Glass snob question 😁

[Happy Antelope]

I had the same requirements as the OP and ended up choosing the NF NXS. I couldn't be happier.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Great scope, had many, but not great light transmission IMO. I don't believe NF will even advertise it.

 

[noodle]

The brightest glass I believe you can buy is the Zeiss V8, someone correct me if I am wrong? 92% light transmission, assuming the Z6 and Z8 from Swarovski are the same. These 2 scopes have ridiculous forgiving eye box. Almost laughable.

Very wrong, laughable indeed!

 

[Gallahad]

Hey noodle, how about keeping it on an adult level. "I disagree, and here is the reason" and then an explanation, would be much more helpful to everyone. I'm trying to learn here, not watch arguments go down. Much appreciated, thank you!

 

[Happy Antelope]

Very wrong, laughable indeed!

Who has a better light transmission rate? S&B must have something better?

 

[KenLee]

Who is advertising better light transmission? S&B must have something better?

Those % numbers get manipulated and are usually just measuring one wavelength of light...or so I was told by an eye surgeon who is an avid hunter.

 

[KenLee]

Who has a better light transmission rate? S&B must have something better?

I think the S&B Polar had the highest advertised % # at 95%. I've never had a chance to look through a Polar at last light.
To my eyes, the Leica Magnus i is a tiny bit better at last light than a Z8i. Both in light transmission and illumination dot size and ease of use.

 

[Happy Antelope]

Those % numbers get manipulated and are usually just measuring one wavelength of light...or so I was told by an eye surgeon who is

The old size victory was also advertised at 95% of course. The lower end the scope goes the brighter it'll be also obviously. You're 100% correct about the wave lengths, I've definitely watched YouTube videos on that where they discuss you need the chart showing all the different light colors to know which is the brightest. You will notice that any of the lower to the middle range scopes don't even make an effort to advertised light transmission rates. I had 50 Leica Magnus when they were discontinued in my hand at a massive discount and sold all but 2 of them very regrettable today.

 

[KenLee]

The old size victory was also advertised at 95% of course. The lower end the scope goes the brighter it'll be also obviously. You're 100% correct about the wave lengths, I've definitely watched YouTube videos on that where they discuss you need the chart showing all the different light colors to know which is the brightest. You will notice that any of the lower to the middle range scopes don't even make an effort to advertised light transmission rates. I had 50 Leica Magnus when they were discontinued in my hand at a massive discount and sold all but 2 of them very regrettable today.

You can sell me the other 2 Magnus and not have a visual reminder of your regret .

 

[Happy Antelope]

You can sell me the other 2 Magnus and not have a visual reminder of your regret .

If you knew what I had paid for them you'd think I was a bigger idiot.

 

[KenLee]

If you knew what I had paid for them you'd think I was a bigger idiot.

If you sold them for good profit, I wouldn't think you were an idiot. I probably would have kept about five though.

 

[KenLee]

If you knew what I had paid for them you'd think I was a bigger idiot.

Have you compared last light usefulness of the Magnus i vs the Amplus?

 

[Marble]

Those % numbers get manipulated and are usually just measuring one wavelength of light...or so I was told by an eye surgeon who is an avid hunter.

Agreed..

Also, depending on someone's actual vision, corrected or not, optics reviews can be very subjective. I tend to like several of the high-end glass products and have much better than normal vision compared to most people.

The best way I have found to evaluate products is to get the product you want on a tripod outside and look through them. Some stores won't let you do it, some will.

Looking across the room in any store is just not doing yourself any favors. Using the optics in unnatural light with unnatural colors is not what the optics are designed to do.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[sdupontjr]

I think the S&B Polar had the highest advertised % # at 95%. I've never had a chance to look through a Polar at last light.
To my eyes, the Leica Magnus i is a tiny bit better at last light than a Z8i. Both in light transmission and illumination dot size and ease of use.

Close, its listed at 96%, thus in the name S&B Polar T96

 

[nobody]

Ever thought about changing your perspective on what truly matters in regards to choosing a scope?

I second this post. You’re buying an aiming device, not an observation optic.

