Was it just me or did the Schmidt&Bender have a much brighter image through the camera? Kept switching back and forth and liked what I saw through the Schmidt a lot more.
Rifle Scopes Lowlight's Scope Review
- Thread starter Dark Horse
- Start date
Re: Lowlight's Scope Review
i think that its kind of deciving and you cant really compare the clarity through the eyes of a video camera. What i did find particullary interesting was that the cheek weld and eye relief on the Hensoldt was amazing, what i mean by that is that it wasnt finnicky like the SB was. If you have ever tried to hold a camera up to a scope and get a reticle shot its a PITA, but with that Hensoldt he dropped the camera in behind it and there it was edge to edge view. But in MY opinion i couldnt really tell which was brighter or clearer just from looking at a video
i think that its kind of deciving and you cant really compare the clarity through the eyes of a video camera. What i did find particullary interesting was that the cheek weld and eye relief on the Hensoldt was amazing, what i mean by that is that it wasnt finnicky like the SB was. If you have ever tried to hold a camera up to a scope and get a reticle shot its a PITA, but with that Hensoldt he dropped the camera in behind it and there it was edge to edge view. But in MY opinion i couldnt really tell which was brighter or clearer just from looking at a video
Re: Lowlight's Scope Review
No, the S&B wasn't clearer it was just the operator and how I was able to get behind the scope.
If you look in the beginning of the video, a few seconds in there is a short piece showing some targets at 100 yards through the Hensoldt and it is super bright.
The issue is the fact the benches are in the shade and the camera is trying to auto balance so it doesn't give you a good view.
Technically if you look, they are really so close its near impossible to tell on the video one over the other, but trust me the Hensoldt has a big bright picture. But the S&B is definitely good, just not the same.
No, the S&B wasn't clearer it was just the operator and how I was able to get behind the scope.
If you look in the beginning of the video, a few seconds in there is a short piece showing some targets at 100 yards through the Hensoldt and it is super bright.
The issue is the fact the benches are in the shade and the camera is trying to auto balance so it doesn't give you a good view.
Technically if you look, they are really so close its near impossible to tell on the video one over the other, but trust me the Hensoldt has a big bright picture. But the S&B is definitely good, just not the same.
Re: Lowlight's Scope Review
Would love to play with a 6-24 Hensoldt, anyone get a chance to run one?
Would love to play with a 6-24 Hensoldt, anyone get a chance to run one?
Re: Lowlight's Scope Review
I have seen the 6-24X and seen them used, but I personally have only worked with the 3-12X and the 4-16X, I haven't worked with the 6-24X, although I do have a Zeiss 6-24X in my personal collection, just not a Zeiss tactical.
At the SHC in March Nathan was using a 6-24X72 and it really was an awesome piece of glass and not nearly as overbearing as the 72mm might suggest. Even at night it was insanely awesome the detail you can see.
But I went back and looked at the unedited HD footage and its so close you can't tell through the camera, really impossible to be honest.
I have seen the 6-24X and seen them used, but I personally have only worked with the 3-12X and the 4-16X, I haven't worked with the 6-24X, although I do have a Zeiss 6-24X in my personal collection, just not a Zeiss tactical.
At the SHC in March Nathan was using a 6-24X72 and it really was an awesome piece of glass and not nearly as overbearing as the 72mm might suggest. Even at night it was insanely awesome the detail you can see.
But I went back and looked at the unedited HD footage and its so close you can't tell through the camera, really impossible to be honest.
Re: Lowlight's Scope Review
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Outsydlooknin75</div><div class="ubbcode-body">damn 72mm just seems ungodly in a scope. How was cheekweld on that?</div></div>
Like I said, not nearly as bad you think it would be.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Outsydlooknin75</div><div class="ubbcode-body">damn 72mm just seems ungodly in a scope. How was cheekweld on that?</div></div>
Like I said, not nearly as bad you think it would be.
Re: Lowlight's Scope Review
If you figure 1/2 the scope is below eye level:
56mm is 28
72mm is 36
Only 8mm more of cheek which isn't really that much. Adjustable pieces won't really notice that at all.
This is if you can get rings that will put it fairly close.
Chad
If you figure 1/2 the scope is below eye level:
56mm is 28
72mm is 36
Only 8mm more of cheek which isn't really that much. Adjustable pieces won't really notice that at all.
This is if you can get rings that will put it fairly close.
Chad
Similar threads
