DarkLordOfOptics
Politics • Science & Tech • Sports
Guns, Optics, 2nd Amendment and resisting the Left in everything they touch.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?

Learn more first
March 4.5-28x52 High Master Review and Comparison to Tangent Theta 5-25x56 Page 3

OPTICAL QUALITY
One of the most difficult areas to ascertain with any manufacturer is the quality of glass they use in a given scope model, or rather, how the image looks to the shooters eye when viewing the sight picture through the scope. Traditionally when it comes to optics one generally “gets what they pay for” and hence the higher end optics tend to have the higher end prices; however, with new design technologies we have seen some scopes punch above their weight class. It is impossible to take images through the scope to show the quality of the image to the naked eye, this is because any image capturing device (e.g. camera) also has its own lens system which introduces its own optical aberrations and if the system is better aligned on one scope verses another it may throw off values; therefore, you will not see any through the scope images because I do not want to skew opinion based on IQ of one image over another. So, for this evaluation I took meticulous notes based on my naked eye observations under as best controlled conditions I could get outdoors. Scopes were tested at multiple magnification points: 5x, 10x, 15x, 20x and 25x and a weighted average was obtained for the ratings below.
Optical Assessment criteria (rating 1-10 with 1 being worst and 10 being best):
Resolution (Center) – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 9.4 | Tangent Theta – 10
Looking through both scopes at distance (1000 yards) you are often dealing with atmospherics that can wreak havoc for any optical system, both these scopes performed very well out to 1000 yards, so well that I had to throw up my resolution chart and evaluate line resolution at close range so atmospherics had minimal effect, when testing in these conditions the center resolution victor became clear, the TT was able to resolve about 5% better than the March throughout much of the magnification range with 10-15x March matching the performance of the Tangent.
Resolution (Edge) – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 7.7 | Tangent Theta – 9.4
The Tangent Theta had the clear advantage in edge to edge sharpness throughout the magnification range. The sweet spot for the Tangent Theta appeared to be in the 15-20x magnification range while the sweet spot for the March was between 10-25x albeit having less definition than Tangent. March is utilizing a brand new 25° wide angle eyepiece that offers an HD viewing experience with thin outer edges while looking through the scope, but as a result of this wide angle design, one of the side effects is the slight edge distortion which is apparent throughout the magnification range – one of the drawbacks to such enormous FOV and a tradeoff the shooter will have to decide. Keep in mind throughout my testing I found the edges to be perfectly acceptable and was not distracted by the level of distortion.
Color – Tie: March – 8.8 | Tangent Theta – 8.8
If you’ve ever heard the term “it’s all in the eye of the beholder” that in large part describes the experience of color for each of us. It seems our eyes have different sensitivity to different parts of the spectrum and while I tend to prefer “warmer” images and am somewhat put off by “cooler” ones, others see colors differently. For some reason, most Japanese manufactured optics tend to be on the cooler side while many European optics tend to be more neutral to warm. For this reason I have always gravitated towards European optics; however, I am happy to say that March optics in general (not just this scope) have a color contrast that is much more in alignment with their European counterparts. In my test target testing both the March and Tangent were able to reproduce colors very accurately.
Contrast (High) – Advantage March: March – 9 | Tangent Theta – 8.7
My high contrast target has very bright white paper with very black lines, the numbers represent the smallest value I was able to discern. Surprisingly, even though the Tangent Theta was able to resolve better, I was actually able to discern more contrast with the March on the high contrast target.
Contrast (Low) – Advantage March: March – 8.4 | Tangent Theta – 8.3
My low contrast target has a gray background with darker gray lines, the numbers represent the smallest value I was able to discern. This test proved to be almost a tie as both performed very closely to one another.
Clarity – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 9.3 | Tangent Theta – 9.4
Sometimes known as “pop”, the ability for the image to really stand out and come alive. The Tangent began to fall off close to 20x while the March began to falloff at 15x; however, falloff was very slight and both scopes performed extremely well in this area.
Chromatic Aberrations (CA) – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 9 | Tangent Theta – 9.6
A hotly debated topic – CA, which is typically seen at the edges between high and low contrast objects in what is termed as fringing and usually comes in a band of color along the green/yellow and magenta/purple spectrum, some are greatly annoyed by this optical anomaly while others insist they cannot see it, one thing to know is it has nothing to do with your ability to hit a target, but can affect the clarity of the target. I tested for both center CA and edge CA. One other area is CA sensitivity with lateral movement off the center of the scope, you can quickly induce CA in these situations which are often rectified by proper cheekweld/eye placement behind the center of the scope. The Tangent Theta is known to be one of the best scopes at managing CA; however, I did notice slight falloff at 20x where it exhibited slightly more CA than at other magnifications. One of the drawbacks to short scope designs is this typically induces more CA, March decided to use their High Master lens system in the 4.5-28 to help control CA and I must say they did an admirable job as I was expecting to see more CA than I was able to observe. Yes, the Tangent still had the edge but the March was not as far behind as I thought it would be given its ultra short design.
Depth of Field (DOF) – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 8.8 | Tangent Theta – 9.4
The Tangent Theta has extraordinary DOF, objects outside of the plane of focus maintain sharpness and detail for quite a distance, the March is not as forgiving as the full sized Tangent but better than many ultra short scopes.
Mirage (effect) – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 8 | Tangent Theta – 9
If you hang around Snipers Hide forums long enough and read enough threads about the alpha class scopes, you see some common terms like “splitting hairs” between one scope and another because at the $3000+ level the margin between the scopes begins to become very thin; however, one thing that is often attributed to the Tangent Theta is its apparent ability to “cut through” mirage. For me, the verdict is still out on this claim and I think what most TT owners are talking about is the ability for the TT to define micro contrast regardless of the atmospheric conditions, so when there is heavy mirage, the ability of the scope to define detail helps the brain to perceive this as “seeing through” the mirage. For my testing I had both scopes side by side and my test subject was at 1000 yards during midday, with the scopes set between 10-20x, what I was looking for was how well I could define detail behind the mirage and how much the heat waves would distort that image. The Tangent did have a slight advantage over the March during these tests but I was pleasantly surprised at how well the March performed in comparison.
Field of View (FOV) – Advantage March: March – 10 | Tangent Theta – 8
The new March 4.5-28x52 High Master with its 25° eyepiece has enormous FOV for a long range scope. Many shooters often mistake low magnification for being able to “see” more; however, this is not always the case. For example, while the March has a low magnification of 4.5x, it actually has greater FOV (29.1’) than the ZCO 4-20x50 does at its lowest magnification of 4x (28’), so in reality, even though the March has a higher magnification at its lowest setting you can actually “see” more. For an older design, the Tangent Theta has very impressive FOV numbers and has been one of the best scopes in that category. Neither of these scopes showed any significant tunneling at low magnification. Outside of the specs which offer FOV numbers at the low and high magnification settings, keep in mind that FOV is not always a linear value so extrapolating actual values can be difficult. A couple years ago I began to measure the mrad value once I could detect it and for many long range scopes this is usually around 15x. The following numbers are from center so to get the full FOV value just multiply x2:
Mag March 4.5-28 Tangent Theta 5-25
5x NA 33 mrad
10x NA 20.5 mrad
15x 15 mrad 14 mrad
20x 11.2 mrad 10.6 mrad
25x 9.2 mrad 8.4 mrad

