I found it optically unclear next to a kahles ($500 more) and not close to the high end NF and SB. If you can afford another 500 get the Kahles. If you want crystal then ~ $3400 with NF, SB (used), and some of the new comers i.e. ZCO
Rifle Scopes Vortex AMG?
- Thread starter vno.helix
- Start date
Funny, I had the exact opposite view from my AMG. I had it next to both a Minox ZP5 and a TT and I didn't see where it gave up much in the optical quality to either of those... It also has better turrets than the Minox hands down and less CA than the Kahles. But this again is subjective as our eyesight isn't the same.. The TT is at the top of the heap still when considering all things such as turrets, glass, eye box. If they ever get their reticle debacle fixed they would run away with it, unless the new ZCO has something to say about that, only time will tell. Whenever I can park the Ark cause the rain decided to quit and things dry up a bit, I plan to do some comparing between my AMG and NF 7-35 to see how they stack up...
Thank you for the clarification.
Everyone has different eyes so I won’t comment on the “optically unclear” statement as I completely disagree and my opinion of the AMG mimics @koshkin and @ICU22250
What I will say is that the K624i was my favorite scope and I was pretty dead set on buying one. The turrets are my favorite, the LSW is a nice feature, and I love the SKMR3 reticles simplicity and usefulness. What killed it for me was the CA.
CA for me was something I did not pick up initially in my MK6 nor T5Xi. Only once I started to get behind more high end optics did I really start to notice CA. It isn’t a deal breaker and I still own those optics, but at the K624i price point it is unacceptable in my opinion.
The ATACR 5-25 left me wanting more especially at that price. The turrets were mushier than a GEN2, K624i, AMG, and PMII. No locking turrets nor second rev indicator. The eyepiece still rotates. The illumination control I find irritating. I do like the MIL-C but wish it was expanded upon as a x-mas tree. The glass was good but nothing above a Razor GEN2 in my opinion.
Congrats blb, and thank you for the mini review. Your findings are similar to mine, the AMG does a pretty amazing job keeping up with the big boys (5-25x56 sereies) while keeping the weight down. I wish CA didn't bother me as much as it does, has nothing to do with hitting a target, but I am right there with you when it comes to CA in scopes above $2k, I have an expectation that it shouldn't be there in that quality of glass which is why I was a bit taken back by the K624i, and like you I really loved everything else about it. I expect that with the release of the 3.5-18x50 scope Kahles is finally going to get into the 5x erector arena and I'm hoping for a K525i to replace the K624i hopefully as soon as next year, and if they've refined the optical formula to improve upon CA I will definitely be keeping my eye out. The very first thing that turned me off with the T5Xi was its really bad CA, at least in my model, even worse than lower end scopes; that was another scope I had really high hopes for because I really liked everything else about it.
When the AMG was first announced by Frank here on the Hide I was first put off by the 4x erector but given its wide FOV at 6x I was able to overcome that and I'm glad I did. Not only did Vortex correct for CA, but they did something special with their glass that really helps it do well in low light which is where I like to torture test my scopes. I find a lot of scopes do really well in good light but when you begin to take away that light, that is when the great scopes begin to shine.
I really would like to see more FFP scopes in light weight packages above 18x. Schmidt has its Ultra Short, then the Ultra Bright and now I'm hoping for the Ultra Light PMII series. I think as more hunters begin to see the light with FFP optics we'll begin to see this market increase as I believe that is one reason why the AMG is doing so well.
When the AMG was first announced by Frank here on the Hide I was first put off by the 4x erector but given its wide FOV at 6x I was able to overcome that and I'm glad I did. Not only did Vortex correct for CA, but they did something special with their glass that really helps it do well in low light which is where I like to torture test my scopes. I find a lot of scopes do really well in good light but when you begin to take away that light, that is when the great scopes begin to shine.
I really would like to see more FFP scopes in light weight packages above 18x. Schmidt has its Ultra Short, then the Ultra Bright and now I'm hoping for the Ultra Light PMII series. I think as more hunters begin to see the light with FFP optics we'll begin to see this market increase as I believe that is one reason why the AMG is doing so well.
IMHO CA should be cause for concern in any optic over $2000. Maybe i've become stingy but it simply drives me insane and i don't own a plethora of top tier glass. My SN-3 was the first high end optic i purchased and the only one i've not let go of. I think given the nature of reviews on USO back then i might have gotten a gem, but idk. The rest have been mid tier IMHO. It almost seems accustomed to the $1500 bracket to have CA. It's like the jump in resolution and edge to edge clarity is made from the $700-1000 market at the expense of having to put up with CA. I will say the one Cronus i looked at briefly was mighty impressive for what those scopes could be had at during December ($1000). The Leupy is going to get a fair shake from me but honestly if it has some CA issues it will be on the OpticsPx and i'll have an AMG on order.
