MTCs, Hawkes, Nikons etc: Some Opinions

[turtle]

I have been looking for a couple of mid range scopes for air rifles recently. I looked at a lot of scopes and examples of each model over the last few weeks and was surprised how epic the quality variration is in the £100-@200 range.

Initially looked at the Hawkes because of the reticles. I think the Map 6a is a lovely uncluttered reticle, but sadly nothing worked out with the Hawkes and here is why (and not all from the same shop):

3-9x40 AO EV Panorama - Magnification ring not on straight.
2.5-10x50 Digi Nite Eye - Reticle off centre. Subtle, but not hard to spot at all....
3-12x50 Digi nite Eye - Dent in front objective ring. About a 5mm depression!
3-12x50 Digit Nite Eye - optics sucked. Beyond 20 yards and with anything above 6x think bathroom window glass.

OK, so that was not too good from Hawke. Shocking in fact. I bought a little £60 2-7x32 Sport HD for my kids gun and theirs is optically very decent and they love the reticle, but zeroing it is a trial of patience and the clicks are, shall we say, not remotely consistent or accurate. The silly thing is that it is optically superior to all of the much more expensive digital Nite Eyes I looked through. By a mile. I should also add that the Panorama EV was much better optically than the Nite Eyes and a touch better than the Sport HD. I suspect that this is because the manufacturers just are not able to get decent optical quality out of a side parallax combo, which is more complicated and requires more lenses I believe. From what I have read, opinion on the Panorama EV is pretty good and this matches my experiences (aside from the canted magnification ring). That said, I think there are better options out there if you can spare another £30.

One more thing I noted with the Hawkes is that at anything above about 6-7x, if you shift eye postion, you get weird optical disturbances around the field of view, i.e. as you fractionally change alignment, parts go from sharp to blurry and back again as you move again. I know parallax is also an issue, but I would rather not have my eye balls assaulted when shooting. The Panorama had this, but not as badly as the Nite Eyes.

Onto MTC:

I ordered a 5-20 Genesis a while back but the optics were surprisingly poor, so it went back. I noticed the box was not sealed and suspect a duff unit that someone else had returned before. I could see why. Resolution was not good at all and the Hawke Panorama EV a lot better in terms of brightness, contrast and centre resolution (at the cost of more blurry edges). The Genesis also seemed to have a very narrow and 'distant' field of view compared to the Panorama EV. When you look through much more expensive scopes, the sense of 'intimacy' you have with the target is much greater. Its hard to describe, but varies considerably with different scopes. The Panorama EV was much better than the MTC Genesis in this regard.

...But then I looked through some Mambas and Mamba lites at BAR and what a revelation. Sure, eye position had to be correct (laterally speaking), but eye relief was flexible and the optics were a real surprise in this price range. they were nicely finished, nicely boxed and with good literature and frankly LIGHT YEARS ahead of the Hawkes. I find it astonishing that they are the same price, roughly. Mamba Lites are close to the Varmint/Panorama EV range (OK, £30 more) but much less than the Digi Nite Eyes and the Mambas are about the same as the Digi Nite Eye Hawkes.

OK, so here is what was wrong with ALL the Hawke Digi IR units I looked through: great at low mag, poor at high mag (blurry, milky, smeared....get the picture?). Awful. Build is nice on the higher end models, but QC is shocking. The brand new lens with a massive dent in the objective (but no damage to the finish) says it all.

Thinking of getting a Nite Eye? I wouldn't go near one again even if it was free. MTC? I have read the good and bad reviews and the two series I looked at were at the better end of the reviews. I am very, very impressed at what they are producing for the money. The reticles are great too, but bringing the AMD into the more middle range scopes (in price and weight) would be a good move for them. Its less busy.

One observation when comparing the Mamba and Mamba lite scopes is that, aside from being much heavier, the Mamba has a greater apparent magnification at the same indicated number i.e. 4x on the Mamba gives and image in which things look bigger/closer than the Mamba Lite at 4 x. I did this direct comparison and it is obvious. I preffered the regular Mamba in this regard, but the Lite was so much, well, lighter.

Nikon. How may do they produce that are suitable for air rifles? Not many. I tried the Nikon Pro Staff 3-9x40 AO after wanting a scope to go on a .22 for close range ferals/rats etc around buildings. This scope is a cracker. Optically superb, very clean reticle with fine cross hairs with a little dot at the centre. Very precise and build is top notch.If you don't want a busy reticle and have a budget of £180, this is well worth looking at. How the cross hairs will show up in dingy barns I have yet to find out, but the scope overall is very nice and I like the uncluttered view. For a gun shooting no more than 25 yards, 30 at a push, who needs a fancy ret?

I hope this helps for those of you thinking about a new scope.