I highly suspected a long winded post of why your question about NF glass difference was so enlightening. I wasn't disappointed. If you really want to understand things then get out of your books, get out of the internet. Get your feet dirty in competition, get behind other people's rifles, find out what it's like to fail.
Or just ask more questions that have already been answered in this forum.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

quote:

Originally posted by offgrid:
ya know sigfreund you could come shoot the Raton match! If fritz can shoot it....

Tough crowd.
You know, Mommy and Daddy now allow me to drive all the way to Raton by myself.

Yeah, but I want to know if you have to text them when you get there and when you leave?

quote:

Furthermore, I can now put the pointy end of the bullet the right way into the clips at least 2 out of 3 times.

So there.

Clips? Did you just say "clips"? Seriously?

You're such a rube.

An armed rube.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:
If you really want to understand things then get out of your books, get out of the internet. Get your feet dirty in competition, get behind other people's rifles, find out what it's like to fail.

This in spades.....

Although I do not always agree with opinions regarding Manufactures … I do respect the opinions of others that demonstrate significant knowledge.

I'd echo what fritz is saying. Get out, get behind as many optics or rifles as you can. In the upper end of optics world (Nightforce, Swaro, Kahles, S&B), I'd challenge anyone to truly notice significant differences or deficiencies within the timeframe of a competition window (90-180 seconds). In addition, the weakest link in the long range environment is the shooter and not usually the equipment. It is a rare individual that can outshoot/perform the equipment.

I've met plenty of "asshats" in the PRS/NRL world walking around with the latest, greatest, and most expensive equipment - while looking like a mobile billboard - that can't shoot for anything. Good solid training and experience will trump equipment every time.

Andrew

Fritz is very correct in that you have to go out there and use the equipment; you can't just talk about it and compare spec sheet to spec sheet.

Interestingly enough, people's eyes are different and your eye actually gets used to a certain scope or brand if they have similar glass, and when you look at another scope, you might even think that it's worse than yours because it looks different and your eye (brain) is not used to it.

I'm passionate about optics, because it's something I enjoy and try to understand as much as I can. Being a long time photographer has helped me understand riflescopes and spotters by the fact I had a decent knowledge base about this stuff already.

When I invite people to look through my optics, I tell them what to look for and why that effect exists. I find that most people may notice and overall difference, but do not know or understand what they are seeing or can describe it.

This past weekend, we had some good mirage going and the flags were lying, (the fiends) and that was great for optics comparison for F-class shooters. I had several people get down on my mat and look at the target through my scope. Of course, it's always a crap shoot because usually the reticle is not set for the guest's eyes, it's set for the owner. But in this case, the reticle focus is near 0 diopter for my eye. The fact there was this nice big wheel to set the focus was also a plus and people liked that a lot. I had several guys spend quite a bit of time behind the scope, much longer than the cursory quick glance followed by the customary "nice," and walk away. They would stay there for a while, play with the focus for a few seconds and then just stay there and look. After a while, they would get up and walk away with this quizzical look on their face. That's the look of "oh wow, now I understand."

In F-class, we spend a lot of time looking through the riflescope, or the spotter or both. Having a great image is critical to success. I remember my very early days of F-class with sub par scope and how you just wanted to take the shot so you didn't have to continue looking at a bad image. The Nightforce NXS changed that for me and then the March-X elevated it even more. The HM is a joy to look through as long as you want.

I suspect the TT is like that also, and as are the other platinum level scopes.

My Lady friend does not like it when I drive to Raton even with a co-driver so I certainly understand that. I am not complaining about this thread, and I do not dislike what you post or even why you post, often a trolling post will be super entertaining. I actually hope to hear more about ZCO offerings, but the chances of reading anything new here on the topic is pretty low, there is only so much you can find out about a scope from reading reviews and watching videos. Personal opinions can be helpful, but the only measure of a tool is actually using the tool yourself. Much like shopping for boots, you actually have to try them on to see if you like them, and it is quite possible for a scope to be perfect for one person but not quite scratch that itch of another. Anyone that lives within driving distance of a stocking dealer of fine optics is lucky indeed. Other than brief looks through other competitors scopes at matches, if I want to demo an optic I need to buy one. So far the comments seem to indicate that the turrets of the ZCO's have a similar feel to the PR/TT turrets, and I am one of the few that prefer the older style S/B turrets, so I have been able to resist buying one. I do have a chubby for the new Leica PRS that is due to ship out soon.

quote:

Originally posted by Stlhead:
[T]he new Leica PRS that is due to ship out soon.

Thanks for mentioning that: another scope I would not have heard of otherwise.
Are there any particular reasons you are interested in that one?

My eyes like leica glass, the L-ballistic reticle will work for me. Tool-less re-zero is not a feature I care about, but the configurable zero stop is something that I would like to play with. The main reason I am willing to step outside of my comfort zone and try a different scope brand is that I use leica binos and as my back up range finders already so I am hoping the PRS meets my needs as well. If the glass is as good as my old geovids, it could be a winner. Worst case it goes on a trainer or I give it to one of my boys.

Thank you.

That’s the sort of information I hope to gain from a discussion like this. Spec sheets and factory claims are one thing, but until someone decides to loan me a scope for a few weeks in the summer when I can use and evaluate it for myself, I appreciate the insights of other users. Although I don’t have plans at this time to purchase a top tier scope, that’s always subject to change, and the more information I can gather in advance of such a purchase, the better.

Unfortunately it’s not possible for me to go around the country finding other shooters to let me see and use theirs, so I must rely at least to some extend on resources like this.
Thanks again.