Is glass quality in scopes actually a factor?

[Gstew1930]

WAIT WAIT WAIT!! O-ring? Does it keep the turret from "wandering" when you breath on it? I've benched the Maven for the SWFA for this exact reason... Is it just a larger auto O-Ring or something from maven?

yeah Ninebanger came up with a fix for it, theres a thread around here somewhere about it

 

[Wprinkle]

yeah Ninebanger came up with a fix for it, theres a thread around here somewhere about it

And just like that @Nine Banger is getting a Christmas card!!!

 

[Nine Banger]

I’ve often wondered why folks set their optic to go below zero. What is the use case behind this?

My most current use case:

- 6 creed zeroed for 115/112 Match Burner loaded to Quick Drop but I was shooting a lot of full speed 95gr TMK too @-.2 mil

 

[Gstew1930]

And just like that @Nine Banger is getting a Christmas card!!!

he prefers feet pics

 

[Kyguy]

My neighbor has a 65 acre field across the road and the long dimension is 753 yards. I can put a SWFA fixed 6 and a SWFA 3-9x42 on his sturdy fence posts and discern a marked difference in glass quality at and after sunset.

I can't see much of a difference between the Maven Rs1.2 and the SWFA 3-9x42 tho.

The Maven is a whole new animal with a fat o-ring on the elevation turret if you're in on that. Mine went from an untrustworthy black sheep to back to my favorite.

I think my closet looks like GStew's closet. The ATACR glass is better/best but it was essentially a 30oz fixed 10x for me with Mil-C.

Can you make the shot with the 6x? Is the glass impeding you in any way? Or is that the 3-9 is just better, since it's HD glass?

 

[Bluumoon]

@Gstew1930 @Wprinkle

Y'all send me an address, and I'll mail you what you need. I think I have 10-12 O-rings left

 

[Nine Banger]

yeah Ninebanger came up with a fix for it, theres a thread around here somewhere about it

And just like that @Nine Banger is getting a Christmas card!!!

It was @Shortschaf that saved the day.

 

[Gstew1930]

@Gstew1930 @Wprinkle

Y'all send me an address, and I'll mail you what you need. I think I have 10-12 O-rings left

Thank you!

 

[Nine Banger]

Can you make the shot with the 6x? Is the glass impeding you in any way? Or is that the 3-9 is just better, since it's HD glass

There's a point in the evening where you can still see "deer" with the 3-9x set at 6x and just "dark shapes" with the 6x.

The fixed 6x is grainier prior to that time.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I will say that specifically for coues deer hunting I do care about the image quality (contrast/resolution/etc) of my scope. When you're looking into a shaded spot on a grey looking hill and the deer is basically the same exact shade of grey it's really freaking hard to see things well. I've had glasses since I was 11 so my eyes didn't exactly start off great though so it may not be an issue for other people.

 

[Kyguy]

There's a point in the evening where you can still see "deer" with the 3-9x set at 6x and just "dark shapes" with the 6x.

The fixed 6x is grainier prior to that time.

That's interesting. I'd say that's a resolution issue, so it makes sense that the HD makes a difference.

Another thing that I've noticed is that each individuals eyes can make quite a bit of difference. Some eyes and glass work well together, some doesn't.

 

[Kurts86]

I will also say if I can get 2 scopes that are both sufficiently durable I will take the one with better glass quality. With modern consumer products we are spoiled for choice and don’t have to make major compromises to get just one feature.

 

[Johnwell]

I think the level of scopes discussed here all have way better glass than is needed. I remember being happy with my Nikon buck master and vortex viper back in the day before I was a glass snob.

Heck, my dad used a bushnell banner wideview for decades and never had an issue with glass clarity..

I lent a spare 3-9 swfa to a friend last summer and he said it was painfully bright to look through compared to an old leupold he was using.

I think the vast majority of hunters would be absolutely tickled with the glass clarity of even the lowly 6x and 10x swfa. The gold standard ‘good’ scope in most hunting camps I’ve been to is almost always a leupold vx3.

A $500-1k scope is just not something most guys in my area would even consider.

 

[Rich M]

I completely "see" why glass quality is top concern for spotting optics, zero argument here. But with aiming devices is it that important? I honestly can not really say that the glass difference between say SWFA, Leupold, Nightforce SHV, Swaro or Maven is enough to even be a factor. I

Look thru them 15-30-45 minutes after sundown and see what you see. Should clear things up real quick.

Better glass shows details, color, depth of field, and will show animals in the shadows when other scopes have quit for the day.

Vx-3 was the standard for deer hunting scope back in the day. Still have banner scope on a rifle.

Bought an Alpha scope this year cause it’s time to quit screwing around. Getting too old to brush off loss of opportunity cause scope on gun aint working and it is legal time.



Edited a little. What does he want out of the "glass" if not for details, color, contrast, depth of field, and low light. Test the hardest or most desired variable first and work back to the least.

Used to be a SWFA forum, back when SWFA sold scopes. Those guys (from the industry - not "influencers") would split hairs about all aspects of scopes. Was informative. Shame they went out of business or whatever.

These days all we get is opinions. No place to go see what scope your eyes like. No place to see if the scope will show you crisp target lines and bullet holes or the details of a bucks rack or help you find a hole to thread a bullet to an animal in thicker woods. Sucks pretty much. So you ask questions and read reviews - most reviews are crap, the trick is finding the reviews that apply to what you want to know. In order to do that you need to define your wants.

