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 4

RETICLE & ILLUMINATION
One of the most important choices one can make in a long range scope today is the reticle, this is, after all, what you will see every single time you bring the scope to your eye so it’s important to make sure that it fits the needs or your shooting style. That being said, reticle selection or preference is extremely subjective and saying Brand X reticle is “the best” is like saying “Brand X vanilla ice cream is the best” – we all have different tastes, and the good news is that there are many options available to the long range community. With this in mind, my ratings below should be taken with a grain of salt because they are based on MY preference, but I will explain what I like and why, which should help you understand if it might be something you would like or not like even though I may have a differing opinion.
Reticle & Illumination Assessment criteria (rating 1-10 with 1 being worst and 10 being best):
Reticle Usability – Tie: March – 10 | Tangent Theta – 10
The reticle in the March is their new FML-TR1, which is a superb design created by none other than the Dark Lord of Optics himself. The reticle provided in the Tangent Theta is their Gen 3XR design. Both are a newer .2 mil hash design with dots in the Christmas tree, which I prefer, because they do not obscure the image as much as the solid lines of some other tree designs. One of the interesting features of the FML-TR1 is that the Christmas tree dots virtually disappear when you’re not using them, they blend into the background. The Gen 3XR also does a decent job at this but not to the level of the TR1. A feature shared in both designs are the larger center dot, in a trend by many manufacturers to make the tiniest center dot possible, I find myself constantly searching for this dot, especially on dark backgrounds, but that does not happen with the FML-TR1 and Gen 3XR which both use a .075 mrad dot. The FML-TR1 adds a .075 mrad center cross to complement the dot, this cross is .2 mrad wide and is spaced .2 mrad from the center dot and main stadia making it very easy to measure without clutter, the Gen 3XR has large dots every full mrad mark in both horizontal and vertical stadia. When I first saw the specs for the reticle, I was worried the center would be too thick, but it is ideal in my book offering the perfect balance and allowing it to be usable even at low magnification.
Illumination Color and Brightness – Advantage March: March – 7 | Tangent Theta – 6
Both scopes offer red illumination as the only option. Tangent Theta has lackluster performance when it comes to brightness, but sufficient for low light engagements. March has improved on previous performance but still does not deliver a daylight bright illumination out of their 6-setting module, although it too is sufficient for low light situations. I would say the March is ever so slightly brighter than the TT illumination. March did not exhibit illumination bleed while the Tangent Theta’s illumination did show slight bleed on full power but not enough to be distracting.
Overall Reticle & Illumination Assessment – Advantage March: March – 17 | Tangent Theta – 16 (20 points possible)
Neither of these scopes’ illumination modules are going to wow the user for usability during daylight hours. Scopes like Kahles and ZCO both offer much brighter illumination so if you are a shooter who likes to have the little extra during the day you may be somewhat disappointed. That being said, illumination in long range scopes is typically relegated to lower light situations and that’s where the March and Tangent will perform adequately.

ERGONOMICS
Overall Ergonomic Assessment – Tie: March – 8 | Tangent Theta – 8 (10 points possible)
Tangent Theta excels with the traditional design in long range scopes, clearly, they are regarded as some of the best glass and mechanics with superb fit and finish that is virtually unmatched by any scope on the market. Tangent includes the excellent Tenebraex caps and ARD which is a very nice touch; however, I do wish the Tenebraex caps would lay flatter when opened. Tangent could use larger numbers on their turrets while the March could use a better illumination control module. March has the large elevation shroud and includes flip caps, throw lever and sunshade for those who desire those features, March turrets are also low profile while Tangent’s are some of the meatiest out there. March offers greater magnification and FOV while reducing size and weight considerably. The overall ergonomic winner is a tie, the March has an advantage with its short body and the Tangent has an advantage with the toolless turrets.

FIT & FINISH
Overall Fit & Finish Assessment – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 8 | Tangent Theta – 9 (10 points possible)
As good as the March is in overall craftsmanship, and it is superb… the best I have seen from Japan, earning it a spot in the ranks of alpha class scopes that are dominated by European craftsmanship, I do have to give the nod to Tangent Theta with overall fit and finish. Quality reeks from this scope everywhere you look, the precise fit of every single part abounds with the precision that Tangent Theta is known for. All that being said March has their own set of impeccable craftsmen (and women) who are hand assembling each and every scope, if Tangent Theta gets a 9 then March is not far behind with an 8, we are truly splitting hairs when it comes to the fit and finish of each of these scopes – as it should be with the alpha class.
PRICE
Overall Price Assessment – Advantage March: March – 7 | Tangent Theta – 5 (10 points possible)
Most knowledgeable shooters are aware that the alpha class of sport optics is not cheap, you are guaranteed to pay in the thousands for these top-quality optics, but the March and Tangent Theta scopes really push the wallet to the limit. MSRP for the March comes in at a teeth grinding $3590 while the Tangent Theta is a “do I really need two kidneys’” - $4800! Street price you can expect to pay less but not much less.
Final Score – Advantage Tangent Theta: March – 226.6 | Tangent Theta – 239.8 (out of 270 possible points)
It should come as no surprise that Tangent Theta takes the blue ribbon in this competition, but the March has proven to be a confident runner up. This was kind of an “unfair” comparison to begin with as we are comparing one of the best scopes on the market today to a new comer that is designed to push the limits what can be done in a short body design. The final results are very close and I could easily see any one shooter choosing one scope over the other. At the end of the day the March has so much going for it: less expensive, shorter, lighter, more ergonomic with very nice turrets, High Master glass with amazing color/contrast with an industry leading FOV (for its magnification range). The Tangent Theta bests the March in several areas including overall resolution, edge to edge sharpness, overall fit and finish, eyebox and DOF. If the features of the Tangent Theta suit your fancy more than March you won’t find an argument from me, but I highly recommend you give the March a chance especially if you're looking for a scope that packs so much into a shorter/lighter design, I think you will be pleasantly surprised and at over $1200 less, your wallet will be thanking you as well.

