I talked to the rep at Blazer and he said they will be going back to regular price after the promotion has ended.
Rifle Scopes Why isnt minox more popular?
- Thread starter A.Bennett
- Start date
Most likely. Its funny how most are willing to pay extra for something that is comparable just for the brand recognition/popularity. Yes, they have a longer and proven track record but if people take some time to do some research or better yet (pick up a ZP5) and compare, the scopes speak for themselves. Eventually, word will get around that (most) would agree that the Minox ZP5's are well worth the $3,200 price tag.
What about the ZE5.2 line? Any word on those? How would that glass compare to the usual alpha suspects?
-Stooxie
-Stooxie
+1. And I’d go as far as to say the Atacr has better glass than the Minox. Less CA and better resolution.
I was checking out their other offerings as well, and surprised they didn't have more high end binos
And stupid is as stupid does
And they have learned nothing....
Owned several. They ain’t worth $3200.
I’ve got both the ZP5 and ZCO 5-27 and had a chance to play with the ZP5 out to 1500 today.
Not sure I’d pay $3200, but at $2000, it has me second guessing $3600 on the ZCO, it compares that favorably.
I saw ZERO CA today, absolutely no fringing on any white target at any distance.
Last edited:
Everybody’s eyes are different, but I’d say it’s 100% the opposite. The ATACR 5-25 to me was 1 step above the Kahles 624i, which was very underwhelming at its price point.
Agreed. The minox is a solid $2500 optic. Just like the Kahles k525i is a solid $2500 optic. Minox glass is better than kahles, but kahles has features the minox doesn’t, which IMO, keeps it in the same price point I’d be willing to buy at.
Must be. A bunch of us got together with maybe $40k worth on scopes and the ZP5s were only a small step up from a Razor 2. The Schmidts, Tangents, and Atacrs were consistently better.
What we were trying to resolve were fresh impacts on targets at 1000 yards through mirage. One of the IPSCs has 7 impacts, several of which were clustered up pretty good. With the Tangent you could clearly make out each individual impact and even some of the jagged edges where the paint was chipped up. The Schmidt’s and Atacrs were able to resolve them as well, with the Atacrs being nearly identical with regards to CA control. The Minox looked great until you tried to resolve the impacts. Literally some of the impacts either disappeared or looked like diffuse gray smears instead of clear black spots. The Razor 2s all exhibited the same thing. The Kahles 624s were about the same. We had multiple samples of everything and multiple people looking through all of them.
I’ll also say my own personal visual acuity is better than average. I can resolve the 20/15 line easily and read most of the 20/10 line. If you have 20/30 or 20/40 I can easily see how something like the Minox would look as good or better than others because of the color and contrast (which is as good as anything out there), while missing out on how good Tangents, Atacrs, and Schmidts resolve images and seemingly cut through mirage.
I make purchasing decisions by understanding what function it needs to perform, what range is my budget, and then researching what quality of scope I can get in that range. That’s how I’ve ended up with multiple $650-850 Bushnell Elites on $1000 rifles. The value for the dollar is perfect for me. I’ve never walked into a new rifle setup and decided “I want to spend $3k on a scope, what is in that range?”
I landed a Minox ZP5 with mr2 in February (pre-50% off code situation) for about $1900. The glass was excellent, especially for the rate.
A person can buy the 50% off coupon for $300-400, and then use it to buy a ZP5 for $1750 plus tax. So the limited time new rate is about $2100-2300. By December, there will be enough floating around at that rate (or less used) to set the new value into 2020. I do think that these are great scopes, and so a used price this time next year will still be $1900+.
If I had a budget of $2200-2400, I would definitely consider a Minox for a wide range of uses. It carries much more value than almost any other scope in this range.
I landed a Minox ZP5 with mr2 in February (pre-50% off code situation) for about $1900. The glass was excellent, especially for the rate.