Eyebox – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 8.2 | Tangent Theta – 9.2
I have seen varied definitions of eyebox in the community, so to be clear, here is my definition which will help you understand what I am looking for – put simply, eyebox is the ability to be able to quickly obtain a clear sight picture when getting behind a scope. Both the March and the Tangent Theta showed decent eyebox forgiveness throughout the magnification range with both getting more finicky at higher magnifications. Tangent Theta is known to be one of the very best with regard to eyebox forgiveness, but I was pleasantly surprised at how well the March performed to just past 20x; however, the March did appear to get more finicky above 20x, still very usable but should be noted.
Twilight Transmission (low light performance) – advantage Tangent Theta: March – 8 | Tangent Theta – 10
I set both scopes to 12x to allow for a larger exit pupil yet still give my eyes a challenge in the failing light. From about 20 minutes after sunset, I begin testing both scopes side by side as the evening became darker and darker. Throughout this time the Tangent with its larger 56mm objective maintained amazing brightness and pop, the March maintained excellent contrast but there was some brightness falloff, more than I hoped to see but low light performance was still very good.
Overall Optical Assessment – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 104.6 | Tangent Theta – 109.8 (120 points possible)
The Tangent Theta has a brilliant image from edge to edge with excellent color and contrast while the March has slight edge distortion but excellent contrast and brilliant color. The Tangent Theta manages CA slightly better while the March offers enormous FOV throughout the magnification range. The TT has very forgiving DOF while the March is not far behind. The Goldilocks zone (superb optical performance) for the Tangent Theta and March was between 5-15x with only slight falloff at 20x and above.
Special Note on Resolution: The center resolution between both scopes appeared very close during my normal testing so I decided to throw up my resolution chart at close range (to minimize atmospheric interference) and see how many lines my eyes could differentiate before they blended together, as you can see in the chart below as you move from left to right the lines get closer together, with each scope I would place the optical center/crosshair where the lines began to blur together and I would note which section that occurred.

