Alpha glass, 56mm objective, turrets & reliability - does it exist?

[High Tech Redneck]

First time posting here, was drawn to the site after listening to the podcasts about the scope evaluations.

I’m looking for a scope with true alpha glass and a 56mm objective to gather light in the twilight time period, ideally with turrets and a decent lit reticle.

I’ve bought and sold several high end scopes over the last several years, from Swarovski Z8i 2.3-18x56, Tangent Theta 5-25x56, ZCO 4-20x50. All of them had issues holding zero, travel across the country and you’d almost always have to adjust a click or two. Currently running several Nightforce scopes, including a couple 5-25x56 ATACR’s, primarily because of their reliability. But in my opinion the glass doesn’t measure up to the Swarovski Z8i 2.3-18x56 at first light / last light, and the reticles aren’t the greatest.

Does the Schmidt & Bender 3-27x56 or 5-25x56 have comparable reliability and ability to hold zero to the Nightforce?

Any other 56mm objective scopes I should be looking at?

 

[WeiserBucks]

No, unless you skip the turrets. S&B Polar maybe.

 

[Southern Lights]

I have shot thousands of rounds on an S&B 5-25x56 without issue, but I've seen one blow a seal and fog at a match. I've also had good luck with the Steiner 5-25x56 with MSR reticle (made in Germany) on a 338LM for 1,000+ rounds. I can't comment on other versions.

My feeling is that heavier scopes/bigger objectives are more susceptible to problems than lighter scopes from the same make. I can't prove it, but just a hunch. More mass being shaken around on recoil, etc. is my guess.

Swarovski scopes tend to have pretty thin tubes. I've heard of several problems from people just having the rifle tip over and they hit the ground. The tubes are easily damaged. Not sure on the Z8, but the Z3 and Z5 are easily damaged this way.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the reason many scopes fail a drop test is because the tubes are slightly bent on impact. NF tubes are probably 2X as thick as most other makes and my feeling is this is a major reason why they don't lose zero easily when dropped. They are just really tough built and hard to damage externally vs. others.

The coatings on the lenses also can make a difference in low light. Many makes add more pop to look good in the store or bright sunny days. NF told me in the past they tend to optimize their coatings for lower light as they are often used in military applications. YMMV, but just what I was told by them. I've never had problem even with the 42mm NF versions in low light. At least, not enough problems that I couldn't ID the animal and make the shot.

 

[Pronghunter]

If you’re having issues with a Tangent and ZCO holding zero and gathering light, then you’re out of luck. I can officially say I’ve owned/own or have used and in recent months and years the Tangent, ZCO, Schmidt Exos, PM2, Polar, Kahles 318/525, NF, Minox ZP5, etc
I don’t think the human eye can see a light gathering difference between the Z8i, Polar and ZCO. The TT315 is a beast for light transmission and would argue it beats ever scope mentioned. Including my Leica Magnus.

So honestly if you’ve had the TT and ZCO fail you, then I think you’re out of options.

 

[sdupontjr]

My Polar has exposed elevation but not windage.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Currently running several Nightforce scopes, including a couple 5-25x56 ATACR’s, primarily because of their reliability. But in my opinion the glass doesn’t measure up to the Swarovski Z8i 2.3-18x56 at first light / last light, and the reticles aren’t the greatest.

The ATACR 5-25s are widely known as the worst glass in the ATACR lineup. Have you tried an ATACR 7-35? That's their best and, while it's not quite a ZCO or TT, is alpha-adjacent in the same way a Vortex R3 6-36 or S&B 6-36 are. With better reliability of course.

 

[Kimber7man]

This is an attractive price on a S&B

Schmidt Bender 6-36x56mm PM II US LPI P5FL 1cm ccw DT27 MTC LT / ST ZC CT RAL 8000 Riflescope 163-945-64F-G8-E8

FREE SHIPPING on Schmidt Bender 6-36x56mm PM II US LPI P5FL 1cm ccw DT27 MTC LT / ST ZC CT RAL 8000 Riflescope 163-945-64F-G8-E8

www.eurooptic.com

 

[Mike D Texas]

The ATACR 5-25s are widely known as the worst glass in the ATACR lineup. Have you tried an ATACR 7-35? That's their best and, while it's not quite a ZCO or TT, is alpha-adjacent in the same way a Vortex R3 6-36 or S&B 6-36 are. With better reliability of course.

Widely know by what?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Mike D Texas]

The ATACR 5-25s are widely known as the worst glass in the ATACR lineup. Have you tried an ATACR 7-35? That's their best and, while it's not quite a ZCO or TT, is alpha-adjacent in the same way a Vortex R3 6-36 or S&B 6-36 are. With better reliability of course.

Widely known by whom/what?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[JohnJohnson]

Widely know by what?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Users and optics people in general when it comes to thoughts on 5-25 image quality versus others in the ATACR line. The 5-25 has the worst low power tunneling of the ATACR line too. The 7-35 tunnels from 7-8 power or so and then is fine. The 5-25 tunnels from 5-7. I don't think the 4-16 tunnels at all, while the 4-20 reportedly tunnels up until about 5 power though can't confirm that one.

That doesn't mean a 5-25 is BAD. Just means if the OP is picky enough to have gone through TT's and ZCO's, he probably cares about the small details.

 

[Pronghunter]

The difference between the 5/25 and 7/35 ATACR is night and day. No clue why or how, but it’s immediately apparent when looking through them side by side.
The 7-35 in my eyes competes with the very best. The 5-25 is meh

 

[Mike D Texas]

The difference between the 5/25 and 7/35 ATACR is night and day. No clue why or how, but it’s immediately apparent when looking through them side by side.
The 7-35 in my eyes competes with the very best. The 5-25 is meh

Interesting.

I’ve had both literally side x side on 2 rifles and didn’t notice this.

I have a 5-25 and the only thing I don’t like about it is the Mil-XT reticle. I should have known better as I generally don’t like tree reticles.

I also wish I had gone with the 4-20 over the 5-25 because I’ve never shot it at 25X.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro