[MENTION=102665]Dead Nutz[/MENTION]
Cause you're not too smart... Not trying to start an argument but you don't understand the audience or what an initial impression tells you.
i could be confused, but 99% of people's question about an initial impression is what it looks like, the sight picture. I never commented on the glass, but balanced my observation to mention, clarity, FOV, and how that combined with its magnification gave me a very good initial impression.
Because of people like you, who, no offense, might be reading challenged, at least when it comes to comprehension I stopped going into any details on the glass. Watch the video, 10 minutes worth. How many of those minutes was spent on glass? So in my initial impression, I gave you 3 sentences, maybe four and painted a picture of the overall "look" of the scope, you feel I weighted that portion. Once again you prove my point.... People read into what is said according to their bias and not what is actually discussed.
there is a reason I tell companies a minimum of 45 days for a review. Sure I gave my initial impression, and it was quick, but after I box test or actually tall target it it every single time I take it out. I shoot my range from 100 to at least 1250 and back, then next trip out I start all over again. It's actually quite boring. I confirm zero, every time, run the 7 mils then hit steel out and back, recheck zero, and repeat. I fire than no less than 1000 rounds with any given scope. You'll see me do lessons with it, and since I usually do a monthly class, I let them get behind it and sample opinions.
So, how a person can get the impression I put more effort into the glass, above anything else is beyond me. No argument from me, I expect misunderstandings which is why over the years I have dumbed it down. I used to print test targets, I invested in optical targets of every type and had an account with Edmunds, I own all sorts of optical charts which now collect dust, still it appears I have fallen short in making any kind of point.
With the fundamentals of marksmanship, Sight Picture is important, but sight picture is a combination of factors to give the shooter edge to edge clarity. So touching on the FOV, the clarity and resolution is necessary. But only to the degree needed to make the shot. Can I see, can I dial out the parallax, is there too much CA which may distract the shooter on brightly lit targets, it all has value, but I weight it far below the function. Because of this, you 3 lines in my initial impression, and 10 minutes everywhere else.
With the new March 3-24x52 in my possession I will try to satisfy your curiosity and strive to clarify my position better.
Apologies for contradicting myself in such a manner to confuse.
No apologies needed.