Mag March 4.5-28 Tangent Theta 5-25
5x 7-9 lp/mm 8-10 lp/mm
10x 13-15 lp/mm 13-15 lp/mm
15x 20-25 lp/mm 20-25 lp/mm
20x 35-40 lp/mm 35-45 lp/mm
25x 45-55 lp/mm 50-60 lp/mm

post photo preview
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?

Learn more first
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
PA GLx 2x Final Resting Place

Here is a final, likely, wrap up of where I think the GLx 2x from Primary Arms belongs.
It is likely the best general purpose optic for AKs and ARs I have seen in a while for shooting inside of $200. Definitely the best for the money and per ounce.
Now, when I say "inside of 200 yards" I do not mean trying to shave a hair of of a mosquito's left testicle. Assume shooting at typical subjects the size of a human torso, or a hog's vital zone.
Most of the time, I have the GLx sitting on a 300BLK pistol. I used it to teach one of my kids to shoot and it was a very easy and forgiving optic to use for a 7 year old. It is equally easy and forgiving for adults as well. It is just that easy to get behind and moderate magnification helps with the ease of use tremendously.
Now that pistol braces are verbotten, the GLx ended up on a 7.62x39 AK (a somewhat tricked out WASR-10) and I think it is going to stay there permanently.
https://alnk.to/ge40PLW
The ACSS reticle on this one is done just ...

00:12:30
SwampFox Sentinel red dot sight

This one is a very simple review:
-it is small
-it is robust
-it works they way it is supposed to
-it does not cost a huge amount of money
-the Ironside shield is a good idea
-RMSc footprint is a good idea

I messed up on price in the video. It is about $50 less than I thought at Brownells: https://alnk.to/a41u5D4

Ironsides stainless steel shield adds $40 to it: https://alnk.to/hDo4gJf

00:07:04
Kicking things off with 5x prismatics: SwampFox and Vortex

I plan to examine a few more prismatics as I go along, but here is the first installment that discusses SwampFox Saber 5x36 and Vortex Spitfire Gen2 5x25.
The interesting part is how little they have in common and how they do compromises differently.
Saber used a large CR123 battery, for example, but the housing gets in the way of a conventional offset red dots or irons should you choose to use one. However, the red dot mounted on the body of the sight, I think, works better.
Vortex, unlike the SwampFox comes with two different mount heights, so I was able to use it on both AK and AR platforms. It is more at home on a lightweight AR though.
The approaches to FOV, reticles, packaging and mounting are very different, which makes it all interesting to me.
The next video on 5x prismatics will talk about the Element Immersive 5x30 and Primary Arms SLx 5x Micro in some length.