Areas of Improvement
March
The first item that comes to mind is for March to design non-translatable turrets, that is - turrets that do not rise and fall as you spin them up or down. I would also like to see a similar locking turret design with larger diameter turret as is on the 5-42x56 HM. Get an illumination module like so many other new scopes that have excellent low light quality with no bleed but also bright enough to be used when the sun is out, and a different design for easier manipulation of settings especially if wearing gloves.
Tangent Theta
Get a daytime bright illumination module. Larger and more bold numbering and dashes on the turrets, maybe even reduce the height of the turrets. Reduce spacing on turrets to 12 mrad per rev and increase the travel to 36 mrad total. This design which originates from Optronika could use an optical formula face lift, maybe something like a shorter bodied 5.5-33x56 with a wide angle eye piece – how many shooters would turn their heads if TT came out with a completely new scope and not something they essentially inherited from Premier Reticles? My final comment is for Tangent to invest in better multi-coating to help eliminate flare when the scope is pointed towards the sun, depending on position there can be significant flare and ghosting which shouldn’t be there at this price point, sure you can put on the ARD to help eliminate this, but many will not be using that part for most of their shooting.
How does the March compare to Brand X?
Often when I do these reviews, I get asked the question, “how does it compare to insert favorite brand/model here” and while I’ve gone through a number of alpha class scopes I simply do not have the money or time to try them all. What I can tell you is I did a brief comparison of the 4.5-28x52 HM with a ZCO 4-20x50 and with the updates that March has made to the final (production) version I can confidently say the March gives the ZCO a run for the money. At about the same price, the March offers a scope that is slightly smaller than ZCO’s ultra short but with magnification and FOV that bests both of ZCO’s offerings (the 4-20 and 5-27). If you told me that you want the absolute best in optical/mechanical performance then I would tell you to buy the ZCO, but if you want both scopes wrapped up in one body and with greater FOV and arguably better crossover style reticle then the March 4.5-28x52 should be on your radar. The March is a scope that will be as at home on a competition rifle, a short barreled rifle like a Desert Tech, an AR platform and a hunting rifle, it may well be the most well rounded crossover scope available today which says a lot given the competition that is out there. If there is another scope you’d like me to compare to the March then send me a PM and I’ll send you my address and you can ship it to me and I’ll do a side by side evaluation 😉
Final Thoughts
Finally, reiterating what I mention at the very beginning, I am biased (we all are) and I have my own preferences and this review and opinion has influence from that, hopefully I’ve done an adequate job throughout the review to share where my personal preference comes into play in order to help you better evaluate a particular feature. I might rank a reticle as a 10 but you would rank the same at a 7. Also, I am trying out this new “scoring” system based on something Frank brought up during 2020, I am not sure how I feel about it as so much of the ratings are subjective so I welcome your constructive feedback on how I can improve or simply get rid of it entirely.
Where can you find March scopes, the good news is that since 2020 more and more dealers have begun carrying them. Keep in mind March are handmade scopes and lead time is running 45-60 days, I tried to get March to agree to a Group Buy for the Hide but they did not want to undercut other dealers so for now you will need to contact a March dealer.

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
AR-15 barrel profiles

We somehow veered into this discussion in the comments of the previous post. I have an hour to kill in an airport lounge, so I figured I'll go find a good explanation of why the ubiquitous "government profile" barrel ended up the illogical mess that it is.
I vaguely remembered that Matt has talked about it and it turned out that, for once, my memory was spot on:
https://www.everydaymarksman.co/equipment/government-profile-barrel/

Over the years, I have talked to quite a few people about barrel profiles, encompassing both barrel manufacturers and AR-15 builders.

My basic question was simple: "where do you remove metal on a barrel if you are trying to save weight?"

In the meantime, since I have had a chance to build a significant number of ARs over the years, with most of them being fairly light, I have looked very carefully at how different profiles behave when warmed up. Now, they were not all made by same makers, but there are still some noticeable trends.

I have looked at barrels ...

Hi Ilya,

Furthering some of the recent discussions on red dot optics for CQB rifles, I am wondering if a high end LPVO can be an ideal compromise for both very close engagements and distances out to 200 yards and more. There is no doubt that the LPVO is an order of magnitude better than a red dot for targets beyond 100/200 yards, so the question is how fast can an LPVO be at very close range. This comes down to how wide/forgiving the best LPVO eye boxes are and how bright the illuminated reticle center features are.

I have a good 16" < 1 MOA 556 with MPVO plus offset red dot that is outstanding for engagement flexibility (let's call this an SPR setup). This configuration can very reliably engage and accurately hit from a few yards to 700 yards even in challenging low light conditions. This rifle definitely has it's place and I don't plan to change the optics (except for possibly upgrading the scope to a TT). However, while the rifle is pretty light (6.2 lbs) the mount plus two optics load ...

Questions and Solutions for Ring/Mount Height
I have always wondered how one determines what height of rings/mount should be getting for a new specific build. Instead of going off experiences, I was developing this height-adjustable ring/mount to mock the installation of actually mounting a rifle scope to the platform before the purchase of the rings/mount. It would be resulting potentially fewer returns when they don't fit.
This is a scratch of two-piece rings and the height range should be from 0.9 to 1.6in (Still working on it). The one pice mount's design is coming out soon.
This tool is meant to be a measuring tool and not really for the final installation of scopes for long-term use.
What yall think? Inputs are welcomed.

post photo preview
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