Welcome to the IHoP

[dem beats 1,223]

What will make me hate a scope though is chromatic abborations(sp) and distortion around the image at the edges. Those two things bug my eyes so much I cannot tolerate looking through them. even if the scope was perfect otherwise, i will head a headache looking at images that way.

Both are artifacts of zoom.

God that warping fisheye effect makes me sick. I doubled my budget because the scope I was going to.settle for had it so.bad in 3 different examples.

How does it get resolved for zoom without those problems, just better alignment?

[dem beats 1,223]

No matter what you do, how bad ass you think you are, or how brass like your balls are, this wins.

He is made out of badass. I can't believe his correction.

That is GANGSTER.

[///M5 2,833]

What will make me hate a scope though is chromatic abborations(sp) and distortion around the image at the edges. Those two things bug my eyes so much I cannot tolerate looking through them. even if the scope was perfect otherwise, i will head a headache looking at images that way.

Both are artifacts of zoom.

God that warping fisheye effect makes me sick. I doubled my budget because the scope I was going to.settle for had it so.bad in 3 different examples.

How does it get resolved for zoom without those problems, just better alignment?

You can't, you can get better but it's FUCKING expensive.

There is a reason that a good camera lens is in the $2k range without zoom. Photographers will tell you there aren't any good WITH. There are some very rare exceptions that just seem to be manufacturing anomalies that somehow make things okay.

If it's a target gun do you really need zoom?

[ssh 924]

I'd like zoom because I believe it would come in handy. A lot of review sites from "snipers" use scopes with zoom, and aren't bitching like it's some terrible thing that should be shunned. Of course a good portion of those people are spending over a grand on their scopes, but even so.

[ssh 924]

What will make me hate a scope though is chromatic abborations(sp) and distortion around the image at the edges. Those two things bug my eyes so much I cannot tolerate looking through them. even if the scope was perfect otherwise, i will head a headache looking at images that way.

Both are artifacts of zoom.

God that warping fisheye effect makes me sick. I doubled my budget because the scope I was going to.settle for had it so.bad in 3 different examples.

How does it get resolved for zoom without those problems, just better alignment?

You can't, you can get better but it's FUCKING expensive.

There is a reason that a good camera lens is in the $2k range without zoom. Photographers will tell you there aren't any good WITH. There are some very rare exceptions that just seem to be manufacturing anomalies that somehow make things okay.

If it's a target gun do you really need zoom?

I wouldn't exactly agree with that, but like everything, it's relative to what one considers good.

My father is a photographer, and I would say 90% of his work is with "zoom" lenses.

I couldn't imagine running around swapping lenses every thirty seconds. Not everything shot is in similar distances.

Edited June 6, 2012 by stefanhinote

[ssh 924]

For Aaron:

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

better version

[Tirefryr 1,742]

Here's the BEST version.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

[///M5 2,833]

What will make me hate a scope though is chromatic abborations(sp) and distortion around the image at the edges. Those two things bug my eyes so much I cannot tolerate looking through them. even if the scope was perfect otherwise, i will head a headache looking at images that way.

Both are artifacts of zoom.

God that warping fisheye effect makes me sick. I doubled my budget because the scope I was going to.settle for had it so.bad in 3 different examples.

How does it get resolved for zoom without those problems, just better alignment?

You can't, you can get better but it's FUCKING expensive.

There is a reason that a good camera lens is in the $2k range without zoom. Photographers will tell you there aren't any good WITH. There are some very rare exceptions that just seem to be manufacturing anomalies that somehow make things okay.

If it's a target gun do you really need zoom?

I wouldn't exactly agree with that, but like everything, it's relative to what one considers good.

My father is a photographer, and I would say 90% of his work is with "zoom" lenses.

I couldn't imagine running around swapping lenses every thirty seconds. Not everything shot is in similar distances.

Dig around on photography forums, everyone wants primes. I'm a little overboard as usual, but I work for an optics company.

[///M5 2,833]

Here's the BEST version.

Only one I watched.

[///M5 2,833]

Take the comment differently Stefan. Minimizing the zoom is the goal. In particular with a limited budget.

[ssh 924]

Take the comment differently Stefan. Minimizing the zoom is the goal. In particular with a limited budget.

That I understand.

[dem beats 1,223]

I'd like zoom because I believe it would come in handy. A lot of review sites from "snipers" use scopes with zoom, and aren't bitching like it's some terrible thing that should be shunned. Of course a good portion of those people are spending over a grand on their scopes, but even so.

Up until recently most real sniper units used a standard 10x magnification scope.