The one Kahles i had for 30 min or so to mess with next to a Gen II razor didn't really wow me enough to want to spend another $400 over the Gen II. I just couldn't see it and i went back and forth constantly at various magnifications. Granted i also didn't notice any CA in that 624i either. Though this wasn't extended time spent behind either. Just glancing back and forth on friends rifles. Though enough reports of the 624i from people i trust would have me wary of grabbing one. I looked at a NF 5-25 that day and was mighty impressed as well, seemed a little warmer to me than the previous two mentioned scopes, but edge to edge clarity and resolution was there.
As to the mention of the AMG or any expensive scope not tracking...with a competent reticle design in the field it should theoretically alleviate the issue in the moment given the optic is FFP. I'm not saying it should happen, i'm simply saying it can. If any of us turn out to be on the unlucky side of that spectrum on a distant hunt, be it dall sheep or what have you, just remember to use hold overs
(assuming it will track back to zero efficiently)
The one Kahles i had for 30 min or so to mess with next to a Gen II razor didn't really wow me enough to want to spend another $400 over the Gen II. I just couldn't see it and i went back and forth constantly at various magnifications. Granted i also didn't notice any CA in that 624i either. Though this wasn't extended time spent behind either. Just glancing back and forth on friends rifles. Though enough reports of the 624i from people i trust would have me wary of grabbing one. I looked at a NF 5-25 that day and was mighty impressed as well, seemed a little warmer to me than the previous two mentioned scopes, but edge to edge clarity and resolution was there.
As to the mention of the AMG or any expensive scope not tracking...with a competent reticle design in the field it should theoretically alleviate the issue in the moment given the optic is FFP. I'm not saying it should happen, i'm simply saying it can. If any of us turn out to be on the unlucky side of that spectrum on a distant hunt, be it dall sheep or what have you, just remember to use hold overs
(assuming it will track back to zero efficiently)I'm not saying it should happen, i'm simply saying it can. If any of us turn out to be on the unlucky side of that spectrum on a distant hunt, be it dall sheep or what have you, just remember to use hold overs
Yeah that is assuming a lot and without checking zero if something happen you have to hope for the best.
All the claims of wonderful quick turn around times of the warranty and such means absolutely nothing to me for my uses. Having heard of 3 AMGs now that have problems with the parallax knobs acting up isn't exactly a warm fuzzy (pun intended
) I suppose if I can still see through the blur than I can make it work perhaps. I am still just a bit apprehensive about the AMG but hopefully it will turn out to be unfounded. Yeah that is assuming a lot and without checking zero if something happen you have to hope for the best.
All the claims of wonderful quick turn around times of the warranty and such means absolutely nothing to me for my uses. Having heard of 3 AMGs now that have problems with the parallax knobs acting up isn't exactly a warm fuzzy (pun intended
I kinda look at this from a different perspective and it is one of the reasons this was my first vortex purchase.
I had to send 3 scope back in 2017, 2 for warranty work and one for an upgrade, all big name, top tier manufacturers, and the turn around time without shipping, time the manufacturer actually had the scope ranged from 3-5 weeks. If I can reduce that time and pay the same price for a quality product I am all for it.
I believe it was stated earlier in this thread or another AMG thread that the number of AMGs that have been sent back is extremely low. I will try and find that quote.
True just a different way of looking at things. I guess would rather buy from a well reputed company that most don't even know how fast the turnaround times on their warranty are because so few actually have to use them. If I had to send 2 scopes back in a single year, I likely would swap to a different company. Warranty doesn't mean much to me when out on a hunt...."atleast its got a quick turn around when we get back to town and you box it up to send it in", doesn't exactly lessen the blow of the scope failing for me.
2 different companies, Steiner and Nightforce. Leupold was the one that went back for an upgrade. I would venture to say all 3 are very reputable. All mechanical things will fail eventually and they typically happen at a inopportune time.
Agreed, I have no illusions no other companies are infallible I just to find "look how fast the turn around is" a huge selling point for me. Of course the faster the better certainly, but speed of turnaround on warranty is way down on the list of a selling point for me when buying $2K+ on a scope. But here I am with a Vortex AMG despite of it so maybe I am just a sucker haha.
I know it would be impossible to get the companies to release this data but it would be way cool to see rate of return for warranty on all the products and different product lines they sell.
@alaskalanche below is the excerpt I was looking for from the horses mouth.
I suspect the reason we hear so much about Vortex’s warranty is because they have so many more scopes in use than any other manufacturer. I mean at matches and tournaments it is usually 3-4 Razor GENIIs to any other one high tier scope.