A person can buy the 50% off coupon for $300-400, and then use it to buy a ZP5 for $1750 plus tax. So the limited time new rate is about $2100-2300. By December, there will be enough floating around at that rate (or less used) to set the new value into 2020. I do think that these are great scopes, and so a used price this time next year will still be $1900+.
If I had a budget of $2200-2400, I would definitely consider a Minox for a wide range of uses. It carries much more value than almost any other scope in this range.
Considering the source, I put a lot of weight behind this comparison.
And since I’ve spent more than an afternoon behind Kahles, Razor (AMG), Minox, Nightforce, S&B, Swarovski, etc...I’ll stand behind what I said. The Minox is far superior to the ATACR optically.
I’ve heard the 7-35 is much better, but I wasn’t super impressed with the 5-25. I’ll pick up a 7-35 to try out eventually.
Whoever owns the Minox you tinkered with, they may want to send it back.
Absolutely not, the ATACR was still a VERY good scope, which is why I’m willing to give the 7-35 a try.
The nightforce didn’t have the same contrast and resolution compared to the Minox, especially once the sun started to set. I’m not saying the NF isn’t good, but sitting behind my Minox is similar to sitting behind my S&B. ..you can see color variations and fine details from edge to edge. The ATACR reminded me of some models Instagram photos...the filters used in their photos hide a lot of imperfections. It seemed to smooth out everything that I was looking at, if that makes sense.
Dam last year you guys all loved the Minox. I heard stories about how it's glass was equal to TT, how it and the TT's glass were a notch above anything else, and great the turrets were. Now it seems the Minox has QC issues, the turrets don't always line up with the hash marks, the glass quality is at the lower end of the upper teir scopes, and based on it's merit is only worth $2000-$2300.
What gives you wishy washy little bitches?
Could it be that pride in one's purchase kept people from saying anything negative about the scope until a few months ago when the 50% off deal began and people became frustrated as the perceived market value of their purchase dropped afterwhich they began talking more about the con's of the scope? Could it be that transparent?
What gives you wishy washy little bitches?
Could it be that pride in one's purchase kept people from saying anything negative about the scope until a few months ago when the 50% off deal began and people became frustrated as the perceived market value of their purchase dropped afterwhich they began talking more about the con's of the scope? Could it be that transparent?Dam last year you guys all loved the Minox. I heard stories about how it's glass was equal to TT, how it and the TT's glass were a notch above anything else, and great the turrets were. Now it seems the Minox has QC issues, the turrets don't always line up with the hash marks, the glass quality is at the lower end of the upper teir scopes, and based on it's merit is only worth $2000-$2300.
What gives you wishy washy little bitches?
Or we had time to use the optics long term and changed our opinions.
Or are you one of those retards that sticks to his original thoughts regardless of future experience?
Many of us sold them long before they discounted them.
So, could it be that it’s as transparent as minox isn’t living up to the initial hype and is making a Hail Mary 50% off to try to drum up sales?
Wait wait wait......I know what it is. Minox is smarter than TT, Zco, Schmidt and NF and has made a genius decision to sell all their products for 50% off. Because they are selling tons of optics at retail prices.....
Had time to use the scope long term and changed your original opinions eh. That would be a reasonable claim if the ZP5 hadn't been out what about 2 years now.
Edit; I believe the Minox was introduced in 2015 it's been out for 4 going on 5yrs.
Last edited:
Your quote was “last year.”
I owned several last year, when all the hype was going on. Sold them after I decided they weren’t worth it when compared to other choices. You can go back through several threads over the last 6-12 months and you will find several posters saying this.
One of the big reasons most of us don’t yell it from the rooftops is because a major hide vendor is a retailer and works with customers extremely well for problems and warranty issues.
But, keep making assumptions without reading all the threads. It makes you look pretty smart. Kinda like minox discounting their $3200 tier 1 optic to $1800
I agree with this. The Minox is quite a bit better optically than the ATACR 5-25 and still edges the 7-35 ATACR but not by a lot.
