At last Year's NRA Annual Meeting in Pittsburg, I was cheerfully purusing the wares of various manufacturers when I happened upon a table covered with riflescopes. The fellow behind the table, who introduced himself as the owner of Osprey Worldwide, was all too happy to tell me about his scopes (which included the oft repeated mantra concerning the same lenses used by Nightforce, etc.). He was even more eager to educate me about his products after I mentioned I was a LE Sniper. I must admit to being a curious about Osprey scopes after hearing a favorable report on their performance from a Sniper instructor at the state Police Academy. Anyway, the fellow behind the table got around to offering to sell me a scope for a low enough price that I thought "what the hell, if it's junk, I'll just pitch it."
The model I purchased was the 4-16X50 Mil-Dot version. I should mention here that the scope I've been using for years on my 700P is a Leupold 4.5-14X40 Tactical model that has been rock solid. It is my benchmark for comparing other scopes (I know, I know, these days anything with a light funnel smaller than 50 mm is hardly even considered to be a scope, but in my defense, I've been using this set-up since before "these days.") I mounted the Osprey on a rifle that is becoming a "test-bed" of sorts. It is capable of half MOA or a bit better with me at the wheel. My first impression of the Osprey was that it was definately inferior to my trusty Leupold in fit & finish, but not nearly so much as its bargain-basement price tagwould suggest. The target turrets possessed positive tactile clicks, but they were faint in the audible sense. They are also graduated in 1/8 MOA, which I don't care for, but I can use them well enough. The side-focus/parallax adjustment performed as it was supposed to, but I prefer distance calibration markings to the ever increasing circle markings on the Osprey. Functionally, I just looked through the scope and turned the dial until the image was in clear focus, ignoring the circles altogether. In all fairness, I've done the same with my Leupold on deployments where either low light conditions, or fear of detection by the bad guys prevented me from dialing in the AO to a specific distance. In any case, the side focus is still preferable to the AO, and the circles are no great hinderance.
Another positive note for the Osprey was light transmission. Whether the whole "same lenses used by Nightforce" claim is malarkey, or not; the image, at least in bright sunlight, was very bright, and reasonably clear. In low-light conditions, the image is not nearly as impressive as the Leupold 4.5-14X50 on my partner's rifle. I suspect the difference here is not so much lens quality, but rather the type and number of optical coatings. this is not to suggest the Osprey is unusable in low light, it's just not as good as the better scopes (that's part of what the additional $1000 gets you). If low-light performance is important to you, look at the better scopes; if, however, you only shoot on warm, sunny days from a bench, that extra performance (and price) may do little for you.
After zeroing the scope to the rifle (an AR based system in 5.56 mm firing 77 grain FGMM). I noted that the rifle was still capable of .5 MOA or better groups out to 300 yards (my max range for this particular system, and the 5.56mm in general for anti-bad guy applications). On the negative side, the turrets did not track exactly 1/8 MOA. They were in the ball park, and they would probably have worked fine if my goal was simply whacking a 6-10" steel target. I demand a much higher degree of accuracy than that, and the Osprey simply could not deliver that level of precision. Similarly, the scope did not return exactly to zero. Again, it was not radically off, well within minute of chest shot, but less than minute of eye ball. I confirmed these results on a subsequent trip to the range by means of a box test. Surprisingly, it the Osprey did better than I expected on the test (which was performed at 100 yards) the shots on the various "corners" of the box were fairly close, although the corners themselves consisted of 1 MOA target spotters and, again, the Osprey could not meet that degree of precision. More troubling than the box test was the fact that the zero had wandered just a bit from my first outing with the scope. It was, in fact off by almost exactly 1MOA.
At the end of the day, my opinion of the Osprey is somewhat mixed. It is worth noting that nothing fell/broke off during use, and this includes some fairly vigorous training, and it demonstrated the ability to allow accurate shots to be placed on target. The image, in good light, is usable as is the reticle, and the focus knob works even if its markings are not to my liking. On the down side, it lacks absolute precision in adjustment, and the zero seems to wander a bit. The degree of importance a given shooter assigns to these issues will depend entirely upon the type of shooting being performed. For informal shooting to moderate ranges (such as 300 yards) on targets no smaller than about 3 MOA, the Osprey will probably work well enough (assuming, of course the performance is similar to the one I tested). For cutting edge accuracy, at extended ranges, or under extreme conditions, however, you should probably choose something else. I suspect, however, there are shooters out there, of limited means, who's accuracy requirements do not exceed those mentioned above ( there may be more of these shooters than not). For them, the Osprey may work just fine.
