Scopes that display a range finder & shooting solution
- Thread starter K9TXS
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
QuietTexan
Well-Known Member
I use digital scopes - mainly thermal but I do have a couple of daylight digital models also, including ones with built-in LRF to do the calc. Vortex Fury 5000 binos do a similar thing- built-in LRF, with AB firing solution shown, but on the glass and not a display screen.
The digital scopes DO NOT remotely compare to a quality glass optic. They're still somewhat gimmicky IMO - fun and cool but not for serious long range shooting. Better than anything going at night (thermal), but just not there for daytime use.
The main reason is the optical magnification power is essentially fixed, because the focal length of the lens has to be set to cover the sensor fully to get the maximum resolution. Zoom is accomplished digitally, with a loss of resolution. If focal length were able to changed, the sensor won't be in the optimal position anymore in a fixed-length scope.
Maybe this can be solved for in future generations, DSLR cameras have changeable lenes so the solution exists, but I haven't seen it applied to rifle scopes yet. Imagine a rifle scope with a telephoto lens on it that physically moved in and out when twisted. Right now that function is on the ocular end of glass scopes, but that's not possible behind an electronic sensor.
In regards to firing solutions, the limitation is the same whether or not it's digital in the scope, digital in an app, or manual on paper. Target distance is the most critical factor in the calculation. Consumer laser ranging has limitations, and it only so good. There are measurable precision and accuracy differences between $100, $1000, and $10,000 LRF units - which one ends up in a digital scope? I have an ATN Thor and Pulsar Thermions with built in LRF, but those units are not Vextronix quality, that's easy to tell based on the price difference between LRF and non-LRF units. The top-end Thermion costs $8,000+ street price, that's more than double top-end glass scopes. Thermal sesnor is a big part of the price tag, but at the end of the day it's the same concept as the daylight digital scopes - sensor, lens set, display, LRF. And LRF is not the primary driver for functionality on those scopes.
So how do you get the range data into the scope for the solution? Use a higher end LRF separate from the scope and transcribe data manually, it's probably more cumbersome to input that data into a digital scope than using a stand alone app. Or with a lower-quality LRF and introducing tolerance stacking into the calc?
It'll work fine to a couple/few hundred yards, minute of coyote inside a range where velocity/ bullet BC can overcome ranging errors (or where MPBR negates ranging almost entirely). But not there for longer shots yet.
The digital scopes DO NOT remotely compare to a quality glass optic. They're still somewhat gimmicky IMO - fun and cool but not for serious long range shooting. Better than anything going at night (thermal), but just not there for daytime use.
The main reason is the optical magnification power is essentially fixed, because the focal length of the lens has to be set to cover the sensor fully to get the maximum resolution. Zoom is accomplished digitally, with a loss of resolution. If focal length were able to changed, the sensor won't be in the optimal position anymore in a fixed-length scope.
Maybe this can be solved for in future generations, DSLR cameras have changeable lenes so the solution exists, but I haven't seen it applied to rifle scopes yet. Imagine a rifle scope with a telephoto lens on it that physically moved in and out when twisted. Right now that function is on the ocular end of glass scopes, but that's not possible behind an electronic sensor.
In regards to firing solutions, the limitation is the same whether or not it's digital in the scope, digital in an app, or manual on paper. Target distance is the most critical factor in the calculation. Consumer laser ranging has limitations, and it only so good. There are measurable precision and accuracy differences between $100, $1000, and $10,000 LRF units - which one ends up in a digital scope? I have an ATN Thor and Pulsar Thermions with built in LRF, but those units are not Vextronix quality, that's easy to tell based on the price difference between LRF and non-LRF units. The top-end Thermion costs $8,000+ street price, that's more than double top-end glass scopes. Thermal sesnor is a big part of the price tag, but at the end of the day it's the same concept as the daylight digital scopes - sensor, lens set, display, LRF. And LRF is not the primary driver for functionality on those scopes.
So how do you get the range data into the scope for the solution? Use a higher end LRF separate from the scope and transcribe data manually, it's probably more cumbersome to input that data into a digital scope than using a stand alone app. Or with a lower-quality LRF and introducing tolerance stacking into the calc?
It'll work fine to a couple/few hundred yards, minute of coyote inside a range where velocity/ bullet BC can overcome ranging errors (or where MPBR negates ranging almost entirely). But not there for longer shots yet.
Last edited:
lancetkenyon
Well-Known Member
Swarovski DS. But open the check book.
ShtrRdy
Well-Known Member
Be aware that some states do not allow use of an electronic firing solution scope for hunting.
CBS
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 932
Having owned or set up 6 of the burris scopes I'd have to give a huge thumbs up to the simplicity of shooting longer ranges with that brand. Out to 750yds is relatively easy point, range and shoot. However, glass isn't comparable to other scopes in the price range in clarity resolution or low light. The illuminated dot didn't appear circular to eyes but I'm the only person that I've heard of that had that complaint. The illuminated dot was also larger than I prefer and made it difficult to shoot p dogs at longer ranges as it would cover the animal. The odd shape of the dot and the inferior glass convinced me to sell them all. Not because they didn't work but I've become too picky with glass. I have reached a stupid level of snobbery. I made the mistake of buying a used hensoldt and now my tastes out pace my wallet. I have however heard that the glass in the newest version of the burris is much improved. If someone offers an opinion that hasn't actually used one they just don't know what they're talking about.
One of my secret personas is tht I'm a well-known Silicon Valley inventor. I've pushed the state of the art of silicon tricks for a long time. Here's the real deal - this industry is at the mercy of the chip designers and fab shops. The core imaging chips will continue to improve as the demand improves. This, as we've all seen, is a constant evolution. I've had a Burris - quickly realized the basic silicon limitations. I saw a huge step forward with the latest Arken products - Amazing! But.....Great? Not quite yet.
Think back - remember when digital cameras first came out - ugh.....now everyone has multi-megapixel cameras in their phones. Who knew? But that is the evolution of silicon.
Hang on to your hats - this is about to get good!
All true today. Trust I'm = I'm a glass junky ........ But this will change with time. No telling what that calendar is - but I can guess that five years from now we'll be at a whole 'nuther level of performance.
There are multiple technical evolutions happening coincidentally that are very likely to significantly impact out current "state of the art". And that's just where we are - "The current state of the Art". Watch this space!
Swelch87
Member
I have a Burris on my 300 rum and it has been great honestly. I have shot it out to 1100 on steel with no issues whatsoever. I also have a rix leap 6 thermal with lrf on my 22-250 for coyotes it has digital as well as optical zoom and is really good as well. But once you get into those you're def going to be out a decent chunk of change.
Varmiter71
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2015
- Messages
- 158
I am looking forward to see where this goes
Don Rackley
Well-Known Member
I worked in optical telecom for a long time in lots of roles from engineering to management. I agree that the next few years will see dramatic changes in the optics that will become available and what we will use.
One worry about the evolution and adoption in sport optics is simply the economies of scale. It's one thing to develop fantastic cameras for phones (very high volume gets low prices) than it is to develop the next generation of fully loaded rifle scopes. The cost curves of optical devices were typically logarithmic when new devices would be released. The steep price decline was due to very high volume of devices built.
If we think about what top end glass costs now, probably add 20 to 30% of costs for that same glass with gizmos inside. The cost will have to really come down for mass adoption.
But electronics and optics are ubiquitous and once they are introduced to a product line, they rarely, if ever, go away.
Josh06
Well-Known Member
The Burris glass and reticle are terrible on the ones I've owned. At 800 yards on a deer the illuminated dot takes up 1/2 the deer or better. They are simple and fast, but the glass and reticle kills them at long range for a precise shot.