No it makes perfect sense that after a 50% price drop people change their "original opinions" of a scope that's been out 4-5 years.
Sure.
Like what? The stupid parallax ring on top? No other scope has that feature.
It is far superior in the respect that it produces a sharper image, it does not tunnel, it has a far more forgiving and easier to set diopter.
All the problems people have with Minox happen to people owning other Tier1 scopes.
I had the 525 LSW.
I really liked the SKMR3 reticle & the overall look and feel of the scope, but I just couldn’t get used to the top side parallax and LSW. Parallax adjustment, for me, is just so much more natural on the left side, where it belongs.
Left and right side windage option and ambidextrous parallax.
While you personally think it’s stupid, many others don’t. No other optic has that feature because it’s patented (parallax) and when you are the only one in town with something, you get to charge a premium for it.
Again, it’s not a $3300 optic though.
I’m waiting for some manufacturers to offer right side parallax and left windage.
As a right handed shooter, using your right hand for any adjustments (elevation and parallax being the most common) is much more efficient. Most, if not all top shooters attempt to make adjustments with their strong hand.
Your hand is already off the trigger to run the bolt. Much more efficient to make any adjustments with that hand as well. Your support hand is for exactly that, supporting the rifle.
And left side windage allows you use your peripheral to make sure your windage isn’t bumped without moving your cheek weld.
A while ago there were some killer deals on S&B PMIIs at a number of vendors including EuroOptic and Mile High. I bought a 5-25 H2CMR for $2K. While the sales were on the PX prices were significantly higher than the new ones. Guys were not going to sell their used S&B for $1800 so the PX had a dearth of PMIIs. When the sales were over the PMIIs reappeared in the PX and the asking prices were down but not down to $2K. Somewhere in all of this S&B reduced their retail pricing.
Look at the price of a Razor I or the recent drop for the Razor II. Consider all the new entries in the market that appear to have found some staying power. Markets change constantly for a myriad of reasons and will continue to do so.
When I bought my PMII I had looked through one for about one minute at a Cabela's. Did I make my make my decision based on that one minute? Hell no! I based that decision on years of reading here. Was it worth two grand? Absolutely. Would I buy another one? No--well maybe for 2K but I'd rather buy a ZCO for $2600.
If you're considering the Minox as your first Alpha or near Alpha, or you just want to try one, or whatever order your Mauser. This is a killer deal and unless the scope market gets hit by an asteroid you'll be able to sell it for more than you paid for it.
Already owned a ZP5 and got rid of it
My comment was more geared towards that nothing appreciates, unless it is a rarity, but much rather things continue to depreciate. Which is highlighted by your comments.
My apologies if I misunderstood your comment regarding "appreciation". Defining appreciation in this case is simply an increase in market value which is greater than it was. The value of the ZP5 has been artificially depressed by the current offer by Minox. Let's just call it $1950.00 after the Mauser sale, FFL fees etc. Simply put, after the current offer expires in Dec., I believe the value will exceed the $1950.00 within ninety days (as exhibited by the PMIIs). Thus the value has increased. The important thing is, that if one wants to try one they can due so with little to no financial risk.
If buying one means taking food out of your babies mouth than you have no business doing so. On the other hand, if buying one scratches an itch than have at it. If you find it unsatisfactory or not worth the money then sell it. You will suffer little to no loss in my opinion.
You are looking at the pricing in a fixed period of time; i.e. from this sale moving forward. You a negating the previous years of used market pricing. Within the last year, without the 50% off coupon, we have seen ZP5 used pricing go from $2800 to $2200.
If you look at used prices of anything since it was offered on the market to where it stands today the general trend will be it depreciates. Sure, there are fluctuations overall, but just like the PMII and Razor GenII it'll depreciate over the entire time.
Throw in blowout sales, special pricing, etc. and there are surely places where you can make some money off them. This is one of those cases.
