Surprising scope comparison

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Centercut

Centercut

Member
Jun 9, 2017
7,913
1
5,191
SD CA
open.spotify.com
Are “high end” scopes all they are cracked up to be? Or are mid range scope 99% as good without the prestige of a tier 1 scope?
Before you go jumping down my throat, I’m sure there are comparisons from reviewers, scope experts, etc that discuss a smidge of chromatic aberration at the tiny edge, yadda yadda blah blah blah…

Last weekend my hunting buddy Gerry @Gerry52 and I compared the Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x, Athlon Midas BTR gen2 4.5-27x and Sightron S-TAC 4-20x side by side outdoors around noon on a sunny CA day. We compared optical quality only.

All three scopes were set to 20x, mounted on guns sitting side by side on a table overlooking a winery and trees in the distance. We took turns looking through each one at least 3 or 4 times. And our conclusion was they all had excellent optical clarity and pretty much looked the same. We both thought that for hunting purposes out to a couple hundred yards, there was practically no difference.

Take it for what it’s worth. The S-TAC normally sells for about $500 but can be had at times for about $300. The Midas BTR gen2 normally around $600 but sometimes can be had for $450, and the Cronus normally about $1600 but at times discounted as low as $1000.

If I had to do it again, I’d buy two or three Athlon Midas BTR gen2 or Midas TAC than one Cronus and be perfectly satisfied. When I shot the Long Range event in Oregon the end of April, and did quite well, I used the Midas BTR gen2.

Just my two cents on the matter. Going anywhere much over $500 (discounted) illustrates the law of decreasing returns…
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Struckat, qball, FunGun and 21 others
I scored an Athlon Helos BTR Gen II 6-24 for $464 and couldn't be happier. Reticle thickness is perfect for 100 EBR type shooting. I looked through a friend's $3000 Vortex Razor for comparison and didn't like it-too heavy and the reticle is way too busy. I also picked up one of the new Heras 6-24 and like it better because I prefer SFP scopes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kilmouski, SpiralGroove, iAMzehTOASTY1 and 2 others
Upvote 0
jps2486 said:
I scored an Athlon Helos BTR Gen II 6-24 for $464 and couldn't be happier. Reticle thickness is perfect for 100 EBR type shooting. I looked through a friend's $3000 Vortex Razor for comparison and didn't like it-too heavy and the reticle is way too busy. I also picked up one of the new Heras 6-24 and like it better because I prefer SFP scopes.
Click to expand...
Recently got a Heras too. VERY pleased with it.

To illustrate @Centercut point:

Optical quality is - for practical purposes & at the ranges I use it - equal to the scope it replaced, which was 2.5x the price. And for field target ranging, it's actually a bit better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cavedweller, L.Leon and Centercut
Upvote 0
Athlon all the way for me . and it is available from a local gun shop . I am boycotting Cabela's their parking lot is a bit ridiculous. i actually measured the closest regular parking space to the door and it measured a little over 30 yards , any parking in any direction from the door that was closer is marked Handicapped . i can see the lane directly in front of the door but measured from the door the farthest HC marked spot is 100 feet. do they really need 40 handy parking places ? OK rant over .
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeyU and iAMzehTOASTY1
Upvote 0
I'm a bit of a scope snob. But got my first Athlon. Its the Chronus because its the only made in Japan one they make. But I will admit the ones that are more than half the price where pretty darn nice. I was in the market for a Sightron SV 10-50 because I hear the mirage at longer distance is better than my NF ATAC but I need another scope in that range like I need a pellet in the eye. I like to use the 1951 USAF optical chart at 100 yards when trying to decide which is better.

View attachment USAF 1951 Opical Chart.pdf
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smitty911 and .20calguy
Upvote 0
more to it than just optical quality

How does it track? I there a reticle you like available?