It would be very interesting to see that data.
I suspect the reason we hear so much about Vortex’s warranty is because they have so many more scopes in use than any other manufacturer. I mean at matches and tournaments it is usually 3-4 Razor GENIIs to any other one high tier scope.
It would be very interesting to see that data.
Sorry for the question.....but what is "CA"??
CA = Chromatic Aberration
https://www.google.com/amp/s/photographylife.com/what-is-chromatic-aberration/amp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/photographylife.com/what-is-chromatic-aberration/amp
Especially if you're bird watching. It is a very serious issue.
Lmao..... exactly!!! It brutal on bird watching!!!
"Wait! was that a purple bellied Finch or a yellow Finch?! Ahh crap. It was a white dove... Damn CA!"
?? Scope Humor, please meet Ornithology....
?? Scope Humor, please meet Ornithology....
LOL!!!!! Wait a second, this isn't the bird watching forum, dang, I've been in the wrong forum for all these years. Although I must admit the other birders get kind of upset when I point my rifle at their beloved pot bellied flicker and get better picks of it with my iPhone and Minox ZP5
There is only one issue with the AMG's.... Vortex doesn't offer a smaller magnification version!!!! I need a 4-16! I really want them to make a 4-16, or if they want to change to a 5x erector a 3-15, something in that range for a short action hunting rifle. But the 6-24 is great, I have no desire to get rid of it for something else. I don't think I am losing out on anything by using it.
I would easily purchase a 4-16 or 4.5-18 AMG to replace a MK6 on my lightweight 6.5 Grendel AR
I have asked Vortex for a 4.5-18 AMG for some time now and while specifics are not given it appears there is another AMG on the horizon. That being said, Vortex has a history of announcing new products at SHOT, so my guess is we'll have to wait another year to find out
But I agree, if they could make a 4.5-18 AMG under say 25oz... well that would make an old man happy. A 4-16 would be okay, but the 3.5-18/4.5-18 is where it's at these days, they do everything the 4-16 could but just a little better without giving up too much FOV at the low end. Oops. .wrong thread! Haha.
I have asked Vortex for a 4.5-18 AMG for some time now and while specifics are not given it appears there is another AMG on the horizon. That being said, Vortex has a history of announcing new products at SHOT, so my guess is we'll have to wait another year to find out
Yea, I won't be too picky. Anything in that mid power range and I'll pre-order it the day it's available. 6-24 will stay on the long action, long range hunting rifle and the new one on a short action hunting rifle.
I don't think they will do this, but I will be real upset if the next amg released is a 1-6 or 2-10 or something on the low end like that.
No love for the AMG? I assume you are interested in the MK5
I have asked Vortex for a 4.5-18 AMG for some time now and while specifics are not given it appears there is another AMG on the horizon. That being said, Vortex has a history of announcing new products at SHOT, so my guess is we'll have to wait another year to find out
100% agree. I would be willing to wait until next year for a 4.5-18. Great glass, light weight, solid features. I spend the majority of my time between 12-18 with the 6-24 so 18 on the top end would leave me wanting nothing.
Actually I am interested in the AMG. The MK5HD may have a bit too much CA for a $1.5-2k scope. I'm willing to spend a little more but was really hoping the short light specs would pan out with tracking and light handling.
I'm specifically looking for a 18-20x high end with FFP and light weight for a DMR/LR semi rifle. Would like to see Vortex pull it off but nobody seems to be able to make CA disappear (consistently) for less than $2k. Would love to find something like you described for 4-16 or 3.6-18 with solid tracking, simple zerostop, and glass that didn't look like a yellow & purple rainbow in winter shooting.
Nice to know I'm not the only one, living in Colorado where we get a lot of snow (though its been pretty barren on the front range so far this year) CA becomes pretty obvious when you see the stark contrast of white snow and dark timber or almost anything in contrast to the white.
I recently went from an AMG in MOA to a Gen II in mils. Long story short the shear size and weight of the Gen II made me sell it and went looking for another scope. I almost went with the Khales 624i but ended up going with another AMG with the EBR-7B reticle. The Khales scope is flat out awesome but their warranty is misleading. Lifetime on glass only, everything but electronics is 10yrs. Electronics is 2 years. Repair work is done in Austria. could take several months to fix even something simple due to customs. AMG is a solid scope and I'm happy I went back to it.
They do have a repair center in Rhode Island, but I could not get a straight answer from several different people on what work they could actually do there. As you said everything else goes back to Austria.