The problem with comparing minox to Schmidt is Schmidt tried to drastically raise their pricing on a widely popular and tested optic.
Once they figured they priced themselves too high, they did a big sale and gradually raised their pricing.
Minox’s issue however is they aren’t making the sales at their initial pricing.
Using Schmidt as an example of what will happen with minox pricing in December is not a great idea. While someone who makes this purchase now will likely get their money back if they don’t like the optic, they likely won’t be making any exceptional profit, if any at all.
It depends on what the manufacturer does, I've seen it plenty of times, sometimes they offer a special which hurts the current value, but once the deal is over gradually prices will move if there is demand - but demand is the big driver.
Maybe a bad copy of ZP5 compared to a great copy of the ATACR but this would be the exception and not the rule with regard to optics. I can't say on turrets because I've only played with ATACR turrets at the shops, the Minox turrets don't bother me so I'm content with mine and am thinking about grabbing another considering how low they are right now.
I think optics sales in general arent what they used to be, especially for high end optics. With that said, I can certainly see TT prices dropping.
Gen2xrs have dropped yes, but have somewhat leveled out around $3200. Gen3xrs are still around 4K. Used ZCO’s are going to basically new prices
I realize everyone's eyes are different, but this would be the first time I've ever heard or seen someone say the ATACR has better glass than the Minox. I've owned mine for a little over three years and I've never seen a hint of CA at any mag range on any contrast target. Like @wjm308 , I like the turrets on mine. The clicks are tactile, the eyebox is quite forgiving, the parallax is basically set and forget, and the MR4 reticle is perfect to me. I'm still going to buy a 7-35 ATACR because I suffer from "Ooohhhh, shiny new toy" syndrome, but that's not a slight to my Minox, S&B, or any of the other scopes I own. Hell, after checking out the XTRiii this weekend, I was really impressed. The FOV was outstanding. The glass was really impressive, given the price point. I might pick one of those up too
I think the cost to get into a new TT makes its resale value pretty stable. Scarcity=value and all that. I think the aftermarket ZCO prices will fall a bit the longer the scopes are out
Where did you get that information, are you making an assumption or do you have inside information?
I will agree with you there, Minox simply doesn't have the name recognition that Schmidt has, this is part of the struggle of the smaller brand, they have to compete in a market dominated by the big name players. Even though Minox may have a better scope than Brand X it will be difficult for them to compete head to head with Brand X and in order to get their scopes more sales they typically have to lower the price to encourage the purchase. Most of us want value - best bang for your buck; whatever you'd like to call it, if you can buy Scope X for cheaper than Scope Y and feel that Scope X even performs better for your needs, many people will go that route, but there will always be brand loyalists who will buy Scope Y regardless if there are better scopes out there which may cost less.
Five years ago, if you were to have told me that Minox makes a scope that competes at the alpha level I would have laughed but more than a few on the Hide at the time recommended the Minox ZP5 that I finally caved and gave it a go, that scope has sat on my rifle longer than any other scope (3+ years) because I have found nothing better. The ZCO is something that I think could seriously challenge the ZP5 optically without getting into the Theta stratosphere. If it were a choice between a $3k ZP5 or a $3500 ZCO 5-27x56 I think the choice is easy, I would take the ZCO; however, when the choice is between a $2200 ZP5 or a $3500 ZCO, well that's a lot different.
There is another factor that sets the ZP5 above a lot of other scopes and that is the FOV, it is on par with the TT and has one of the widest FOV's of these scopes, considerably better than Schmidt and NF ATACR at the low end. And another reason why I chose the ZP5 was because I wanted a scope that was under 35oz and the TT, NF and Schmidt are a bit more. It wasn't until last year that NF even had a decent Christmas tree reticle, and I really like the Mil-XT and the Mil-C but those were non-existent at the time. Reticle plays a bigger role for me than turrets (as long as the turrets are repeatable and accurate) and until recently there was not much competition to the MR4 reticle.