And to answer Sean, zoom is usefull for targets of different sizes and different distances. Especially if the reticle is on the first focal plane so it stays the same size in relation to the target regardless of zoom. If you are hitting one target at one distance every time it isn't as usefull.

To me the biggest selling point on zoom is increased FOV. Especially with lower cost scopes with narrow FOV being able to back off high magnification to acquire targets is a big deal.

To me perfect optical picture isn't absolutely critical for a scope. As long as it let's 99.99999% of light through, has high defenition, and doesn't have issues that strain my eye it will pass the test for a scope that is used outside of bench rest shooting. If we are talking 50 lb guns that sit on clamped basses and won't move of be carried then maybe I would hold more value to perfect picture quality.

For the shooting I want to do making 1 hole through 1 target with 10 bullets is less important than acquiring and hitting targets at several distances.

[ssh 924]

Well on a good note, I booked another job today, so it looks like I'll be ordering some stuff relatively soon.

Everyone seems to say replacing the injection molded stock on the 700 sps-v with an aluminum bedding & free-floated barrel one is a pretty big improvement. It'll likely be the last thing I get, but B&C makes a Medalist Tactical stock for relatively cheap, and everyone raves about it. Also looking at the harris bipods.

Edited June 7, 2012 by stefanhinote

[dem beats 1,223]

Take the comment differently Stefan. Minimizing the zoom is the goal. In particular with a limited budget.

Yup.

My scope is 3.8-22, rugged enough to crush other scopes and be tossed off a cliff a few times and still hold zero, with custom reticle, illumination, knobs, paint, and a much much larger tube to allow for the maximum elevation and windage.

It is around 6 times your budget MSRP.

I got a fucking killer deal, so could probably sell for the same price I purchased or at least close enough I don't care.

Larger zoom, costs extra cash. And its funny, but the bottom magnification is always more usefull than the maximum.

[ssh 924]

Take the comment differently Stefan. Minimizing the zoom is the goal. In particular with a limited budget.

Yup.

My scope is 3.8-22, rugged enough to crush other scopes and be tossed off a cliff a few times and still hold zero, with custom reticle, illumination, knobs, paint, and a much much larger tube to allow for the maximum elevation and windage.

It is around 6 times your budget MSRP.

I got a fucking killer deal, so could probably sell for the same price I purchased or at least close enough I don't care.

Larger zoom, costs extra cash. And its funny, but the bottom magnification is always more usefull than the maximum.

I expect it to.

[dem beats 1,223]

Well on a good note, I booked another job today, so it looks like I'll be ordering some stuff relatively soon.

Everyone seems to say replacing the injection molded stock on the 700 sps-v with an aluminum bedding & free-floated barrel one is a pretty big improvement. It'll likely be the last thing I get, but B&C makes a Medalist Tactical stock for relatively cheap, and everyone raves about it. Also looking at the harris bipods.

I would skip the bipod and go with a shooting beanbag to start with. 1/10th the price. Then you can get a nice roll up shooting mat too.

Atlas bipods are the current candy of the day right now too. A little more shooter friendly.

I wouldn't disregard savage either. They are nonsense accurate out of the box and are friendly. You can put in your own barrels. The floating bolt head is also an AWSOME design. Combined with the barrel nut it makes for zero tollerance headspacing. No smith in the world can tune a 700 to absolute 0.

Less bolt on aftermarket stuff though. Not by much, but less.

[dem beats 1,223]

Well on a good note, I booked another job today, so it looks like I'll be ordering some stuff relatively soon.

Everyone seems to say replacing the injection molded stock on the 700 sps-v with an aluminum bedding & free-floated barrel one is a pretty big improvement. It'll likely be the last thing I get, but B&C makes a Medalist Tactical stock for relatively cheap, and everyone raves about it. Also looking at the harris bipods.

I would skip the bipod and go with a shooting beanbag to start with. 1/10th the price. Then you can get a nice roll up shooting mat too.

Atlas bipods are the current candy of the day right now too. A little more shooter friendly.

I wouldn't disregard savage either. They are nonsense accurate out of the box and are friendly. You can put in your own barrels. The floating bolt head is also an AWSOME design. Combined with the barrel nut it makes for zero tollerance headspacing. No smith in the world can tune a 700 to absolute 0.

Less bolt on aftermarket stuff though. Not by much, but less.

[dem beats 1,223]

Double post. Lol

[///M5 2,833]

Mmm, double bubble

[dem beats 1,223]

Double posting makes me want to fuck twins.

[///M5 2,833]

Surprised you don't double post more

[dem beats 1,223]

I have low T.

I probably couldn't keep up. Need to go eat some more raw oysters.

[nem 2,019]

What a great night!