Importance of glass at different magnifications

[pineoak]

Curious as to the thoughts of others.

Is glass more important on lower variable mag scope or higher?

Gen 2 Vortex 1-6x glass is clear enough happy I can be behind it easily and see clearly. My old PST gen1 1-4... was terrible to me. I'd get teary and my eyeball would ache in very short order.

Razor gen 2 4.5-27 happy at distance. SWFA 10x I was unhappy behind for anything more than 10 mins. SWFA 3-15 I was unhappy for anything more than 5.

Seems obvious, but is the answer both?

Can you get away with lower quality glass at lower mags, like under 10x as opposed to 20x+?

Or is it more important because you have less magnification so in order to see better you'll need better glass?

Overall, I've notice that with quality glass you don't need as much X.

 

[Perceptiv]

Curious as to the thoughts of others.

Is glass more important on lower variable mag scope or higher?

Gen 2 Vortex 1-6x glass is clear enough happy I can be behind it easily and see clearly. My old PST gen1 1-4... was terrible to me. I'd get teary and my eyeball would ache in very short order.

Razor gen 2 4.5-27 happy at distance. SWFA 10x I was unhappy behind for anything more than 10 mins. SWFA 3-15 I was unhappy for anything more than 5.

Seems obvious, but is the answer both?

Can you get away with lower quality glass at lower mags, like under 10x as opposed to 20x+?

Or is it more important because you have less magnification so in order to see better you'll need better glass?

Overall, I've notice that with quality glass you don't need as much X.

Yea you pretty much answered you own question bro, better glass you don’t need as much magnification, that’s why the straight x10 power u.s optic was a very popular scope 10 years ago. Glass is obviously important on all magnification but semi decent glass at 18-20 power is fine for long range, might not be as pleasant as the top tier glass but it will do the job. However on 6,8,10 power power scope glass is very important if you wish to shoot 1000+ yards

 

[beetroot]

You are correct on all your assumptions/observations.
Better quality glass at a lower magnification is certainly a better choice, you'll likely see more details (within reason) and have a scope that's easier to use.

The other big benefit of good quality glass is less eye strain and something you can look through for long periods comfortably.

I had a Vortex 4-16 HST that gave horrendous eye strain, like you said after 5 minutes looking through it you'd had enough.
Also had the disadvantage of unforgiving eyebox and terrible in mirage, being an SFP scope you had to use it on max power to have correct subtensions but using it on max power was unusable under certain conditions, not a nice spot to be in.

 

[jeffl838]

Oh man. Side by siding a mk6 3-18 and an atacr 4-16 is a fun game. It's not even a matter of magnification... some scopes (especially the mk6) just make things look like there's a ton of mirage, and if you zoom in you're just zooming on this faux-mirage.

 

[GreenMushroom]

I mostly shoot LPVOs but to me if your going to shoot steel at 4-500 yards with a 1-6 especially in shitty conditions you need at least decent glass. Mid range Japanese stuff is where price meets quality for me.

 

[pineoak]

Oh man. Side by siding a mk6 3-18 and an atacr 4-16 is a fun game. It's not even a matter of magnification... some scopes (especially the mk6) just make things look like there's a ton of mirage, and if you zoom in you're just zooming on this faux-mirage.

So the mk6 makes it look like there is mirage when there isn't?

How?

Because the glass is distorted?

 

[koshkin]

The simple answer to this is that image quality is important across the board regardless of magnification range. A riflescope needs to stay zeroed. Once it has that, you have to start considering how good the image quality is and how easy the scope is to be behind.

ILya

 

[GreenMushroom]

The simple answer to this is that image quality is important across the board regardless of magnification range. A riflescope needs to stay zeroed. Once it has that, you have to start considering how good the image quality is and how easy the scope is to be behind.

ILya

I wanted to throw a question about eyebox into this mix. I don't hunt or compete and almost exclusively shoot steel. I shoot relatively quickly so eyebox and fov are as important as glass quality. Other than my 3-15 pst2 my scopes are Japanese LOW scopes. They seem to compare favorably in the eyebox department to other scopes I've looked through.

My first non lpvo scope is a LHT 3-15-50. I love this scop for what it cost and the eyebox on 3x is amazing but on 15x the eyebox quite tight. It's still usable and is similar to other mid priced optics I've tried but is much friendlier down in the 10x range. This caused me to venture into the ffp world with the Viper and it is similar except of course the reticle is usable on 10x.

