I agree with Holly on this scope, I thought mine was very average, and sold it after about 3 weeks.
Tried two, albeit inside a very long shop with limited outdoor vision.
The optics were quite average, although not far behind the budget Zeiss Duralyt range or whatever they are called. Build quality was fairly basic, the tactical style one was a bit better; I heard they had to skimp on build a little to make up for the optics cost, but don't hold me to that.
Nothing wrong with them. On the plus side they are extremely compact for the magnification, and I thought quite light. The optics are probably pretty good, given the length to magnification ratio, that is probably why you get such good optical quality from yours at 16X.
I bet the 4200 at such magnifications is better; they are a very long scope, right?
It would be interesting to compare. FWIW, bought a Leupold 45X Comp instead eventually, very nice, couldn't afford to keep it sadly.
which is the best option for general use on a remy 223 a 2.5-16x50 or 4.5-30x50 i found them at app the same price but 30mag seems alot so what is the trade off ??
Hi Guys,
Mite as well add my tuppence worth, i recently purchased one of these to go on my 222 and i am fairly impressed (i did get a good deal pricewise) I compared it between my mtv tapian and s&b 8x56. Put the three at 8 mag and as expected it is not as clear as the s&b but a lot better than MTC. When i put it up to 16 it was still very clear in average day light, better than the mtc.
However in low light situations at 8 mag its great but at 16 mag it seem very dull. I know this is common for the pic to get worse in fading light when you put up the mag but on a £600 scope i didnt think it would be so severe??
Cheers Rob
Rapid 7 mk1 with pecar 6x42 22. Cz 455 varmint thumbhole laminate with 2.8-10x44 aetec 22. Tikka T3 hunter with t8 mod and S&B 8x56 222. Remington 700 VLS with T8 mod and swarovski 6-18x50 243