So for me, the ZP5 checked off boxes that no other scope (until recently) could check off:
- Under 35oz
- Great Glass (Resolution, Contrast, Color, CA)
- Great Reticle
- Great FOV
- Great DOF/Parallax/Eyebox
- Repeatable turrets with decent clicks
We had 5 ZP5s. Some black box, some white box. The best by far was a brand new one that was up there with Schmidt and Tangent. I wouldn’t be scared of the latest builds, they seem to be well sorted. The demo they had on display at SHOT this year was amazing.
There were a handful of builds with weak erector springs that wouldn’t track when dialing down (it’s a known issue with a certain serial range) and some with mushy turrets, glass was also hit or miss, and a couple of the turrets would not line up between like 6-12 mils. If you are cool with rolling the dice on a used one, ok, but for the same price you can get a used Schmidt or Atacr that are generally much more consistent. I would probably saying buying one made within the last 6-12 months is a safe bet, but I got scared off with some of the older ones.
Just curious, what were your test conditions. Were the 5 ZP5's all individually owned and setup to each owners eyes (diopter) or were all scopes adjusted to the same diopter settings on each and likewise with the Schmidt and NF. It is extremely rare (again exception not the rule) that anyone ever complains about the glass on the ZP5, this is one of its strong suits for sure; however, the turrets have had an interesting history but seem to be better in the newer versions. I have a black box version that has really good turrets IMO, I tried my friends white box version and liked the turrets even more but nothing that would cause me to sell mine and buy another. Keep in mind that ZCO and TT have had some turret alignment issues as well, this is not something unique to Minox, but if I had a turret that didn't track or didn't align after adjustment, the scope would go right back to the dealer. I get what you're saying about used, but it's not just a gamble on the Minox, it's a gamble with any used scope, you just don't know what it's been through or what you're getting in the end. I typically trust most Hide members if they have a long history, maybe I trust them a little too much but so far I've had really good experiences with the scopes I have bought used, and scopes I have sold I get really good feedback. Does Schmidt or NF have "more" good scopes that pass through QC than other brands, I have no idea, but I'd imagine Schmidt and NF sell a lot more scopes than most other brands. I know guys who compete with the ZP5 and I know guys who buy a lot more scopes than I who've had very opposite experiences that you have.
I admit that having 5 sample scopes and not being too impressed with any would give a poor impression, but your experience is definitely in the minority based on the multitude of reports and not just on the Hide.
Also, I know I'm a big proponent of the Minox ZP5 but I would not consider myself a fanboy. I know that I have my bias' but I try to be as unbiased as possible when reviewing scopes, I try to write about the good and the bad and not sugar coat it. There is no "perfect" scope, but I have been pursuing trying to find the scope that comes closest to what I want - and that is the key, we all have different needs and preferences which is why it's good to have so many options. The scope may not be for everyone, but for anyone to discount it based on the few reports of issues would be a mistake IMO, you are passing up one of the best scopes out today (as a total package) and at a lower price than all its competition (for the time being).
Same here.. I think the 7-35 is a better all around scope.
Now that more people have presumably put their hands on Minox, would the mass say they have fixed their QC problems and are consistently delivering a solid product? IE fixed their turrets
The 50% deal makes it hard for me to not purchase one. Would just like feedback from some who have recently purchased if they think they have fixed previous issues.
The 50% deal makes it hard for me to not purchase one. Would just like feedback from some who have recently purchased if they think they have fixed previous issues.
This is just my opinion, but QC problems were grossly overstated on this board. I've had mine on my primary match rifle for three years now and it's never been anything but reliable. @wjm308 has had one just as long, if not longer, and his experience is the same. One of @CSTactical team shooters had been using a minox for a couple of seasons.
