Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
March 2.5-25x52 vs….
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Troutslayer2" data-source="post: 2384670" data-attributes="member: 25190"><p>I just picked up my second March. Both of mine are 42MM objective. I haven't mounted the 2.5-25 yet but I was just playing with it. They eyebox does get a little touchy at max power but I don't see any darkening with either of the ones I have. I have carried the 3-24 March F on a bunch of backcountry hunts, a few times in a scabbard. It's seen it's share of abuse honestly a lot of that abuse was more than most optics probably experience- no problems. The parallax has not bothered me the way I hear others gripe. You go through a lot of focus range in a short amount of twist. Once you get used to it, it's not that bad. </p><p></p><p>Against the NX8 which I have never owned but looked through several - I did not like that scope as much as I wanted to. My take was that optically it wasn't as clear or crisp, equally as tight of an eye box (maybe tighter on the NX8) and didn't play with parallax enough to say. </p><p></p><p>Against the MK5 - This is like apples to oranges if you ask me. The MK5 is decent. Weighs a little less. Less magnification range. Bigger eye relief. Not as robust. Optically I guess on par with each other as far as clarity with maybe even a nod to Leopold on brightness/crispness, maybe. </p><p></p><p>My next build will be a 6.5x47 built heavy. I will put a 52MM March on it. </p><p></p><p>I hear you on not wanting to add weight. That's what led me to them. I don't know why no one makes scope tubes from titanium to get a scope with this kind of power and versatility down to maybe 16 ounces. I'd buy one.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Troutslayer2, post: 2384670, member: 25190"] I just picked up my second March. Both of mine are 42MM objective. I haven’t mounted the 2.5-25 yet but I was just playing with it. They eyebox does get a little touchy at max power but I don’t see any darkening with either of the ones I have. I have carried the 3-24 March F on a bunch of backcountry hunts, a few times in a scabbard. It’s seen it’s share of abuse honestly a lot of that abuse was more than most optics probably experience- no problems. The parallax has not bothered me the way I hear others gripe. You go through a lot of focus range in a short amount of twist. Once you get used to it, it‘s not that bad. Against the NX8 which I have never owned but looked through several - I did not like that scope as much as I wanted to. My take was that optically it wasn’t as clear or crisp, equally as tight of an eye box (maybe tighter on the NX8) and didn’t play with parallax enough to say. Against the MK5 - This is like apples to oranges if you ask me. The MK5 is decent. Weighs a little less. Less magnification range. Bigger eye relief. Not as robust. Optically I guess on par with each other as far as clarity with maybe even a nod to Leopold on brightness/crispness, maybe. My next build will be a 6.5x47 built heavy. I will put a 52MM March on it. I hear you on not wanting to add weight. That’s what led me to them. I don’t know why no one makes scope tubes from titanium to get a scope with this kind of power and versatility down to maybe 16 ounces. I‘d buy one. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
March 2.5-25x52 vs….
Top