Would you buy this scope?

[Joe_K]

Some discussion on the podcast today about the scope. Sounds like they are trying to keep the price reasonable.

The more I hear the more I like it. Can’t wait.

Which podcast, and what episode if you don’t mind sharing.

 

[keystone112]

Maybe March 25th. Episode 115

 

[Joe_K]

Maybe March 25th. Episode 115

Shoot to Hunt? Hunt Backcountry? Rokcast ?

 

[lak2004]

Shoot to Hunt? Hunt Backcountry? Rokcast ?

Shoot2Hunt

 

[Kjc103]

Yes, I would likely buy it. It sounds basically like a Maven rs1.2 but lighter.

It would be sick if you could get the THLR reticle in the scope.

It seems SWFA discontinued their 6x. I would also be interested in a fixed 6x with a reticle similar or identical too Swarovski’s BRH and with better glass than the SWFA. Not necessary to be top tier glass, just glass that in the “good” category.

 

[TxLite]

Yes, I would likely buy it. It sounds basically like a Maven rs1.2 but lighter.

It would be sick if you could get the THLR reticle in the scope.

It seems SWFA discontinued their 6x. I would also be interested in a fixed 6x with a reticle similar or identical too Swarovski’s BRH and with better glass than the SWFA. Not necessary to be top tier glass, just glass that in the “good” category.

They are making a Gen 2 on the fixed 6. Just no ETA on delivery

 

[Kjc103]

They are making a Gen 2 on the fixed 6. Just no ETA on delivery

I hope they include the option for ED glass. I’ll buy it either way though.

I have never actually looked through their higher end glass, I’m just operation on the assumption that it’s decently good.

 

[Dobermann]

I hope they include the option for ED glass. I’ll buy it either way though.

I have never actually looked through their higher end glass, I’m just operation on the assumption that it’s decently good.

Lots of different opinions on that here ... mine is that I was pleasantly surprised by the SWFA SS glass quality for the price. Clearly nowhere near that of, say, the ZP5, and not as good as the LRHS/LRTS models to my eye, but more than serviceable for its intended use.

 

[Clinicus22]

Sounds good! Illumination would be nice though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I hope they include the option for ED glass. I’ll buy it either way though.

I have never actually looked through their higher end glass, I’m just operation on the assumption that it’s decently good.

I’ve killed multiple big game animals (as small as coues deer) in the 500-600 yard range with the SWFA fixed 6, at first and last light, and have never said “man I wish this glass was better”.

 

[Kjc103]

I’ve killed multiple big game animals (as small as coues deer) in the 500-600 yard range with the SWFA fixed 6, at first and last light, and have never said “man I wish this glass was better”.

I have a feeling you’re probably right…..it wouldn’t make a difference.

I do notice on my 10x SS, that around 800 yards, it’s not nearly as crisp and clear as a 3.6-18 Mark 5HD at the same magnification.

The difference is actually pretty startling. I can see where my bullet impacted in the mk5, things are super crisp and clear etc. in the SWFA, clarity has gone down a fair bit. Of course there’s a massive price and feature difference between the two and this would, of course, be expected.

 

[4th_point]

I do notice on my 10x SS, that around 800 yards, it’s not nearly as crisp and clear as a 3.6-18 Mark 5HD at the same magnification.

The 10x has bad veiling glare and reflection off of the ocular lens, at least the pre-Gen2 scopes. Its just one of the trade offs.

Shoot long enough, under enough conditions, and the glare will get you on those, but I don't know if SWFA improved the Gen2 fixed powers in that regard.

The 4-9x HD doesn't have either type of glare.

And the 3-15x is really good at handling stray light.

I still have some pre-Gen2 scopes in 6x and 10x. Started using the fixed powers in 2009, then the 3-15x or 4-9x HD.

 

[Kjc103]

The 10x has bad veiling glare and reflection off of the ocular lens, at least the pre-Gen2 scopes. Its just one of the trade offs.

Shoot long enough, under enough conditions, and the glare will get you on those, but I don't know if SWFA improved the Gen2 fixed powers in that regard.

The 4-9x HD doesn't have either type of glare.

And the 3-15x is really good at handling stray light.

I still have some pre-Gen2 scopes in 6x and 10x. Started using the fixed powers in 2009, then the 3-15x or 4-9x HD.

Is the HD glass a big step up?

 

[4th_point]

The 4-9x HD vs the non-HD fixed 10x?

The image with the 4-9x is better, but neither will limit you on big game or steel plates.

The magnification is low on both so the non-HD lenses are fine. At higher mags you'll start to see the benefits of better lenses.

Except for the glare. Ocular reflections are due to inferior coatings and you can get a reflection with light over your shoulder with the fixed powers, unless the Gen2 fixed it.

It's not super common to get that reflection with the fixed powers, but if you shoot enough under enough conditions it'll happen. Then you have to shade the ocular. I've had the 4-9x side by side and could make the shot - not so with the 6x or 10x.

I sold all my 4-9x awhile back but I don't recall any veiling glare either.

 

[TxLite]

The 4-9x HD vs the non-HD fixed 10x?

The image with the 4-9x is better, but neither will limit you on big game or steel plates.

The magnification is low on both so the non-HD lenses are fine. At higher mags you'll start to see the benefits of better lenses.

Except for the glare. Ocular reflections are due to inferior coatings and you can get a reflection with light over your shoulder with the fixed powers, unless the Gen2 fixed it.

It's not super common to get that reflection with the fixed powers, but if you shoot enough under enough conditions it'll happen. Then you have to shade the ocular. I've had the 4-9x side by side and could make the shot - not so with the 6x or 10x.

I sold all my 4-9x awhile back but I don't recall any veiling glare either.

Are you referring to the 3-9?

I haven’t noticed the veiling glare on my fixed 10 but it’s been used mostly for squirrels on my 17hmr in the middle of the day. I’ll have to see if it does it. I’d have a hard time believing it’s worse than the Schmidt Klassik I had. It was downright unusable at dusk/dawn if you zoomed past about the halfway mark.

 

[sz28]

The 4-9x HD vs the non-HD fixed 10x?

The image with the 4-9x is better, but neither will limit you on big game or steel plates.

The magnification is low on both so the non-HD lenses are fine. At higher mags you'll start to see the benefits of better lenses.

Except for the glare. Ocular reflections are due to inferior coatings and you can get a reflection with light over your shoulder with the fixed powers, unless the Gen2 fixed it.

It's not super common to get that reflection with the fixed powers, but if you shoot enough under enough conditions it'll happen. Then you have to shade the ocular. I've had the 4-9x side by side and could make the shot - not so with the 6x or 10x.

I sold all my 4-9x awhile back but I don't recall any veiling glare either.

How many times are you gonna say 4-9x? Oof

 

[lak2004]

How many times are you gonna say 4-9x? Oof

He's 4x high......

 

[TheM1DoesMyTalking]

How many times are you gonna say 4-9x? Oof

I often treat the 3-9x like a 4-9x because there is some tunneling at 3x so I usually stop at 4x on the low end. He's talking about the same SWFA scope, just referring to it by its' useful magnification range.

 

[Jakeb]

For the record, I was stressed about the 4-9x as well.

 

[4th_point]

I often treat the 3-9x like a 4-9x because there is some tunneling at 3x so I usually stop at 4x on the low end. He's talking about the same SWFA scope, just referring to it by its' useful magnification range.

That's right. Makes sense to anyone that's used it as many don't care for that scope on 3x.