00:24:28
6 hours ago

Man, there is NOTHING about the new March 1-10 34mm straight tube scope out there. Now that it's available without those funky turrets, in a sensible capped version, I am very curious about it. For reference, this one, but with capped:

post photo preview

LPVO weight data collection:
I had a few thoughts here after got done with this.
-If March made a 1-6 shorty, would it be quite lighter than the VX-6HD?
-I know the ARES ETR 1-10 has really nice turrets, maybe cutting the weight there would make the weight back to somewhat normal?
-There are a few not well-known scopes like the Gideon 1-10 and the Apex1-8.
Corrections are welcomed

post photo preview
10% off on Primary Arms

Looking at my e-mail, I found a notification from Primary Arms that they have a site-wide sale for a couple of days.

Use SAVE10 discount code for that.

https://alnk.to/3clBQOy

There are several ACSS optics I recommend, hence the link. As I mentioned in the past, I think ACSS reticles work well in lower power designs.

Non-magnifying Optic Parallax Error
A Dose Of Reality

The discussion of how much parallax red dot sights have pops up all the time.  It gets very emotionally charged.  Measured parallax error gets converted to MOA.  Everyone knows that MOA is right around one inch.  Large parallax error in MOA at close distances looks like a huge problem.
What is frequently forgotten is that 1MOA is exactly one inch at only one distance: ~95.5 yards.
At closer distances, it is a lot less than an inch.


Here is a table that calculates linear parallax error at different distances for a given angular error in MOA:

One of the problems is that most manufacturers of red dot sights claim their sights are parallax free.  What they really mean by that is that they are parallax free in the sweetspot (some center region) at one particular distance (usually 40 or 50 yards).

EoTech, apparently and to their credit, actually posted some numbers that are about right based on what I have seen:

The only othe rhologrpahic sight on the market, Vortex UH-1 is slightly better than that at the edges.  However, with both EOTech and UH-1, I can only see parallax error fairly close to the edges.  Most of the center portion of the window has sufficiently low parallax error that the natural dispersion of my shooting completely conceals it.  

Suppose you are doing a CQB drill and go really fast.  You end up taking a shot where the aiming point is somewhere toward the edge of the window of the sight.  Worst case, you are picking up about 10MOA of error from the optic.  That is 1.5 inches at 10 yards.  Does that constitue a problem for a CQB scenario?  Not in the slightest.  The only time I can think of when it might be an issue is a hostage-type drill, but every time I have done it, there was enough time to roughly center the aiming point in the sigh tpicture.  That brings parallax error down to zilch and you get to concentrate on dealign with gun wobble, accelerated heart rate and general stress (and that assumes noone is shooting back at you).

As the distances increase, so does the magnitude of linear parallax error, assumign a fairly constant angular error.  However, I am rapidly getting past the point where I should be taking shots at anything much beyond two hundred yards without magnification (I will be hunting deer with an iron sight muzzleloader in the fall, so I will test this out in preparation).

If I am shooting at something 100+ yards away, chances are I will have an extra second to center the aiming point.

Now, none of this means that we should not check for parallax with our holographics and red dot sights.  However, what I care about the most is the size of the sweetspot: the center area of the sight picture where parallax is negligible.  As long as it is not too small, I do not get too hung up on the parallax performance at the edges.

Read full Article
HET8: Top Level Summary

Since I am pathologically late on everything, I figured I should release at least a summary as I try to put the final video content together.  I plan to do a livestream as a wrap up as soon as I organize all the data.  Below is a run down of a few categories.  Let me know if I missed something and I will add more detail.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
Reference Standard - 2024

I mentioned the whole reference standard idea about six months ago: https://darklordofoptics.locals.com/post/4249701/coming-soon-to-the-mailbox-near-you

The plan is to select a few scopes as my reference standards in a few categories and make sure I keep them on hand for at least the entire calendar year.  If they move on somewhere, I have to designate something else as the reference standard in that category.  There might be a couple of reference standard designs in each category to split them by price range.

