NF Comp 15-55x52 or March. HM 10-60/Majesta 8-80x56

[JFrank]

Oh my, I seemed to have stepped in it again. It's a problem when I'm discussing optics with most people, it's not just you, when they discuss comparisons between various riflescopes.

I'm apologize in advance for using your words "against" you but consider this an educational experience for everyone.

I've frequently said that the vast majority of scope comparisons is bunk, because people don't understand what they are trying to compare and how that affects their impressions.

You said: "I’ve also had world record holders tell me the same thing and btw comps only go to 55x but stay bright and clear at full power." Let's go from there.

First of all, we discount the appeal to authority "had world record holders", it's immaterial to the discussion.

Of course I know that Comps only go to 55X, but do you know what their low end is? It's 15X. So, the range of a Comp is 15X to 55X, or 3.6X zoom. A March-X 10-60X56 HM is 10X to 60X, or 6X zoom. A Majesta is 8X to 80X, a 10X zoom. I have witnessed countless people at SHOT show and endless matches and other venues grab a riflescope, put it at the bottom magnification and zoom all the way to the top. 3.6X zoom is nothing to the human eye, it will adapt to the moderate dimming and you won't realize it. However, do the same thing with a 6X zoom., and you will notice a difference from end to end. Now do that with a 10X zoom, and the dimming is even worser.

Immediate conclusion and overall impression? The Comp doesn't dim, whereas the March HM does, and the Majesta is even worse. Case closed, mind made up.

Nobody, nobody, EVER does a comparison with a Majesta going from 15X to 55X. It's NOT ever done, I've never seen it with ANY other scope.

From that point forward, your mind is made up and that's what you tell the world.

Don't even think of coming back and saying you tested the scopes the same way, if you had done that, you would have mentioned it. NOBODY does it that way.

Now, I have said many times that the Comp is a good scope, excellent even for what it is, a 15-55X52 optic. It's been around a LOT longer than the Majesta, it's easy and inexpensive to make and the manufacturer sponsors a lot of shooters, and more power to them.

A Majesta costs a lot of money because its assembly is more critical due to its optical formula (10X zoom) and its Super ED glass (chock full of fluorite crystal glass), its thick, machined fancy aluminum body, with the sophisticated Shuriken turrets and the argon (not nitrogen) fill are expensive.

I didn’t mention the Majesta scope, that’s all you talking pal.

Sorry to hear any of my friends having a bad experience with NF, myself I’ve not had a single issue.
I just reviewed the equipment list for the 1000 yard BR Nationals, interestingly the choice for optics by a large margin is NF.

https://forum.accurateshooter.com/attachments/equipment-list-nationals-2024-pdf.1580326/

 

[Tangent]

Interesting, that list is telling me that if you select any of the top brands, of whatever piece of equipment, it's capable of winning. All else being equal the shooter is the obvious variable. I love researching gear but the right kind of practice is what results in a win or loss. I've recently looked at a NF ATACR and March HM Vs my Delta Stryker and to be honest I didn't see thousands of difference. Not to say that the Delta is as good, but maybe I'm not good enough to make use of the difference. I was actually surprised how well the Delta seemed to perform at 1000yd @40x.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Interesting, that list is telling me that if you select any of the top brands, of whatever piece of equipment, it's capable of winning. All else being equal the shooter is the obvious variable. I love researching gear but the right kind of practice is what results in a win or loss. I've recently looked at a NF ATACR and March HM Vs my Delta Stryker and to be honest I didn't see thousands of difference. Not to say that the Delta is as good, but maybe I'm not good enough to make use of the difference. I was actually surprised how well the Delta seemed to perform at 1000yd @40x.

I've heard good things about that Delta Stryker.

I like to remind folks that in good conditions, all decent riflescopes will do a great job, it's when conditions become difficult that you will see the differences. This is yet another reason why it's extremely difficult to do valid comparisons. If you're happy with your Delta Stryker, there's no need to change.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Too funny. I just found out my friend Dale Lucy won the Midwest Palma at Lodi in F-TR with his Majesta. Congratulations Dale.

 

[jackieschmidt]

I just mounted my March Majesta on the 6PPC I will be taking to the TackDriver.
I will shoot it at 200 tomorrow at my Club in Tomball.

I am hoping for lots of sunshine and mirage, so I can see first hand how the Majesta handles it.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I just mounted my March Majesta on the 6PPC I will be taking to the TackDriver.
I will shoot it at 200 tomorrow at my Club in Tomball.

I am hoping for lots of sunshine and mirage, so I can see first hand how the Majesta handles it.View attachment 1671469

Mirage? At TGC? Not likely. Try Bayou.

 

[JFrank]

Interesting, that list is telling me that if you select any of the top brands, of whatever piece of equipment, it's capable of winning. All else being equal the shooter is the obvious variable. I love researching gear but the right kind of practice is what results in a win or loss. I've recently looked at a NF ATACR and March HM Vs my Delta Stryker and to be honest I didn't see thousands of difference. Not to say that the Delta is as good, but maybe I'm not good enough to make use of the difference. I was actually surprised how well the Delta seemed to perform at 1000yd @40x.

You are correct, many LR world records have been set with guys using Vortex Golden Eagle scopes.
They might be the least expensive of all.

 

[Tangent]

I've heard good things about that Delta Stryker.

I like to remind folks that in good conditions, all decent riflescopes will do a great job, it's when conditions become difficult that you will see the differences. This is yet another reason why it's extremely difficult to do valid comparisons. If you're happy with your Delta Stryker, there's no need to change.

Yes it's the best my budget could justify. If I had a bigger budget I'd be all over a custom rifle and a Majesta but we all have to "cut our coat to fit our cloth". To be fair I've not reached the limit of my current gear, lack of available range time is the real limiting factor. I do enjoy seeing what others are shooting though, some impressive equipment and shooting on this forum.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

You are correct, many LR world records have been set with guys using Vortex Golden Eagle scopes.
They might be the least expensive of all.

Thank you for making my point so eloquently. Most LR World, or for that matter, any records are established in excellent conditions, and as I have said many times, in good conditions all decent riflescopes will do a great job.

 

[JFrank]

Thank you for making my point so eloquently. Most LR World, or for that matter, any records are established in excellent conditions, and as I have said many times, in good conditions all decent riflescopes will do a great job.

You sir are assuming!!!
You have no idea what the conditions were during the day the IBS 1000 yard heavy gun record was set or over the period of time the aggregate records I’m referring to were set.
I shot on the same relay the day the HG record was set and I did not see you there.
How you could make such a statement is beyond me.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

You sir are assuming!!!
You have no idea what the conditions were during the day the IBS 1000 yard heavy gun record was set or over the period of time the aggregate records I’m referring to were set.
I shot on the same relay the day the HG record was set and I did not see you there.
How you could make such a statement is beyond me.

if ["Most" != "All"]; then
echo "Understood."
fi