 

[Gallahad]

When it's low light, with a canopy of pine, and a deer comes walking across your trail at 200 yds, and you want to identify it - fawn buck/doe? That nice 10 pointer you had on camera/ or his brother, the not quite as big one, or even the difference between a doe and a 3" spike, and you've got 5-10 seconds to make up your mind, it becomes an observation device until the second before you pull the trigger. Such a ridiculous argument that happens on every optics forum. I think it comes from brand loyalty. Guys buy swaros and talk about how much better their glass is than the NF guys, and the NF guy talks about how bomb proof his scope is compared to the swaro guy. Or whatever. They spent the $ and need to defend their purchase. I know what I want, you know what you want. Can't we leave it at that. Could maybe someone answer one of the actual questions I asked, cause that's why I joined?

 

[nobody]

When it's low light, with a canopy of pine, and a deer comes walking across your trail at 200 yds, and you want to identify it - fawn buck/doe? That nice 10 pointer you had on camera/ or his brother, the not quite as big one, or even the difference between a doe and a 3" spike, and you've got 5-10 seconds to make up your mind, it becomes an observation device until the second before you pull the trigger. Such a ridiculous argument that happens on every optics forum. I think it comes from brand loyalty. Guys buy swaros and talk about how much better their glass is than the NF guys, and the NF guy talks about how bomb proof his scope is compared to the swaro guy. Or whatever. They spent the $ and need to defend their purchase. I know what I want, you know what you want. Can't we leave it at that. Could maybe someone answer one of the actual questions I asked, cause that's why I joined?

The best thing is to purchase a scope that does both, has bulletproof internals as well as good glass. They’re not mutually exclusive, but to purchase a scope ONLY because it has good glass is ridiculous, and the opposite is also true. You asked for our opinions on a public, online forum on your proposed options for optics. Just consider that maybe we have a different point of view that’s just as valid as yours, even if you think it’s faulty. And if you don’t like our responses, you can always ignore them.

Not a nightforce owner, so your argument is null and void there. But I do believe in purchasing quality, rugged, and reliable optics that will maintain zero under normal use and occasional abuse. That’s how most of us feel here on Rokslide, because we’ve been burned by mechanical optic failures in field, even when the “glass” still looked good.

Check out the Trijicon Credo HX and Huron lines of scopes. They’re a stripped down, modern optic with great glass and (from some of the tests on here), Trijicon seem to have solid internals. They’ll all be eons ahead mechanically of the Swaros and the Meoptas you’re looking at, and their glass is great to boot. Plus you don’t need a second mortgage to pick one up. That Huron looks like it’s got a reticle you’d like. Winner-winner, backstrap dinner.

 

[KenLee]

When it's low light, with a canopy of pine, and a deer comes walking across your trail at 200 yds, and you want to identify it - fawn buck/doe? That nice 10 pointer you had on camera/ or his brother, the not quite as big one, or even the difference between a doe and a 3" spike, and you've got 5-10 seconds to make up your mind, it becomes an observation device until the second before you pull the trigger. Such a ridiculous argument that happens on every optics forum. I think it comes from brand loyalty. Guys buy swaros and talk about how much better their glass is than the NF guys, and the NF guy talks about how bomb proof his scope is compared to the swaro guy. Or whatever. They spent the $ and need to defend their purchase. I know what I want, you know what you want. Can't we leave it at that. Could maybe someone answer one of the actual questions I asked, cause that's why I joined?

Trijicons at Eurooptic.com or the Leica Amplus are solid choices for what you want. Zeiss V4 3-12x56 illuminated at $900 if you want to gamble some on dependability, even though I've not had any issues.
No new Nightforce will have the low light glass quality you seek at under $2,000...no matter what a great aiming device it is if you throw out part of your morning and evening hunts.
I have no experience with the Meopta R2, but I'd bet and give good odds that it's better glass in low light than any $1500 Nightforce.

 

[Happy Antelope]

We sell all 3 and agree. Some of our Amplus are even on sale right now and can be had for a killer deal. 400 to 500 dollars savings.

The Leica now have a 10 year warranty also.

Good Luck

Paul
Awww.happyantelope.com

 

[KenLee]

We sell all 3 and agree. Some of our Amplus are even on sale right now and can be had for a killer deal. 400 to 500 dollars savings.

The Leica now have a 10 year warranty also.

Good Luck

Paul
Awww.happyantelope.com

Gallahad and myself are needing that nice group volume discount on some 2.5-15x56 L-4a Amplus

 

[Happy Antelope]

Gallahad and myself are needing that nice group volume discount on some 2.5-15x56 L-4a Amplus

Message sent.

Paul