I am looking at the 3.6-18 for a hunting scope in southern Arizona. What do you think of it's light gathering ability and clarity compared to an shv.
Rifle Scopes So, what about Leupold Mark 5 ?
- Thread starter longshot2000
- Start date
Bought a Mark 5 5-25x56 for my back up PRS rifle. Main rifle has a Kahles K624i on it. Took both out to a 600 yard range this past Sunday and Mark 5 optically bested my Kahles, which is very upsetting to me considering Kahles is $1K more. Had a friend look through both and he also agreed that Leupold had noticeably better image quality. I doubt anything is wrong with my K624 as it just came back from Austria where it had a reticle changed. Kahles still had a better eye box and was IMHO superior in every other way. Not a fan of Leupold turrets but they tracked fine. These MK5’s seem to be very good for the money.
Attachments
Last edited:
Hello,
I've been looking at the MK5 3.6-18 with much interest to put on a new LMT MWS I just picked up. I was curious if anyone can comment on the Tremor3 non-illuminated vs the Tremor3 illuminated options if they happen to have used one or both? I'm mostly curious how usable this reticle is at the lower 3.6x range if not using an illuminated version of the Tremor3 reticle? As an example scenario, if you were attempting to bang steel (or fillintheblankhere with any object) at under 50yrds in a Red-Dot like scenario.
Also, I'm also curious of peoples thoughts on if the seemingly very few illumination dots offered on the illuminated version of the Tremor3 are even worth the extra price? It appears they have gotten a bit stingy on the illumination of this version of the optic given the up charge compared to say the illuminated TMR which lights up like a Christmas tree.
I probably wouldn't even consider the Tremor3 if I didn't know any better about how useful all those windage marks are as distance increases but since I still own an older Horus Vision scope (Falcon 4-16 x 50 Scope w/H25 Reticle) from back in the day. I've come to really appreciate the reticle design over the years of using it but the difference here is that it appears that my older scope lights up in a much more usable way unlike what this Tremor3 appears to offer on the MK5HD.
Current H25 Reticle Illumination on my Falcon
If folks say that they have no issues seeing the reticle without illumination in a more up close and personal situation then I can sleep better just skipping that extra cost.
Thanks for your thoughts
I've been looking at the MK5 3.6-18 with much interest to put on a new LMT MWS I just picked up. I was curious if anyone can comment on the Tremor3 non-illuminated vs the Tremor3 illuminated options if they happen to have used one or both? I'm mostly curious how usable this reticle is at the lower 3.6x range if not using an illuminated version of the Tremor3 reticle? As an example scenario, if you were attempting to bang steel (or fillintheblankhere with any object) at under 50yrds in a Red-Dot like scenario.
Also, I'm also curious of peoples thoughts on if the seemingly very few illumination dots offered on the illuminated version of the Tremor3 are even worth the extra price? It appears they have gotten a bit stingy on the illumination of this version of the optic given the up charge compared to say the illuminated TMR which lights up like a Christmas tree.
I probably wouldn't even consider the Tremor3 if I didn't know any better about how useful all those windage marks are as distance increases but since I still own an older Horus Vision scope (Falcon 4-16 x 50 Scope w/H25 Reticle) from back in the day. I've come to really appreciate the reticle design over the years of using it but the difference here is that it appears that my older scope lights up in a much more usable way unlike what this Tremor3 appears to offer on the MK5HD.
Current H25 Reticle Illumination on my Falcon
If folks say that they have no issues seeing the reticle without illumination in a more up close and personal situation then I can sleep better just skipping that extra cost.
Thanks for your thoughts
To all the questions about low light performance:
I have posted several times about how good the Mk5 is in low light. Both the 5-25 and the 3.6-18. For a hunting rifle, I think the 3.6-18 with illuminated TMR is the best scope out there. I have 2 of them and have carried them on elk and mule deer hunts out west, as well as whitetails in the south. I’ve taken both 5-25 and 3.6-18 out at the same time, and compared them side by side in the same conditions. At last light (30 minutes after sunset) I can easily make out deer 600 yards out in a soybean field with either scope. No illumination needed. The 5-25 really only started showing a slight low light advantage well past legal shooting time. I like the illuminated TMR because it is thicker, and works just like a duplex at low power.
The 5-25 has a better optical picture if you’re staring at a paper target at 100 yards. But while actually shooting- I never notice a disadvantage with the 3.6-18, unless I need more magnification.
I have posted several times about how good the Mk5 is in low light. Both the 5-25 and the 3.6-18. For a hunting rifle, I think the 3.6-18 with illuminated TMR is the best scope out there. I have 2 of them and have carried them on elk and mule deer hunts out west, as well as whitetails in the south. I’ve taken both 5-25 and 3.6-18 out at the same time, and compared them side by side in the same conditions. At last light (30 minutes after sunset) I can easily make out deer 600 yards out in a soybean field with either scope. No illumination needed. The 5-25 really only started showing a slight low light advantage well past legal shooting time. I like the illuminated TMR because it is thicker, and works just like a duplex at low power.