And that my friend is why I've gone back to NF 7-35 and an AMG as my two primaries.. Had a Minox with debris inside and was told the wait was gonna be a while because Minox can't keep up, I decided no way, not me.. I'm pretty sure NF and Vortex can have me taken care of well within reason. The German glass may be better to some, but I've had about all of them, and the AMG and NF ATACR series are top tier premium glass and can hold their own with their German and Austrian counterparts. There's just not enough positives in those other optics for me to warrant having to settle with a sub par warranty, long as hell waiting times or underwhelming turrets.... Ok, rant over...
Yeah, I really like the Minox, but god forbid it ever needs work. However, Nightforce needs to do better: The ATACR series is overpriced for the feature set versus competitors and the turrets need work to play at Minox level, or even perhaps Razor level. Had I known Leupold was dropping a mid power variable in the tactical space I’d have saved the money over the 4-16x F1.
If Vortex made a midpower AMG, I’d own it for the above reasons.
If Vortex made a midpower AMG, I’d own it for the above reasons.
I strongly disagree about the time you reach the turret part, my 7-35 turrets, other than the markings are night and day better than both of the Minox scopes I had by a longshot.. And by markings, I mean not having more than the first rev marked on the turret.. But if you have a zero stop, thats not an issue.. I actually have a 4-16F1, and to be honest, after trying two of the Minox scopes, I wouldn't trade my 4-16 for another one.. partly for said reasons in the above post.... Everyone has their preferred optics though, these are just mine...
I don’t have a 7-35 so I can’t comment, but the 4-16 turrets are merely adequate. They play around the same level as a Razor at best and there’s significant difference between the elevation and windage turrets though I rarely dial for wind so whatever. From the factory my 4-16x F1 didn’t lineup adjustments exactly, a problem I haven’t had in a while.
I haven't had any alignment issues, but there are some optics out there that don't have the same feel on elevation and windage knobs. TT is probably the best at managing this, my AMG isn't bad either. NF does have a difference in them, for what reason I don't know why..
My Minox ZP5 is definitely a step above (optically) the AMG, as well as the two Schmidt's I've had, the Kahles, the March, basically it is the best optical experience I've had out of a riflescope, combine that with the MR4 reticle and good mechanics and its hard to beat; however, I do agree that if something were to go wrong we might be in for a bit of a wait. This is why the new ZCO intrigues me so much, if the ZC527 is close to being as good optically and the mechanics are solid, I may be persuaded to sacrifice the additional 4oz and go that route, but the ZCO really needs to knock it out of the park for me to part with my Minox, here's hoping...
That being said, the other scopes are still fantastic optically even given their own limitations. For example, I still don't see a scope that would cause me to give up my AMG because it's the right package at the right weight.
That being said, the other scopes are still fantastic optically even given their own limitations. For example, I still don't see a scope that would cause me to give up my AMG because it's the right package at the right weight.
When I had my Minox and AMG side by side, I could resolve things clearer, more defined than I could with the Minox. Now this could just be my eyes, but that's what I got... This was out at about 400 yards and I didn't look for each and every lighting situation possible to test. This was just a couple of times I had them out together... If the Minox takes a shit, I do feel for you in the worst way. Lol..
It’s interesting because there’s been reports of the AMG suffering from the same IQ issues and I have not seen it with two AMG’s I’ve had. I think sometimes our eyes are looking for different things and have different preferences which lends towards certain biases (of which I am definitely a part of). Like I said the Minox ZP5 I have has trumped all other scopes I’ve had in regard to pure optical performance, the turrets and mechanics have done well so far and I like the reticle a lot so it will stay for now. My AMG is pretty amazing as well so I see no need to change there either. They each have a purpose and fulfill that purpose extremely well which is why I’ve settled on these two for now.
Agreed.... The biggest gripe with the AMG I have is the overall outer finish is very very easily scratched.. I honestly believe you could scratch it with your fingernail, there is definitely room for improvement...
We have more Vortex AMG 6-24's in MRAD on the way if anyone is interested feel free to call 916-670-1103
feel free to call 916-670-1103
I had an AMG, but when put next to my Razor Gen 2, the resolution was very slightly better, but the larger and far more forgiving eyebox of the RG2 works better for me for what I like to do.
When I put my AMG next to two Kahles 624i, the Kahles were significantly brighter at the same magnification, the resolution ever so slightly better than the Kahles (which I thought were better at resolving than the RG2), but the CA was apparent in both.
The color on the AMG looks "flat" to me, but I couldn't fault the scope for anything other than a tighter eyebox.
When I put my AMG next to two Kahles 624i, the Kahles were significantly brighter at the same magnification, the resolution ever so slightly better than the Kahles (which I thought were better at resolving than the RG2), but the CA was apparent in both.
The color on the AMG looks "flat" to me, but I couldn't fault the scope for anything other than a tighter eyebox.
I had the parallax go haywire, sent it in and back in a week. Get service, I will stay with them.
Similar threads
