestly stand to gain a little weight. After I put a Gen 2 Razor on it, it'll still only weigh about 14.5 pounds.
The AMG is in stock right now at CameralandNY.com.. at least they were unless they've sold out again...
Similar threads