The 5-25 has a better optical picture if you’re staring at a paper target at 100 yards. But while actually shooting- I never notice a disadvantage with the 3.6-18, unless I need more magnification.
I have an illuminated Tremor 3 on a 3.6-18. Great scope, but I don’t love the illumination pattern. It’s not red dot-like. The entire reticle is lit under the right conditions. Disclaimer- I have not had it against a cluttered background in low light yet, so take my opinion for what it’s worth.
Non illuminated, the reticle crosshairs are usable at low power, but the drop/windage are not, in my opinion.
Last edited:
Seems when looking at the TMR reticle for hunting and if the ability to see the reticle in low light at low mag is a concern then one should lean towards the illuminated model, not for the illumination but because the non-illuminated thin lines are 0.05 MILs and the thins lines on the illuminated model are twice as thick at 0.10 MILs, correct? Holy run on sentence batman, but can anyone poke holes in that logic?
You are correct, it seems.
Illuminated front focal TMR has .1 mil stadia (and a central dot).
Main page
https://www.leupold.com/reticles/reticle-illuminated-front-focal-tmr-mk-190
Pdf Subtensions
https://cdnp.leupold.com/content/do..._sheet_190422_070639.pdf?mtime=20190422070638
=========
Non-illuminated front focal TMR has .05 mil stadia (and an open center).
Main page
https://www.leupold.com/reticles/reticle-front-focal-tmr-mk-189
Pdf Subtensions
https://cdnp.leupold.com/content/do..._sheet_190422_070640.pdf?mtime=20190422070640
Illuminated front focal TMR has .1 mil stadia (and a central dot).
Main page
https://www.leupold.com/reticles/reticle-illuminated-front-focal-tmr-mk-190
Pdf Subtensions
https://cdnp.leupold.com/content/do..._sheet_190422_070639.pdf?mtime=20190422070638
=========
Non-illuminated front focal TMR has .05 mil stadia (and an open center).
Main page
https://www.leupold.com/reticles/reticle-front-focal-tmr-mk-189
Pdf Subtensions
https://cdnp.leupold.com/content/do..._sheet_190422_070640.pdf?mtime=20190422070640
@carbonbased thanks for posting the tmr reticle specs.
for those using the mk5 in PRS or other dynamic competitions what reticle would you recommend on the 5-25? I’m torn between the T3 and tmr (I know basically opposites) both with illumination as a hunting/prs reticle.
thanks in advance!
for those using the mk5 in PRS or other dynamic competitions what reticle would you recommend on the 5-25? I’m torn between the T3 and tmr (I know basically opposites) both with illumination as a hunting/prs reticle.
thanks in advance!
Did they give a window on when it may be released that new reticle? Looking to get a 5-25 this summer.
I've got a 5-25 with the CCH. I use it for PRS matches; but, I've taken it hunting and killed deer at last legal light. No illumination needed, as long as you keep it above 10x or so. It's not my ideal hunting reticle, but for a match rifle that might occasionally go hunting- it works. I'd image you will spend way more time at matches and practicing on steel than you will hunting. If that's the case, I would go with the CCH as that's pretty much what it's designed to do.
T3 all day. And no it’s not “Uber cluttered” ?
T3 hands down for PRS. The wind dots are actually highly useful on rapid stages.
Edited to add that T3 Mk5 3.5-18 is in my opinion pretty hard to beat for PRS, especially if you can get it at the mil/LEO discount price. I rocked a T3 S&B 5-45 for a while during the 2018 season and rarely found myself going over 15x.
Last edited:
that’s awesome and that 3.6-18 is a solid compact setup.Did you go with illumination?
Are the included scope caps decent?
They aren't bad. Just basic plastic flip covers. They are pretty similar to Butler Creek I guess. They are good enough that I'm not going to spend a bunch of money replacing them on my 3.6-18, at least not until I break one.
They are not great. They pop open all the time, and don't fold flat. I pay the extra money and get the Leupold Alumina caps. I'm also interested in trying the Aadamout caps.
Has anyone had an issue with their mk5. I just had to send mine in for something coming loose inside the tube and lodged on one of the lenses
Thanks for posting your experience using the Tremor3 Illum reticle.
Based on all the options available this reticle appears to be the best compromise IMO. I'm not one to dial windage or elevation much and have come to appreciate having everything you need built into the reticle itself while using my Horus Vision Falcon which is mounted on my bolt gun.
I do wish the Tremor3 had a more defined center illumination marking on it but..
Anyway, I've decided to go with a Nightforce ATACR 4-16x42mm instead using the same reticle in the end because it offers a "Green & Red" pattern and I feel having the Green color option will work in certain situations better than Red alone.
