1-6 and 1-8 Optics

[Failure2Stop]

Its just not for me. I like a bright light reticle for close in work. It stands out better so my eye picks it up faster. If I have a less than perfect mount on the gun I can still shoot using my left eye to see the target and my right eye can see the lit reticle even though the rest of the scope is blacked out. (this is what I am talking about by BAC)

I understand that you can use a scope with a standard black reticle and some use them very well but I find they are a disadvantage.
Pat

I find that guys trying to shoot up close with "illumination required" reticles and high output white lights are at a disadvantage, and are therefore "not for me".

If you can't see through the optic, but can see the reticle, you are taking about occluded lens shooting, which dates back to the Armson OEG. Anyway, given that you are looking at a black background, even low reticle illumination will be sufficient to serve as a hasty aiming reference.

At the end of the day, it is not the equal of the Mk6 or Z6i (though both could use a reticle redesign), and given the option, I default to those two.


Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

[Alaskapopo]

I find that guys trying to shoot up close with "illumination required" reticles and high output white lights are at a disadvantage, and are therefore "not for me".

If you can't see through the optic, but can see the reticle, you are taking about occluded lens shooting, which dates back to the Armson OEG. Anyway, given that you are looking at a black background, even low reticle illumination will be sufficient to serve as a hasty aiming reference.

At the end of the day, it is not the equal of the Mk6 or Z6i (though both could use a reticle redesign), and given the option, I default to those two.


Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

I love the Z6i but I am also very fond of the Vortex. Again not saying its a bad scope it has a following in the three gun world. We each have our own priorities.
Pat

[TehLlama]

I haven't gotten behind enough scopes that are new from the last 24 months, but for the specifics of what I want, and what I'm getting from my Mk6, I'm still trying to wrap my head around a 2FP reticle being more desirable. I realize that in general on a low powered variable it's a 'might as well' sort of endeavor, but now sitting with my Mk6, I actually like that I can run it at 3.5-4x, or up at 6x, and make use of the reticle. I'm actually becoming a pretty big fan of the CMR-W reticle as well, with my eyesight now (20/10 usually) the fine reticle with thicker stadia on the side works astonishingly well, and the only time I can lose the horseshoe is in an instance where I'd want illumination anyway.

As far as the utility of illumination when I've got a 3" sunlight stick hanging off the rifle - I think I use weaponlights differently than the average bear - my tendency is to nudge the light briefly on, sweep as needed, and shut it down right after when searching, and when something needs a closer look down the sights even a little bit of illumination helps. I know I'm utterly unpracticed at using an OEG type gunsight that doesn't stand out like a pink elephant in a Charlie Chaplin film - I'm sure I could learn, but if the option is available I'll take the idiot-proofed version, and from the sound if it (defaulting to the Z6i/Mk6/Short Dot) I'm not crazy for doing so.

I know I'm quite willing to overlook some faults of optics (e.g. a TR-24 when backlit for most people is nigh unusable - but I think it runs just great because I can pick up the silhouette of the triangle fine), but in the FFP implementation Leupold is running (illum wackiness aside) I reeeeeeally like how the reticle seems to display completely different behavior depending on zoom - it's a very simple, near duplex reticle setup with the option of a dot at 1x, and by 2.5x it's an interesting hybrid reticle. 3.5x and above, it feels like a long heavy ACOG with slightly worse FOV and better eye relief. Oddly, this is the behavior I want for this rifle (I want it to behave like a carbine with a reflex sight, until I decide I want a zoom optic with a BDC reticle and the option of illumination), because I think a recce profile rifle with a 1-6x sight is the pinnacle of do-everything-pretty well; and the sorts of compromises I have to make with the optic are the same sorts of compromises with the rifle.

I guess I'm trying to offer somewhat of an explanation of why some really great glass that has come out recently fails to really grab the attention of the market - correctly or incorrectly the notion of 'daytime bright' is going to be a go/no-go criteria for part of the market, and despite the success of some units that do without it (Thinking NF NXS-C 1-4x as a prime example) there are too many optics out there that 'do more' on paper, and as many positive reviews on other important qualities of that scope come out, that manufacturer won't get to fully participate in that section of the tactical optics market.

I really think the boldly done, better 2FP reticle version of a 1-4x 30mm tube optic can still be done right - so much so that it becomes a de-facto standard for somewhat light weight 0-300m carbines, and it won't matter how bright the illum is on it. I just think a part of the market for a highly capable optic without a miniature Eye of Sauron going on in the middle of the reticle has already sailed with the existence of good 1-6x and 1-8x optics that include that as a feature, which make use of the versatility of FFP so that the reticle and BDC features are usable without needing to be at highest zoom (also somewhat necessary with the larger zoom range optics, since the eye box is crap at max magnification anyway).