Author Topic: Riflescope Test: Zeiss, Elite 4200, Tasco, BSA, Weaver, etc. (Read 1854 times)

Zachary · « **on:** March 28, 2003, 03:55:17 AM »

Here is a very interesting article in outdoor life magazine. It appears that the Zeiss and Elite 4200 had the best resolution. Somewhat suprisingly, though, the Weaver Grand Slam got the "Editor's choice."

http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/gear/article/0,13285,264274,00.html

Zachary

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #1 on:** March 28, 2003, 09:50:26 PM »

Peculiar testing . . . they didn't even give resolution values for all the tubes. Who in their right mind would compare 32mm-50mm objectives in the same article? The magnifications are all over the board as well.

If that is their "biggest round-up ever," we are all in trouble. They completely ignored Nikon and Sightron.

I'm also confused as to the waste of words on "quick focus reticles." Once you focus your reticle- it never, ever changes . . . unless your eyes do.

Oh, well ! :-D

SeanD · « **Reply #2 on:** March 28, 2003, 11:52:51 PM »

I take anything i read in outdoor life and field and stream with a grain of salt. Especially when it comes to product reviews.

Especially when its coming from Dave Petzel :eek:

Zachary · « **Reply #3 on:** March 29, 2003, 03:58:28 PM »

Yea, I tend to agree, that's why, in part, I said that it was an "interesting" article.

It appears that the only true objective test was the resolution when they refer to, say, 3.3 SOA. What does that mean specifically? :?

Zachary

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #4 on:** March 30, 2003, 12:12:55 PM »

Quote from: Zachary

It appears that the only true objective test was the resolution when they refer to, say, 3.3 SOA. What does that mean specifically? :?

Zachary

Hi Zachary,

I really don't know! I'm making a SWAG that they are using a spectrometer of some sort, but I can't detect what that number really means . . . nor how it was arrived at! If you find out, please let me know.

Graybeard · « **Reply #5 on:** March 30, 2003, 12:50:12 PM »

Optical resolution is tested using a standard chart developed by the military. It consists of many sets of black lines separated by equal width white spaces. This are placed all over a target sheet at different angles. They are VERY PRECISELY done.

In practice you place the target at a standardized distance and see what set of lines you can clearly differentiate. I used this back in the late 60s and early 70s when my job was to repair the optical sight for the TOW missile system. I will be using a similar system to test the Bushnell Scopes I have currently for testing.

I have forgotten what SOG means it has been so long. BTW there are a number of different test patterns that can be used in such opitical tesing but the one I used and most likely they used is the most common.

Somewhere above in that thread about the tests someone gave a URL for the site that has the targets shown and you can down load them as I did to print out on a laser printer. If you are really interested you might want to search it out in that thread.

GB

Zachary · « **Reply #6 on:** March 30, 2003, 02:17:42 PM »

Sounds like a good idea. I'll try and find that thread, or any related info on the net. In the meantime, this week is going to be just brutal for me. I will be in court on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. I'm going to try and have one of the other lawyers in my office go to at least one, or maybe two, of these hearings, but I'm going to working almost 'round the clock all of this week. I'll still try to get in a few posts here in there if and when I get a couple of minutes to breath. :grin:

Zachary

Rusty · « **Reply #7 on:** March 31, 2003, 11:42:37 AM »

I have read the last three gear tests, and here are some of my observations.

Differing size optics (scopes & binoculars, etc.) are tested against each other for various specifications. OL does not intend to test like products in given lines against each other as "mano a mano". Instead they test only new gear.

On their publication, OL gives all product figures on resolution & twilight time.

OL usually has several people (writers) evaluate the products.

I like these reviews, however because they do not do group or class comparisons, you have to extrapolate the data. However OL never intended to do an optics "class" comparison. If you want an idea on how some of the newly introduced optics compare with each other, check out the OL June/July issue, there is more information than on their webpage. :twisted:

longwinters · « **Reply #8 on:** March 31, 2003, 02:53:52 PM »

I read the same article. Seemed kind of subjective. But then many things about guns and optics are. I came away from that article feeling like I kind of wasted my time reading it. And when it comes to people writing articles about this stuff . . . I always find myself hoping that they are not just doing a "sell job" to the readers. What most people read or see on tv they believe without ever checking into the validity of the facts.