Anybody that has used one of these scopes....please share your thoughts, I appreciate your info!!
Rifle Scopes Schmidt & Bender Polar T96 scopes - thoughts/experiences??
- Thread starter toader
- Start date
I got one a few months ago. I got the 4-16x56 P4F. I compared it to my PMIIs and my wife's Premier Heritage. Of those, it had the longest low light performance. The polar was almost too bright during the day, so I added the sunshade I have to it, I will likely drill a hole in a butler creek to give it a smaller aperture option.
It is as clear or clearer than swaro z3 that I was using for hunting before, but it is FFP, and has turrets I can dial. The only drawback might be the weight, but for the features, I think that is close to comparable scopes.
I am very much looking forward to hunting with it this fall. The nice buck on the land that I have access too, last fall had a habit of coming into the field at last light or just standing at the edge.
It's an S&B, it is excellent.
It is as clear or clearer than swaro z3 that I was using for hunting before, but it is FFP, and has turrets I can dial. The only drawback might be the weight, but for the features, I think that is close to comparable scopes.
I am very much looking forward to hunting with it this fall. The nice buck on the land that I have access too, last fall had a habit of coming into the field at last light or just standing at the edge.
It's an S&B, it is excellent.
Sounds good....thanks!!
Any others??
Well....I ended up with the 3-12x54 Polar. Have not mounted it yet, but just messing around spotting stuff outta my windows.....I like it already, clear as I have seen!!
Yup, I’ve got two. How do you like it?
Last edited:
My brother has 2 3-12x54 Polars. Both FFP P4F. Outstanding glass, super clear and bright. He loves them.
I remember at IWA I was looking at various scopes at the S&B booth.
Picked one up at thought WOW this is bright, it was the Ultra Bright.
Don't expect the Polar to be any worse. 96% light transmission.
Picked one up at thought WOW this is bright, it was the Ultra Bright.
Don't expect the Polar to be any worse. 96% light transmission.
I recently acquired the 2.5-10x50 SFP and it is the best piece of glass I own. Clarity and brightness are amazing. While sighting it in I realized the crispness....only word I can describe it....of the target downrange I have been missing with my other scopes.
The only downside is now my other optics are.......substandard
The only downside is now my other optics are.......substandard
Can you describe the “too bright”?
I have a 3-20 PMII and it seems perfect…just a bit heavy for hunting and the 20x is overkill.
Thanks
I’ve had the 4-16 pmii and the 3-12 polar, neither are “too bright”.
Thanks,
I'm trying to decide between the 4-16 and the 3-12 Polar. I like that the 4-16 has a focus/parallax adjustment (isn't fixed at 100m).
Also this scope will be primarily used on western big game hunts (antelope, deer, elk, moose?). I like the low light abilities but want to make sure I'm not sacrificing daylight capability (i.e. does it have a long depth of field/focus like the PMII 3-20?)
Thanks again for info.
I think I’ve had almost every SB PM at this point…lol. I would say the ultra brights or polar are optically superior to the pm3-20. It’s been awhile since I e owned the 3-20, it is one of the scopes I wish I would’ve have gotten rid of. I can’t imagine the polar giving up much or anything to the 3-20. My only complaint about the optic is I think they should have done field of view better, and the eye piece is kinda blocky..
The 7 SAUM I run is just over 8.5#…(with the 3-20 PMII). Since I want to move the scope saving a few oz seems worthwhile. I’ll ‘sleep on it’ but I expect by next summer it’ll be wearing a polar 4-16…
Thanks again…
From what I can tell it allows for 10 mils above zero?
For hunting that puts me past 1000 yards…seems more than adequate.
Am I missing something?
The video I watched it has 100 clicks up from the zero stop. Seems like it is just a single turn turret.
You ought to heavily consider the Leicas. They are built robust, have a superior illumination system, and a massive field of view. I personally like the fact they are on a 30mm tube, the Schmidt can be kinda bulky with the 34mm tube. The Schmidt will be a tad brighter but I thought the leica has a better overall image. I had the non illuminated version, and ive been trying to talk myself into this version. This scope will not disappoint with overall image and low light performance.
www.eurooptic.com
www.eurooptic.com
LEICA MAGNUS 2.4-16x56 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 54114
LEICA MAGNUS 2.4-16x56 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 54114 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
Leica Magnus 1.8-12x50 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 53174
Leica Magnus 1.8-12x50 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 53174 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
Great scopes. I’m trying to stick with a FFP option though.You ought to heavily consider the Leicas. They are built robust, have a superior illumination system, and a massive field of view. I personally like the fact they are on a 30mm tube, the Schmidt can be kinda bulky with the 34mm tube. The Schmidt will be a tad brighter but I thought the leica has a better overall image. I had the non illuminated version, and ive been trying to talk myself into this version. This scope will not disappoint with overall image and low light performance.
LEICA MAGNUS 2.4-16x56 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 54114
LEICA MAGNUS 2.4-16x56 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 54114 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
Leica Magnus 1.8-12x50 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 53174
Leica Magnus 1.8-12x50 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 53174 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
Really? Why's that?You ought to heavily consider the Leicas. They are built robust, have a superior illumination system, and a massive field of view. I personally like the fact they are on a 30mm tube, the Schmidt can be kinda bulky with the 34mm tube. The Schmidt will be a tad brighter but I thought the leica has a better overall image. I had the non illuminated version, and ive been trying to talk myself into this version. This scope will not disappoint with overall image and low light performance.
LEICA MAGNUS 2.4-16x56 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 54114
LEICA MAGNUS 2.4-16x56 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 54114 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
Leica Magnus 1.8-12x50 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 53174
Leica Magnus 1.8-12x50 i L-Ballistic BDC Scope 53174 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
The beam will be way smaller than any tube by the time it steps down from the objective. Is the S&B glass that much better?
I'm still considering the T96 to replace my Swarovski Z3. I've compared my Z3 to a Leica Magnus and they were equal to each other as far as low light performance which seems to run contrary to what some would say. Because of this I'm very apprehensive to order a T96 since some say the Magnus is better than the T96. Sample variation?
I doubt it is sample variation. All high end brands get the job done, buying alpha scopes is more of a personal preference. I could get an old Nikon scope, and it would get the job done… but I like nice things and love the best so I tend to gravitate to the Magnus and t96s of the world. Buying alpha level scopes is more of an obsession than a necessity.
This. One of the most reliable scopes I’ve ever owned is a cheap Nikon, it just won’t die. Is a S&B Polar better than a Z3? Sure, mostly in terms of mechanics, but the glass should be a step up as well. That said, the Z3 has really nice glass for hunting.
I sighted T96 and the glass is incredible, i was blown away plus Weight is not so bad. regretted going with the S&B 5-20 ultra short.
Limited tunneling once eye relief is set properly. Eyebox and FOV both seem on par with other optics sharing similar specs.
Similar threads