Since I just went through the riflescope category exercise https://darklordofoptics.locals.com/post/5212669/riflescope-type-classification (the "reference standard" idea is one of the reasons I did that), let's stick with roughly the same framework.

Do keep in mind, that some categories I am not as well versed in as I'd like to be.  Also, there might be scopes in each category I consider exceptional, but do not have on hand.  Reference standard has to be something I have here and will use as a basis for comparisons.  I will endeavor to use optics that I believe to be at the top of their category, but it is not always possible.  Natirually, these will lean heavily toward mrad designs.  I avoid MOA like the plague whenever possible.

 

Fixed 1x
For prismatics, this has to be Primary Arms SLx 1x Microprism.  https://bit.ly/3uLqu0E I have a few different 1x prismatics on hand, but SLx is the only one that has been here long enough to be the standard for 2024.  For now.  There are some really interesting options in this range.

 

Fixed mag small prism
This can go in a variety of different directions depending on personal preferences and price.  It is not practical to have a reference standard for every magnification and with compact prismatics I do like 3x as a good compromise magnification.  These scopes are a step up from people who have been using red dots with magnifiers and want a better experience at distance.  This one will also go to Primary Arms.  Technically, I like GLx 2x more than SLx 3x, but 2x is such a unique magnification that it is not a very good yard stick for comparisons.  SLX 3x Microprism it is, then.  https://bit.ly/4bMMclz

 

Fixed mag large prism

Somewhat oddly, with large prism scopes, I start leaning toward higher magnifications.  I want these in 4x or 5x.  I view these differently.  These are, to me, alternatives to LPVOs and spiritual successors of old general purpose 4x and 6x fixed power scopes, except more compact and with wider FOV.  There a couple of good options and, unsurprisingly, my favourites are Element Immersive 5x30 https://bit.ly/3NjJ4mJ and the discontinued Elcan Spectre OS 4x.  The dual power Spectre DR is still thriving, as expensive as it is.  https://bit.ly/4bQpwAN  I have the single magnification 4x and it is a very good yardstick for what a high end prismatic should be.  With the Element, I am clearly biased since I designed the reticle for it.  In other words, I got to put a reticle I could not get other people to make into a scope I like.  You should not be terribly surprised to see it here.

 

LPVO

This one gets tough and there will be several options here.  Keep in mind that I like FFP LPVOs once we get up in price.

With budget LPVOs, for now, it is Primary Arms SLx 1-6x24 with Nova reticle. https://bit.ly/40LeLdt It has some competition this year, but until I spend more time looking through it, PA takes it.

On the mid-range, it is a battle between SAI6 1-6x24 with mrad reticle https://bit.ly/49Nomo4 and PA PLxC 1-8x24 with meters BDC reticle. https://bit.ly/3Bn3951  With PA, I am not a fan of their other reticles, but I like how light and short it is with an excellent eyepiece.  With SAI6, I like the whole reticle line-up but lean toward the mrad designs for general purpose use.  The X-Wing style high visbility feature is not for everyone, but it works for me.  I suppose I will keep both here.  

If you go up in price, my basic opinion has not changed.  Vortex Razor Gen3 1-10x24 is the one to beat if you want a nuclear bright reticle.  https://bit.ly/3w1Ah2T

This leaves a little of a "no-man's land" with LPVOs that are designed to be true general purpose designs, like the side focus equipped March Shorty 1-10x24 and Delta Stryker 1-10x28.  They are a little too different to serve as a useful yardstick for anything but each other.  For now.

 

Dangerous Game

I may have to skip one because I do not really have anything on hand right now that fits the description and I have had long enough to make it a reference standard.  I do have some ideas, so stay tuned.

