MK5HD 3.6-18 or 5-25?

[eod.mickelson]

I can't decide which MK5 I want to order and need some help/opinions. I'm having a 300NM built and it's use breakdown will go something like this:
65% Range/target shooting at or less than 1k yards
25% Hunting big game in the west at distances from real close to 800ish yards
10% Shooting targets/rocks at 1k+ (hopefully some day a 2 moa target at a mile)

What I can't decide is if the 5-25 is worth the extra $, reduced fov, and weight on this rifle.
Any input would be appreciated!

Edited for grammar

 

[nmbarta]

I hear you, I'd like a 4-20....not nuch help I realize, but it's what I want.

 

[kiwikid]

When I read the hunting from real close to 800ish yards my mind said 3.6-18. I have had the same dilemma choosing Swaro Z5s and because I hunt a lot in our bush the 3.5-18 made more sense.
Good luck with your decision.

 

[FEENIX]

The lower magnification provides more versatility (FOV) esp. at close range.

 

[Quintus]

^^^^
What he said, and 18X is still a lot of magnification.

 

[Joefrazell]

I went through this same thing. Went with then 3.6-18. Glad I did. I have no issues seeing targets at 1k plus

 

[Brianc74]

I hade the 3.6-18. I felt it had a smaller field of view and was a bit dim at 18 power. Bought the 5-25. Bam! Larger field of view at 18 power and way brighter.

Brian

 

[jpfrog]

I went through this same thing. Went with then 3.6-18. Glad I did. I have no issues seeing targets at 1k plus

Yep- me too. Though I haven't mounted it yet since the rifle is still being built. That said, the 1k target shooting I do with other rifles when I can stretch that far, I usually keep it set at 10x on those scopes anyway because I'm lazy.

 

[eod.mickelson]

This decision is so difficult! I appreciate all the inputs from everyone, I'm still undecided but it's definitely good to hear different positions on the subject!

 

[sp6x6]

Absolutely the 3-18.If hunting at all in mix.I have the larger and really like,but it is a massive scope,mines on a rig type,for me 338NM.That rifle is just over 11#,did pack it 9 miles one day moose hunting

 

[Hand Skills]

The 5-25 is a better optical design.

Unfortunately, rhe 3.6-18 makes comprises to achieve the short length.

Maybe it's worth the sacrifice if you need to be short and light, but one other thing to keep in mind - the 35mm tube is BIG. I can see it making sense for those running an enclosed forend, but the small objective mounted high isn't ideal on a 'sporter' rifle.

Personally, and for my needs I would take the 5-25 over the 3.6-18. It's actually not a lot heavier, just longer.

 

[simmonzz]

I just had a 300nm built as well and almost got a 3.6-18 but I found the very little additional weight, added clarity, and higher magnification excellent. This was the first expensive scope I bought and I really do think the clarity is better on the longer 5-25