For me, the Osprey will soon be retired. The good news is that I'll probably be able to trade it for nearly the same amount as I paid for it
The model I purchased was the 4-16X50 Mil-Dot version. I should mention here that the scope I've been using for years on my 700P is a Leupold 4.5-14X40 Tactical model that has been rock solid. It is my benchmark for comparing other scopes (I know, I know, these days anything with a light funnel smaller than 50 mm is hardly even considered to be a scope, but in my defense, I've been using this set-up since before "these days.") I mounted the Osprey on a rifle that is becoming a "test-bed" of sorts. It is capable of half MOA or a bit better with me at the wheel. My first impression of the Osprey was that it was definately inferior to my trusty Leupold in fit & finish, but not nearly so much as its bargain-basement price tagwould suggest. The target turrets possessed positive tactile clicks, but they were faint in the audible sense. They are also graduated in 1/8 MOA, which I don't care for, but I can use them well enough. The side-focus/parallax adjustment performed as it was supposed to, but I prefer distance calibration markings to the ever increasing circle markings on the Osprey. Functionally, I just looked through the scope and turned the dial until the image was in clear focus, ignoring the circles altogether. In all fairness, I've done the same with my Leupold on deployments where either low light conditions, or fear of detection by the bad guys prevented me from dialing in the AO to a specific distance. In any case, the side focus is still preferable to the AO, and the circles are no great hinderance.
Another positive note for the Osprey was light transmission. Whether the whole "same lenses used by Nightforce" claim is malarkey, or not; the image, at least in bright sunlight, was very bright, and reasonably clear. In low-light conditions, the image is not nearly as impressive as the Leupold 4.5-14X50 on my partner's rifle. I suspect the difference here is not so much lens quality, but rather the type and number of optical coatings. this is not to suggest the Osprey is unusable in low light, it's just not as good as the better scopes (that's part of what the additional $1000 gets you). If low-light performance is important to you, look at the better scopes; if, however, you only shoot on warm, sunny days from a bench, that extra performance (and price) may do little for you.
After zeroing the scope to the rifle (an AR based system in 5.56 mm firing 77 grain FGMM). I noted that the rifle was still capable of .5 MOA or better groups out to 300 yards (my max range for this particular system, and the 5.56mm in general for anti-bad guy applications). On the negative side, the turrets did not track exactly 1/8 MOA. They were in the ball park, and they would probably have worked fine if my goal was simply whacking a 6-10" steel target. I demand a much higher degree of accuracy than that, and the Osprey simply could not deliver that level of precision. Similarly, the scope did not return exactly to zero. Again, it was not radically off, well within minute of chest shot, but less than minute of eye ball. I confirmed these results on a subsequent trip to the range by means of a box test. Surprisingly, it the Osprey did better than I expected on the test (which was performed at 100 yards) the shots on the various "corners" of the box were fairly close, although the corners themselves consisted of 1 MOA target spotters and, again, the Osprey could not meet that degree of precision. More troubling than the box test was the fact that the zero had wandered just a bit from my first outing with the scope. It was, in fact off by almost exactly 1MOA.
At the end of the day, my opinion of the Osprey is somewhat mixed. It is worth noting that nothing fell/broke off during use, and this includes some fairly vigorous training, and it demonstrated the ability to allow accurate shots to be placed on target. The image, in good light, is usable as is the reticle, and the focus knob works even if its markings are not to my liking. On the down side, it lacks absolute precision in adjustment, and the zero seems to wander a bit. The degree of importance a given shooter assigns to these issues will depend entirely upon the type of shooting being performed. For informal shooting to moderate ranges (such as 300 yards) on targets no smaller than about 3 MOA, the Osprey will probably work well enough (assuming, of course the performance is similar to the one I tested). For cutting edge accuracy, at extended ranges, or under extreme conditions, however, you should probably choose something else. I suspect, however, there are shooters out there, of limited means, who's accuracy requirements do not exceed those mentioned above ( there may be more of these shooters than not). For them, the Osprey may work just fine.
For me, the Osprey will soon be retired. The good news is that I'll probably be able to trade it for nearly the same amount as I paid for it