 

MPVO

For the time being, the one to rule them all is the dual focal plane March 1.5-15x42 https://bit.ly/4bjm15X  This category, almost by definition, is the one where compromises are made for the most flexibility.  This March is not perfect, but it is the best we currently have.  On the budget end, the yardstick should be Athlon's excellent Helos BTR Gen2 2-12x42, but it is sitting on top of a friend of mine's rifle two states to the West.  It can't be a reference standard if it is not here.  In the meantime, the old reliable SWFA SS 3-9x42 will do.  I have a couple of them.  https://swfa.com/swfa-3-9x42-ss-hd-mil-quad-reticle-30mm-tube-1-mil-clicks-ffp/

 

Tweener

I do not like to use a discontinued scope as a yardstick, but Razor HD LH 1.5-8x32 has got to be it.  It is not a common scope category, so we will hoble along like this until I come up with something still manufactured (that fits the profile and I like).  On the low-ish end of the price range,  I do like SWFA 2.5-10x32 Ultralight and have a couple of them.  https://swfa.com/swfa-2-5-10x32-ss-ultralight-msr-556-bdc-reticle-1-tube-25-moa-clicks/ 

 

Crossover

For once, this one is easy and I'll keep it all within a sane-ish price range.  Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50 https://bit.ly/3KEbZyA and Delta Stryker 3.5-21x44 https://annexdefense.com/delta-stryker-hd-3-5-21x44-rifle-scope/ are the purest expressions of the crossover idea I have seen to date, this side of Tangent TT315M that you will see a couple of categories down.

 

Traditional Hunting

This get difficult again because it is not a type of a scope that is common around these parts and the ones I look at do not stick around too long.  I simply happen to be an FFP guy.  However, some hunting scope articles are very much overdue and I do have an excellent Delta Titanium 1.5-9x45.  In sticking with sane prices, let's add Tract Toric 2.5-15x44 with illuminated reticle to this list.  https://tractoptics.com/toric-uhd-30mm-2-5-15x44-ffp-illuminated-mrad-mrad-hunting-rifle-scope

These two should give me a decent ability to compare.  On the high end, there are several real interesting options, but I do not have any on hand since the two categories bracketing this one fill that role for me.

 

General Purpose Practical Precision

Given how much this crosses over with, oun intended, crossover designs above, I could have merged them into signle category.  It would make too much sense so here we are.  Tangent Theta TT315M 3-15x50 is still it to me. https://bit.ly/41dz6c8

In the less eye-wateringly expensive world, the current range of 4-25x50 (or thereabouts) designs from LOW seem to offer a lot for the money.  Tract's version is a good example.  https://tractoptics.com/toric-4-25x50-34mm-mrad-elr-rifle-scope

Moving further down in price, I think Burris XTR3i 3.3-18x50 takes the cake https://bit.ly/48ViwQX  I really like how capable it is at very near to $1k, so it will be here for a while.

 

Long Range Practical Precision

I might catch a lot of flack for this one, but so be it.  

High end: still Tangent Theta 5-25x56 https://bit.ly/3ORWU0n

Best bang for the buck on the high end: Vortex Razor Gen3 6-36x56  https://bit.ly/3VcAXJD

Mid-range: Delta Stryker 4.5-30x56 (there is a bunch of simlar scopes in this category and I happen to have this one)  https://www.edgunwest.com/store/delta-optics/item/delta-stryker-4-5-30x56/

Low-mid range: Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 (again, there are several to choose from that are similar, but this one is on hand) https://bit.ly/3Ia4QX9  and Delta Javelin 4.5-30x56.  There are some similarities between them, but these are not identical scopes  https://annexdefense.com/delta-javelin-4-5-30x56-rifle-scope-ffp-smr-1-do-2470/

 

Short Range Target: I'll have to skip this one for now.

Long Range Target: Ditto.  It is not a category I look at much, so I do not have anything on hand that will fit.  I will rectify that.  Until then, the best paper shooting scope I have and intend to keep is March 5-42x56.  It bridges several categories nicely since it is FFP, but it pulls target shooting duty for me.  If I decide to do a comparison review on target scope, this Marhc will serve as the reference standard.  https://bit.ly/3TdABox

Field Target: I do not have a Field Target setup, so this category is going to be skipped for now.  Hopefuly, not for too long.

Read full Article
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals