Rifle Scopes Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

[MadKap]

Another guy at the range yesterday had an HDMR so I asked him if I could take a look through it.

I've been using a Vortex Viper PST 6-24 ffp/mil for about half a year now.

Looking through the HDMR, I was really impressed with how 'big' the image looked. If that even makes sense.

I didn't actually feel that the glass out resolved my PST, but it was... easier to look through. Maybe that has to do with the 60mm objective.

I'm just trying to understand why it was 'better' for me, because I want to have that kind of experience on my rifle, but I don't really understand what the next optic is for me.

So often I've heard that the PST's optical quality compares to a SWFA 5-20, or even nightforce, or even that the HDMR is worse than some of those.

Anyways, would love to understand optically, why do I find the HDMR easier to look through. Is it a simple matter of objective size?

 

[redirt78]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

I can't really answer some of your questions but the HDMR has a 50mm objective and 34mm main tube. Sounds like you find the eye box or eye relief better/more forgiving for you on the HDMR than your PST.

 

[MadKap]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

Hah, my apologies, not sure why I thought it was 60mm.

Is there a known list somewhere of various scopes eye box... size? Not sure if that is the right question to ask.

I think that may be one of the most critical factors for me.

 

[zinny]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MadKap</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Looking through the HDMR, I was really impressed with how 'big' the image looked. If that even makes sense. </div></div>

I think your referring to the field of view. I once looked through a S&B and a bushnell tactical side by side. the most immediate difference I found was the much larger field of view the S&B had compared to the bushnell at the same magnification. Not saying that was the only difference, but it was the most immediate one.

 

[jrob300]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

Here's what I have seen with my own eyes with regard to the HDMR/DMR G2. I have a friend who has one of the original H58's. The glass is spectacular. I have had two. An H59 and a DMR G2. Both had horrible glass by comparison. Horus gave me my money back for the H59 and Bushnell is still trying to figure out what to do with the G2. It went through their lab, they say it "meets spec" and to my eye, the glass looks like shit.

Many guys on here swear theirs have great glass. Enough that I believe that at least a few are really good.

Bottom line? It would seem that at this time the HDMR/DMR is hit and miss with regard to optic quality. My hope is that this is a wake up call to Bushnell and somebody over there decides to get serious and bring their "A" game. Vortex has really raised the bar in this industry with regard to hearing the customer and providing top notch customer support after the sale. More than a few companies need to take a page out of their playbook.

John

 

[para1505]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

IMHO I looked through a PST at a match and it was like looking through a dirty window compaired to my SS

 

[beenjammin]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

Sold my HDMR to buy another PST. No regrets here. I use the SFP 6-24x version though.

 

[TacT-MecH]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

I love my pst, ffp 6-24. Future plans include a sfp 6-24

 

[BCP]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It went through their lab, they say it "meets spec" and to my eye, the glass looks like shit.
</div></div>

Same here it's on the way back already. In all fairness the horus model I saw previously was much nicer though so they definitely vary.

 

[dpetro64]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

I have both the PST and HDMR. I prefer the HDMR over the PST based on (perceived) glass quality and range of elevation adjustment. The Bushnell has roughly 10 mils more elevation than the Vortex. When using maximum power (24X vs 21X), the PST seems to run out of parallax adjustment out past 900 yards (target appears "fuzzy"), while the HDMR appears very clear well past 1200 yards. Just my Private First Class opinion... I apologize in advance if this offends anyone.

 

[Eric B.]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

dpetro,

Thanks for your comments, especially regarding the HDMR's greater elevation adjustment. Guess that means I don't need a 20 deg. Picatinny rail for it.

I'm getting an HDMR with the (newer) Horus 59 reticle. Since Horus sells this scope directly I'm counting on it being very good quality. As I understand it this scope is made in Japan, not China! So hopefully all production bugs have been worked out.

 

[squinty-andy]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

Hey MadKap,
I'm pretty sure that was me and my HDMR at the range last week, and while I couldn't come up with the term at the time, Zinny hit the nail on the head with Field of View. That was the most noticeable difference we were talking about. Eyebox (also important) refers to how sensitive/insensitive to head position a scope is before you start to see shadowing.

For the record, I couldn't be happier with my HDMR, which is a VERY early H-59 that I bought within the first week they went on public sale. The FOV is fantastic, and really makes a huge difference in self-spotting trace and impacts at longer ranges- I don't even own a spotting scope and don't feel hampered at all. The eye box gets a little touchy at max power, but its immenently usable, and I've experienced the same thing behind a S&B so I think may just be of the nature of the beast in this range of optics. I don't doubt at all folks' reports of poor Image quality, but on mine as well as 3 other HDMRs of various vintages I've seen, it's great- easily good enough to spot .30 holes at 200 yards. Slight purple fringing is there at max power if my cheek weld is bad, but it goes away if I'm behind the scope properly. I seldom notice it, and when I do it's a sign I need to check my head position.

As for the other points, I hold correction so I don't really care about the 5 or 10 mils per rev. I've had that rig out to 940 yards using just holds in the Horus, and it's a 16" 308. If its dark enough to need illumination in the reticle, I'll be using NODs- not an answer obviously for everyone but as I understand it that's why the .mil requirements that drove the development of this scope (and the Leupold 3-18 and the S&B 3-20) didn't include reticle illumination.

The only scope I'm personally considering as a replacement is the Leupy 3-18, and only because it's about 10oz lighter while duplicating the features.

MadKap- if you're interested, I know of an early-vintage H-59 HDMR for sale new that's local to us that you could check out in person. I think they also have a Leupold 3-18 you could check out. Just PM me.

 

[Jeremybj]

Re: Looked through an HDMR for the 1st time -vs my PST

Honestly- I'm not a big fan of the pst as far as clarity goes. Compared to a mark 4 and my ss hd5-20, there is just no comparison. The pst is just lacking in clarity

I really wanted an hdmr, it might be the scope on my next long range setup...