Last edited:
Same couple people complain online and it spreads. Since Minox doesn't have a social media presence to influence people, these few people bitching and moaning becomes the focus. This ongoing topic is ridiculous. I will spare all of you the stories of multiple S&B going down in a season, ZCO being returned multiple times this year, Vortex scope broke on arrival, NF ATACR with dead parallax knob, the stories are there but the fan-girls make it sound like a one off. Nothing is perfect. Nobody cares what scope you own, only if you can hit the target.
I have been running Minox for a few seasons and mine have always tracked. They have not been babied. I have run both from 100y-2000y in PRS/NRL/ELR matches. I have shot-out multiple barrels under each one without any issues. Most optics cannot claim that (vortex/shift&bender/etc/etc). If you're worried about getting one and believe what you read on the internet, don't bother, we don't care. If you want one to actually shoot, buy one. I bought mine with my own money from CS Tactical. No discounts, no pro-form, no 1/2 off. Minox gives me nothing in return, I just think they make a good scope.
I have been running Minox for a few seasons and mine have always tracked. They have not been babied. I have run both from 100y-2000y in PRS/NRL/ELR matches. I have shot-out multiple barrels under each one without any issues. Most optics cannot claim that (vortex/shift&bender/etc/etc). If you're worried about getting one and believe what you read on the internet, don't bother, we don't care. If you want one to actually shoot, buy one. I bought mine with my own money from CS Tactical. No discounts, no pro-form, no 1/2 off. Minox gives me nothing in return, I just think they make a good scope.
I can pretty much guarantee you will not find better glass at the 50% off price, heck even at full price you'd have difficulty finding better glass, the scope was designed by GSO - German Sport Optics (of Optronika fame) the same group that designed Premier Heritage Scopes which ultimately became Tangent Theta - Premier, TT and Minox ZP5 all share the lineage of similar optical design. If you do get a ZP5 and find that it is lacking in optical quality then you got a bum scope which should be returned to the dealer or sent in for repair (keep in mind, this goes for all alpha/tier 1 scopes), yes, some have indicated their ZP5 was not better than scope X, but this is extremely rare and not the norm and can it happen with other manufacturer's? Yes it can.
Your comment about the turrets is subjective. What would you (or anyone else) like Minox to "fix" with their turrets? The bigger question is, are the turrets repeatable, reliable and accurate. To answer the latter question, that has been my experience along with many others who've successfully used the scope. Does the turret have some play, yes it does, but does the turret accurately land on a mark with a distinct click and the answer is yes. I have worked the turrets on a newer (than mine) ZP5 and found the turrets to be more distinct with less play, will that make me sell my copy? No, because I have not yet had a situation where I have not been able to accurately dial my turrets. My request would be for Minox to get rid of the tight spot between first and second rev, it's not horrible but it does cause me to concentrate more when dialing, but this occurs around the 14 mil mark and I rarely shoot beyond 1000 yards so this has not been a major factor. I find that turrets fall very much into the subjective category, it becomes personal preference. I did not like the MTC on my Schmidts in the older copies, but had a 2019 Schmidt Ultra Short that had much better MTC click transition, but the clicks themselves (18 mil DT) were the worst I've experience, just wasn't for me, but the guy I sold the scope to was very happy with the turrets. My Kahles turrets were more distinct, ZCO even better than Kahles but my favorite turrets to date - Leopold Mark 5HD turrets, for my personal preference those turrets were gravy on top - very distinct, solid/loud clicks with great spacing, but the Mark 5HD glass and reticles were not my cup of tea.
Yes, GSO, in my opinion, has produced the best optical design for precision rifle scopes ever. As I understand GSO, they were several optical engineers that left Schmidt und Bender to start their own outfit, an optical R&D type business model.
Premier as a business had issues but those issues were not at all related to optical design. TT was smart to buy Premier's asset and IP (hopefully they got them on the cheap). I wish TT the best wishes although I will not buy one at the price they are offered at new. Minox has me very interested however and I'm really enjoying reading these reviews and opinions. I will run my Premier 5-25x56 until she dies (may that never happen) but if she does, I will give Minox a chance.
Similar threads
