LPVO vs 1.5-8s and 1.7-10s

[Jerry D]

I am looking for a scope that will be both good in the bush for deer hunting with most shots being 50 yards or closer, but will also work as a range scope out to 500 yards max. I've seen lots of videos on the internet of what these lpvo's are capable of. I really like the swaro 1-8 with the brti reticle as well as the nx8 reticle and razor gen ii e reticles for all purpose, especially with the illumination for close range work.

I think though, that I will mostly be using the scope more so in the 1.5-2 power range to 8 power range so I don't really need the 1x power setting.

How would the lpvo compare to say a swaro z6 1.7-10x42 with the brh reticle. Lets talk eyebox, glass quality, clarity on 8 power and through the power ranges etc.

The rifle is a 6.5lb sporter with an ag privateeer stock, remington sporter contour finished at 21". I feel the lpvo is a great compact fit for the rifle, but the larger swaro is in the same price range and I know will be brighter at higher power.

 

[Burdy]

IMO there is a big difference in the a 1.5x vs a LPVO in image quality. For instance, my Kahles K16 and K18i don't have near the IQ and lack of CA that My Meopta 1.7-10 does. The Meopta is visually much cleaner compared to the two Kahles LPVO's and the Kahles LPVO's are considered some of the best. I also have a 1.5-8 Razor HD LH and its performs great as well. I love LPVO's but if you don't need 1x, the 1.5x's will probably serve you much better for your purpose.

Rationale:
Below is a K16i with 3GR at 6x vs a Meopta Meostar R2 1.7-10 at 6x. The Kahles blows it away on eyebox and field of view but the meopta has better colors, better contrast, less CA and is much more crisp.

 

[st1650]

I put a 1-6 VX6HD on my ultralight bush hunting rifle this hunting season, although I did get a coyote in the neck at 125yards with Hornady Sub-X ammo and I won’t do it again next year. Now I got the new Razor LHT HD 3-15 and although I would have preferred a 1.5/2x on the low end, I like the reticle, forgiveness and turrets. Haven’t run it through it’s pace, might come back to the 3-9 VXR or the 3-9 accupoint.

I’d love to get the March 1.5-15 but it’s too far out of the budget.

 

[beetroot]

ILya has done a few videos explaining rifle scope design basics and talks about how having a true 1x scope causes some serious limitations in the rest of the scope, basically says unless you need true 1x and will use it a lot then you are better off with higher mag.

Personally for hunting I think a VX6 2-12 is an excellent choice, great eyebox, good in low light, quick to pick up reticle at 2x (especially with firedot), 12x on top end is enough for more accurate shots and the zerolock turrets are great.

Of the two choices you've said id go the 1.7-10 for all the reasons you've said.

 

[Jerry D]

Much appreciated . I have a 3-15 lht and it’s really nice. For me it’s a mid range optic and I know I really need a lower power scope for the bush.

I am seriously considering the r2 1.7-10. Hear it’s almost a swaro, and comes with illumination for just under the swaro pricepoint.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[308pirate]

The ability to have a both eyes open, near reflex sight quality 1X far overshadows any benefits that the 1.X scopes may have.

 

[st1650]

The ability to have a both eyes open, near reflex sight quality 1X far overshadows any benefits that the 1.X scopes may have.

For hunting ?

 

[Jerry D]

I looked more into Meopta, seems like we have 1 dealer in all of Canada, will probably have to pass on that and go with Swarovski z6 1.7-10x42 for a few hundred more and no illumination.

I know I can get into a used razor gen ii e for a good price as well. Lots of them floating around the used market as well.

Interesting to hear that even at 6x, the Lpvo has a better eye box.

 

[308pirate]

For hunting ?

Absolutely

 

[Burdy]

The ability to have a both eyes open, near reflex sight quality 1X far overshadows any benefits that the 1.X scopes may have.

Lol. Uh, no. The ability to actually see your target overshadows anything else when hunting. A large percentage of game are taken at dawn and dusk, where LPVOs suck. Secondly, I run both eyes open on a every single optic and irons, what in the world makes you think this is only for LPVOs and red dot/reflex or holography? And finally, any discerning hunter will most certainly appreciate the extra magnification a mid range scope will provide when looking over game to determine size and/or sex or looking at your line of sight and bullet path to locate any possible obstructions.

The only way your statement make any sense at all is if you are hunting humans or deadly game and neither of those you specified so your comment is either incorrect for the vast majority of real world hunting situations or just sloppy.

 

[308pirate]

Lol. Uh, no. The ability to actually see your target overshadows anything else when hunting. A large percentage of game are taken at dawn and dusk, where LPVOs suck. Secondly, I run both eyes open on a every single optic and irons, what in the world makes you think this is only for LPVOs and red dot/reflex or holography? And finally, any discerning hunter will most certainly appreciate the extra magnification a mid range scope will provide when looking over game to determine size and/or sex or looking at your line of sight and bullet path to locate any possible obstructions.

The only way your statement make any sense at all is if you are hunting humans or deadly game and neither of those you specified so your comment is either incorrect for the vast majority of real world hunting situations or just sloppy.

That's right, you're experience is the only one that can possibly be the right one.

I guess all the hunters in the US and Europe who use LPVOs successfully are idiots.

PS IDGAF what you use, it won't affect my choices.

 

[Burdy]

That's right, you're experience is the only one that can possibly be the right one.

I guess all the hunters in the US and Europe who use LPVOs successfully are idiots.

PS IDGAF what you use, it won't affect my choices.

Bottom line:
Worst eyebox in the world is still useable if you can see target.
Best eyebox in the world is useless if you cant.
Carry on.

 

[308pirate]

Bottom line:
Worst eyebox in the world is still useable if you can see target.
Best eyebox in the world is useless if you cant.
Carry on.

LOL

 

[308pirate]

IMO there is a big difference in the a 1.5x vs a LPVO in image quality. For instance, my Kahles K16 and K18i don't have near the IQ and lack of CA that My Meopta 1.7-10 does. The Meopta is visually much cleaner compared to the two Kahles LPVO's and the Kahles LPVO's are considered some of the best. I also have a 1.5-8 Razor HD LH and its performs great as well. I love LPVO's but if you don't need 1x, the 1.5x's will probably serve you much better for your purpose.

Rationale:
Below is a K16i with 3GR at 6x vs a Meopta Meostar R2 1.7-10 at 6x. The Kahles blows it away on eyebox and field of view but the meopta has better colors, better contrast, less CA and is much more crisp.
View attachment 7524181View attachment 7524182

I knew it. You can't see shit with an LPVO

Look at the evidence right thre

 

[beetroot]

I guess all the hunters in the US and Europe who use LPVOs successfully are idiots.

It comes down to what type of hunting you do, for driven game and close bush hunting there is very little reason to not use a LVPO, chances are you will never need more than 6x magnification anyway.
For a hunter than is more likely to take longer shots then a LVPO is probably not best option.

I know a guy who shoots all of his deer within about 40m with a 2-7 and has never needed more magnification, another guy shoots everything over 100m so prefers more magnification.

Personally I think I don't need true 1x for most of the hunting I do so are better served with a bit more magnification on the top end.

 

[Powdermonkey4]

Pretty much my experience.
Pushing/stalking animals through thick bush = 1x with big eyebox invaluable.
Shooting/hunting animals across more open ground at distance = 1x not so useful.

Work out what the percentage of each of type of shot you normally take and that will guide what you require.