Are “high end” scopes all they are cracked up to be? Some
Or are mid range scope 99% as good without the prestige of a tier 1 scope? Some
My Nightforce is better all round than the Sightron, the sightron is better than the Athlons, which are wayy better than the discovery ones I have etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: thumper and 7Green
Upvote 0
I think I posted we reviewed them for Optical Quality only, but I will tell you that the Midas BTR gen2 and also the S-TAC track accurately.
Your opinion is appreciated, however I'm not sure that a side-by-side blind comparison (by regular shooters and not Scope bubbas) would rate the NightForce ATAC-R, Sightron SV, or Vortex Razor HD any better than the Athlon Cronus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scotay42, Dairyboy and Ctkny
Upvote 1
That scope comparison Saturday really surprised me. I thought there'd surely be a marked difference in glass between a $300 scope & a $1600 scope. Never been a "scope snob" because I'm not wealthy enough to have those options. When looking for a scope I look for 3 things, cost, reticle, glass. In that order. I've never spent more than $325 on a scope (used Hawke Sidewinder 6x24x56) & was always curious if price was commensurate with clarity of glass. To a certain degree, yes, but I too believe there's a point of diminishing return. I don't believe a $3,000 Night Force would have 10x better glass than my $325 Hawke or for that matter my $150 Discovery (which I've used for the last 4 years with great success). Glad we did that Mike!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JungleShooter, bf1956, Dairyboy and 5 others
Upvote 1
I’d agree with Centercut that modern “midrange” scopes are close optically to higher end scopes. A modern midrange scope may even be better optically than an older “high end” scope.

Modern lens making has improved markedly over the past 30 years. I noticed this phenomenon when I was very into photography during that timeframe. As the resolution of digital sensors (”film”) skyrocketed, the older lens designs from the film camera era could not keep pace. I noticed that some of my current mid tier lenses were outperforming some older pro lenses by a significant margin.

The lens coatings, the machining tolerances, types of glass used, all these things seem to have contributed to making modern lens optics superior to the optics of one and two decades ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ezana4CE, Spinach and L.Leon
Upvote 0
Centercut said:
Are “high end” scopes all they are cracked up to be? Or are mid range scope 99% as good without the prestige of a tier 1 scope?
Before you go jumping down my throat, I’m sure there are comparisons from reviewers, scope experts, etc that discuss a smidge of chromatic aberration at the tiny edge, yadda yadda blah blah blah…

Last weekend my hunting buddy Gerry @Gerry52 and I compared the Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x, Athlon Midas BTR gen2 4.5-27x and Sightron S-TAC 4-20x side by side outdoors around noon on a sunny CA day. We compared optical quality only.

All three scopes were set to 20x, mounted on guns sitting side by side on a table overlooking a winery and trees in the distance. We took turns looking through each one at least 3 or 4 times. And our conclusion was they all had excellent optical clarity and pretty much looked the same. We both thought that for hunting purposes out to a couple hundred yards, there was practically no difference.

Take it for what it’s worth. The S-TAC normally sells for about $500 but can be had at times for about $300. The Midas BTR gen2 normally around $600 but sometimes can be had for $450, and the Cronus normally about $1600 but at times discounted as low as $1000.

If I had to do it again, I’d buy two or three Athlon Midas BTR gen2 or Midas TAC than one Cronus and be perfectly satisfied. When I shot the Long Range event in Oregon the end of April, and did quite well, I used the Midas BTR gen2.

Just my two cents on the matter. Going anywhere much over $500 (discounted) illustrates the law of decreasing returns…
Click to expand...
This seems true to a certain degree. I find the more expensive scopes to be clearer and have a stiffer more tactile feel to the turret. Sometimes that cost is worth it and sometimes it is not. It also doesn't make mjch sense to put a $500 scope on a $2-4k airgun nor a $2-4k scope on a $500 airgun. Imo they should compliment eachother. For instance, my custom Borden built powder rifle wears a March scope, yet my airforce condor wears an Athlon ares.
 
Upvote 0
jps2486 said:
I scored an Athlon Helos BTR Gen II 6-24 for $464 and couldn't be happier. Reticle thickness is perfect for 100 EBR type shooting. I looked through a friend's $3000 Vortex Razor for comparison and didn't like it-too heavy and the reticle is way too busy. I also picked up one of the new Heras 6-24 and like it better because I prefer SFP scopes.
Click to expand...
I 2nd the heaviness issue. Some scopes are simply too heavy for the gun. If you have a high end gun then March builds a high end scope that is considerably lighter than its competition (around 25 oz. If I recall).
 
Upvote 0
I agree whole heartedly with the OP. I am very fortunate to own several Midas Tac scopes....and agree that they punch way above their price point. I would also add that the Helos Gen 2's are almost identical in optical clarity. I was fortunate enough to buy several before the price went up to where it is today. The Helos scopes are so close to the Midas Tac's, it is a toss-up, IMHO.

IMG_0388.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dairyboy, .20calguy and Centercut
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu