I have a review on the negative side of the fence. Mine is regarding the SH-4ii 6-24x50 Model:
I am on the 2nd unit. It was a replacement for the 1st, defective one. Glass / Coatings on the first unit was terrible. Awful abherrations, defects (blemishes) visible in the glass, unusable with light coming from moderately shallow approach angles (even with sunshade).
Return process was quick, however, the warranty section of the website has a choice for return for reimbursement. I chose this and was instead provided a replacement unit. At the time, I was so disappointed in the first scope that this greatly irritated me.
The new unit is what I should have received initially. I really want to like the scope, but I just wish I was reimbursed. It isn’t a bad scope, but I would rather have the value applied toward a good scope. From all accounts the EP5 is a much higher value offering and maybe that would change my mind, but at this point I would not buy another.
Jury is out on reliability and longevity/survival of the brand. Hopefully these “appropriately featured” and well-priced scopes serve as a kick in the pants to the real players in the market to up their game. Trickle-down tech is going to happen, and without innovation the big guys will get upstaged and lose significant market share. Either way, capitalism will prevail.