So finally my question is when you step up to the high dollar scopes like zco, s&b etc is the eyebox noticeably better on max magnification than middle of the road Japanese stuff? I'm a newb at this and it doesn't seem to be brought up much so maybe it's just something everyone knows already. Henstold is the only name I've seen singled out for having a great eyebox.

Last question is I think you or someone else posted that the March 1.5-15 being 2nd focal plane has it's drops calibrated at 10x? People seemed to think this was odd but it makes perfect sense to me. I wish my LHT was set up this way.

 

[koshkin]

I wanted to throw a question about eyebox into this mix. I don't hunt or compete and almost exclusively shoot steel. I shoot relatively quickly so eyebox and fov are as important as glass quality. Other than my 3-15 pst2 my scopes are Japanese LOW scopes. They seem to compare favorably in the eyebox department to other scopes I've looked through.

My first non lpvo scope is a LHT 3-15-50. I love this scop for what it cost and the eyebox on 3x is amazing but on 15x the eyebox quite tight. It's still usable and is similar to other mid priced optics I've tried but is much friendlier down in the 10x range. This caused me to venture into the ffp world with the Viper and it is similar except of course the reticle is usable on 10x.

So finally my question is when you step up to the high dollar scopes like zco, s&b etc is the eyebox noticeably better on max magnification than middle of the road Japanese stuff? I'm a newb at this and it doesn't seem to be brought up much so maybe it's just something everyone knows already. Henstold is the only name I've seen singled out for having a great eyebox.

Last question is I think you or someone else posted that the March 1.5-15 being 2nd focal plane has it's drops calibrated at 10x? People seemed to think this was odd but it makes perfect sense to me. I wish my LHT was set up this way.

Once you go to higher magnifications, exit pupil get smaller and eyebox tightens up a bit on every scope. There are some other factors in play, so there is a difference between scopes of the same exit pupil, but they all tighten up on max magnification, compared to mid. Higher end scopes are generally comparatively easier to get behind on max magnification than mid-range stuff, but it varies across the board and the difference is not huge. Mid-range stuff is getting really good.

As far as SFP scopes go, I have an extremely strong preference to having the reticle calibrated at max magnification or at some magnification that has a detent or some other tactile reference. For my personal use, I will not touch a SFP scope set up otherwise.

ILya

ILya

 

[GreenMushroom]

Once you go to higher magnifications, exit pupil get smaller and eyebox tightens up a bit on every scope. There are some other factors in play, so there is a difference between scopes of the same exit pupil, but they all tighten up on max magnification, compared to mid. Higher end scopes are generally comparatively easier to get behind on max magnification than mid-range stuff, but it varies across the board and the difference is not huge. Mid-range stuff is getting really good.

As far as SFP scopes go, I have an extremely strong preference to having the reticle calibrated at max magnification or at some magnification that has a detent or some other tactile reference. For my personal use, I will not touch a SFP scope set up otherwise.

ILya

ILya

Thanks. That answers my next question which was if there was some sort of stop on sfp scopes set up that way. Seems a detent would be the best way so you could turn right through it if you wanted to. Do you know if the March 1.5-15 is calibrated at 10x and if it is is it equipped with such a feature. Also I've read that the illumination is daylight bright but what that means seems to vary by who's saying it. To me it means both eyes open like an aimpoint/razor 1-6/accupoint triangle. Can you offer an opinion on that?

 

[koshkin]

Thanks. That answers my next question which was if there was some sort of stop on sfp scopes set up that way. Seems a detent would be the best way so you could turn right through it if you wanted to. Do you know if the March 1.5-15 is calibrated at 10x and if it is is it equipped with such a feature. Also I've read that the illumination is daylight bright but what that means seems to vary by who's saying it. To me it means both eyes open like an aimpoint/razor 1-6/accupoint triangle. Can you offer an opinion on that?

I do not have the March here at the moment, so I can not check. The illumination on the MTR-5 I had was not daylight bright, but if you get a model with one of the FD reticle, it is.

ILya

 

[pineoak]

I find it hilarious that when I read Frank/Lowlight's posts... I hear his voice. So distinctive.

When I read koshkin/DLO/ILya's posts... I hear his accent clear as day.

Watched too many of their videos...