Thanks again for the info
Just go ahead and get the aluminas.
I have a hard time not protecting the lenses on a $2k scope, and there are no better.
The included ones are ok, but they don't fold flat and I ripped one off on a branch. Aluminas fold flat and stay where you put them.
Already have a set of Aluminas, thanks guys, I’ll roll with those if I ever get my Mark 5’s. Bought a non-illuminated TMR and an illuminated TMR to see which I like best for a hunting rifle. Hawkins Low rings already on hand. I guess Leupold didn’t expect such a surge with the Kestrel rebate, I’m 30 days into the order for the non-illuminated and 5 on the illuminated. I’m wondering if I’ll get them before the April 15th deadline...I’m told the illuminated should ship tomorrow or Tuesday, fingers crossed.
too bad you couldn't see through it.
Over a year, few matches, few scratches, bounced around the truck, etc.
It's still tracking, still clear, hasn't lost zero.
Mine is non-illuminated. I got it when that was the only option.
I emailed them about 2 weeks ago, they told me they had no plans for new reticles
FYI I spoke with Tenebraex about covers for the mk5 5-25x56. Theyre always my go to, they mentioned there is no designated MK5 flip cap yet but did provide a part number that would fit:
Ocular:
UAC033-FCR, adapter frame ring and Tactical Tough cover, Black
Objective:
56FCR-004BK1, adapter ring and Tactical Tough cover, Black
56ARD-012BK1, killFlash anti-reflection device, Black
There seems to be a few more options now, but what mounts/rings is everyone using on the mk5? Seems like Spuhr, ARC, Badger are the main ones being used. Anyone had any issues with these or other 35mm mounts/rings?
Used both Spuhr and Badger one piece mounts. No issues.
My first dedicated rig was and still is a "budget" .308 build. Sitting atop the rifle is a MK IV 8.5-25, I was never limited by the scope, only the caliber I was firing. Initially, I didn't really care what kind of glass I was running and bought the Leupold because I saw it used in a local gun shop for $700 (and trusted that if something wasn't right, they'd send a new one). That said, I agree, when dumb luck isn't on your side...There are FAR better options out there for $2k+
I’m going on 3 sets of ARC M10 rings. They are rock solid, and by far the easiest rings to set up.
What does this have to do with the Mk 5 line? Do you have any experience, or is the old Mk4 your only point of reference?
The rest of the post for whatever reason didn't make it through. Punchline being that I've since bought 2 MK 5s. Good friend of mine is the Northeast region sales rep. They've actually donated several scopes for the non-profits I support over the years as well. That said, I think that the same thing I said above applies to the MK V.
I have been looking for a cantilever mount for a Grendel build with 6mil/20moa slope for a 3.6-18 Mark 5HD, but choices are few. Got excited about the Tier-One cantilever but it is (for now) only being made in 0mil version. I would like to get an Aadmount, but I have not had any success in making contact to find out when they may be available again. The ZRODelta looks like it is currently being redesigned. Are there others I should consider?
Badger makes a 20MOA riser. You could use that with a pair of conventional rings.
ILya
ILya
I was just recently in the market with the similar criteria. I ended up with the Griffin Armament mount. It seems fine so far, but I haven’t shot it much yet.
Badger also makes the Condition One that I believe will meet your criteria. It wasn’t in stock when I was shopping or I likely would have bought it. It may be now.
This might have been said; but the low weight for the Mk5 3-18 and just about everything else (with illumination), make this a great hunting scope...
oops the I then come back to the FOV a 3x scope sucks. So close to a home run and best in class.
oops the I then come back to the FOV a 3x scope sucks. So close to a home run and best in class.
This is exactly my experience too. Will be buying alumina caps before my elk hunt this Nov.
Thanks, Mike. The Badger Condition One looks like a high quality mount. At 1.54" it is a bit taller than I hope to be. I will be interested in your experience with the Griffin since they make a low version at 1.335" that is of interest.
Thanks. Looks like it only adds 0.4 - 0.431" is height so with low rings I can still be under 1.45"
Email those to Leupold, they'll let you know pretty quickly.
I don't doubt they changed things. When I got my 3.6-18 the sunshade was the wrong thread pattern/too small. It wouldn't go on the scope. On closer inspection the ring that screws onto the front of the scope that contains the threads for the sunshade was marked for a Mk. 6, lol. I sent the scope in and they replaced it.
-Dan
Leupold’s Mark 5HD 3.6-18x44 Riflescope Chosen for Army’s M110 Rifle
Leupold is pleased to announce that its Mark 5HD riflescope has been selected for use with the United States Army’s M110 Semi-Automatic Sniper System.
www.ammoland.com Damn, now it might come out in FDE. Is the TMR the only illuminated reticle? It would be nice to have it in T3.