The scope game has changed - dialing is big, so are high magnification ratios. Glass takes a back seat to those. Thus, aside from maybe better coatings, significant glass improvements seem to be on hold while they pursue the other aspects of scopes.

 

[Kyguy]

Look thru them 15-30-45 minutes after sundown and see what you see. Should clear things up real quick.

Better glass shows details, color, depth of field, and will show animals in the shadows when other scopes have quit for the day.

Vx-3 was the standard for deer hunting scope back in the day. Still have banner scope on a rifle.

Bought an Alpha scope this year cause it’s time to quit screwing around. Getting too old to brush off loss of opportunity cause scope on gun aint working and it is legal time.



Edited a little. What does he want out of the "glass" if not for details, color, contrast, depth of field, and low light. Test the hardest or most desired variable first and work back to the least.

Used to be a SWFA forum, back when SWFA sold scopes. Those guys (from the industry - not "influencers") would split hairs about all aspects of scopes. Was informative. Shame they went out of business or whatever.

These days all we get is opinions. No place to go see what scope your eyes like. No place to see if the scope will show you crisp target lines and bullet holes or the details of a bucks rack or help you find a hole to thread a bullet to an animal in thicker woods. Sucks pretty much. So you ask questions and read reviews - most reviews are crap, the trick is finding the reviews that apply to what you want to know. In order to do that you need to define your wants.

The scope game has changed - dialing is big, so are high magnification ratios. Glass takes a back seat to those. Thus, aside from maybe better coatings, significant glass improvements seem to be on hold while they pursue the other aspects of scopes.

The reason glass takes a backseat to tracking and zero retention is that if your AIMING device doesn't do either of those, it becomes a VIEWING device and you might as well strap a spotting scope or binoculars to your rifle instead.

 

[JimIsland]

That's interesting. I'd say that's a resolution issue, so it makes sense that the HD makes a difference.

Another thing that I've noticed is that each individuals eyes can make quite a bit of difference. Some eyes and glass work well together, some doesn't.

I couldn't agree more.....In South Carolina we are allowed to hunt 1 hour before and 1 hour after official sunrise/sunset. This is considerably different than most 30/30 States. I'm of the opinion that quality glass does afford me a few more minutes than cheaper glass. A 56mm and exit pupil obviously play a big role. My personal observation and having looked through a ton of scopes at Whitetail in the dark is this: Glass quality allows me to zoom to say 9 or 10 and still be able to make out what I'm shooting. Cheaper glass looks great up to a point but when you get up into the 9 power range or beyond, it's very difficult to discern any detail. My son sees the Zeiss Victory HD better than the Polars and I'm just the opposite.

 

[Rich M]

The reason glass takes a backseat to tracking and zero retention is that if your AIMING device doesn't do either of those, it becomes a VIEWING device and you might as well strap a spotting scope or binoculars to your rifle instead.

Do understand where you are coming from. A scope that can't hold zero is worthless. A scope that can't see the target is likewise worthless. There has to be a balance.

Look to Form's drop tests to see which scopes have crap for guts. Yet, there are only 4 or so true low light scopes, 2 are mentioned in the post above, an older Leica model is another, and maybe 1 more? Amazing that they stopped improving the glass about 10 yrs ago, probably due to thermals and night vision.

@JimIsland says he gets a "few more minutes" from using top shelf glass. That's the $1,000 difference between seeing & shooting the deer and having time to stop for a sandwich on the ride home wondering why you didn't see a deer...

 

[Kyguy]

Do understand where you are coming from. A scope that can't hold zero is worthless. A scope that can't see the target is likewise worthless. There has to be a balance.

Look to Form's drop tests to see which scopes have crap for guts. Yet, there are only 4 or so true low light scopes, 2 are mentioned in the post above, an older Leica model is another, and maybe 1 more? Amazing that they stopped improving the glass about 10 yrs ago, probably due to thermals and night vision.

@JimIsland says he gets a "few more minutes" from using top shelf glass. That's the $1,000 difference between seeing & shooting the deer and having time to stop for a sandwich on the ride home wondering why you didn't see a deer...

We can debate this until people are blue in the face. Form also made a post in the thread about the S2H (or maybe it was in THIS thread?) scope where he took a Simmons scope, covered up the logos, and put it next to two "alpha" glass scopes and told everyone it was a secret test model of a german scope. After everyone looked through it and talked about how great it was compared to the other two scopes, he took the tape off and everyone was shocked and some were pissed about it.

If YOU need alpha glass to get it done, so be it. I don't care what you use.

That argument holds about as much water as the guys who say that you have to be able to take 500 yard or longer shots on game because "you just can't get closer"... Tell that to all of the archery, handgun and black powder muzzleloader hunters who've killed everything that can be killed.

I'm not saying that better glass isn't.... better glass. But any scope $200 or more has glass good enough for almost every legal daylight hunting situation. I'll question anyone who says they "can't see at last light" to make a shot unless they're buried deep under the canopy or actually past legal light. I spent 5 days in Maine a couple of years ago bear hunting, and even with a Leupold Vari-X 2-7 shotgun scope (that's long gone for obvious reasons), I had no issues seeing the bait site 40 yards away at last legal light and I was BURIED in the woods. I was usually in the woods at least an hour after legal light waiting to get picked up, so I had plenty of time to amuse myself.