Difference between SCHOTT HD glass and other HD glass??

Litehiker said:
Ballistics Guy,

I agree, "HD" (High Definition) can mean anything the manufacturer wants it to mean.

But "ED" (Extra-low Dispersion) means exactly that and there are standards to measure dispersion. Yes, some "HD" glass truly IS ED glass but most is not.

We all know by now that advertisers often play "antics with semantics" in ad copy. Hey, we're Americans, raised on a diet of slick ad campaigns. We should know by now to be very careful of any and all ads.

Eric B.
Click to expand...

Yep. ED glass is a normal component of an achromatic or apochromatically corrected lens system but technically not required. Apochromatic lens systems focus 3 different colors to the same focal point and weigh the most. Achromatic lens systems converge 2 colors to the same focal point. ED glass is very helpful there as it's a key component to eliminating chromatic aberration with a relatively simple compound lens system. Other techniques can do the same thing. Simply not having ED glass doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the image quality of the optic but it is a strong clue especially in rifle scopes right now. One thing to note, to my understanding, you can't use ED glass in all designs, paticularly those that are extremely short. So other methods come in to play.

HD is a pure marketing term. "Flouride" lenses are a special and real thing which are not "ED" but in my experience produce the most amazing optical quality of any system out there but I've only encountered them in Kowa Prominar spotting scopes that I know of. The simple presence of ED glass in an optic doesn't make any statements about how well it'll correct chromatic aberration just that an attempt has been made.

If you want to pronounce judgement on the optical quality of a rifle scope I'd recommend the test I do... look at Jupiter and count the moons and look for the banding. If you can make out all 4 moons and any color banding at all you're looking through pretty blanking good scope. Even making out 3 moons is pretty good if two or more are on the same side of the planet.
 
I'd take "good" glass and 100% dead nutz tracking over the greatest glass with turrets that don't track worth **** when dialed.
 
Nightforce is no gamble. Their higher end stuff at least. I've not seen much of their more not-insanely-expensive stuff (SHV's) up close. Optical quality on all I've seen was on par with any other top tier scope. Tracking on their optics has never let down the guys I know that use them in competition. If you look at the kit that the winners have at my local matches, NF is a strong presence on top of their rifles.
 
Glad to read that. I bought a used 5.5-22X56. It sure seems good to me. The barrel came yesterday. It is a 6.5 Creedmoor, 26", 8 twist with a muzzle diameter of .800". i had them thread it for a suppressor. I'm still waiting for the barrel wrench.

My hunting friend called me the eternal optimist. With that stated I'm think if it shoots like my Savage .223 with the same kind of barrel it will be a truly sub 1/2 MOA rifle. The worst group the .223 fired was a .494" for five shots.
 
BallisticsGuy said:
Where glass is made is not entirely relevant. There are different grades, densities, coatings and all sorts of things. Some useful info. FWIW, HD is mostly a marketing term.

Some helpful videos.

SHLowLight from SnipersHide at Vortex
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvhL1SsNpqE

TiborasaurusRex of Sniper101 fame.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCISX9id86I
Click to expand...

Hello,

The IRONY of you quoting Frank and "Rex" as information sources in the same post is hilarious lolol.

Just read the "any reviews of Rex youtube videos" over in the stupid marksmanship questions section on the hide....LOL

THEIS
 
Here is a series of tests performed to evaluate some of the best tactical scopes on the planet. It is a few years old so there are some of the newer scopes missing. Also, these are tactical / PRS type scopes and would not be very useful for hunting purposes based on their size and weight IMO. The link shows the final results but I would suggest reading all parts as there is a lot of good information.

Tactical Scopes: Field Test Results Summary & Overall Scores - PrecisionRifleBlog.com
 
I certainly don't agree with Rich on several subjects, but no need for name calling.

We're all here to share our opinions and move the sport forward, if any member needs to belittle another, just seek your entertainment elsewhere.
 
WRO said:
read 24 hour campfire, lots of gems on there by which I base my opinion..
Click to expand...



The difference between here and 24hour is like talking to adults here and then going there to junior high school and trying to engage in the same level of conversation. You are a typical example.
 
THEIS said:
Hello,

The IRONY of you quoting Frank and "Rex" as information sources in the same post is hilarious lolol.

Just read the "any reviews of Rex youtube videos" over in the stupid marksmanship questions section on the hide....LOL

THEIS
Click to expand...


The irony of you professing some expertise and contributing nothing to the discussion is disturbing, uninteresting and unfunny. So, you do you and I'll do me.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

Iron Worker
Spotting scopes with HD glass
Replies
7
Views
1K
WRO
W
Z
Glass NX8 vs VX6-HD
Replies
10
Views
9K
BigBullBob
B
Darryle
Glass in the Razor HD LHT
Replies
13
Views
2K
Joe270
J
P
Glass Qu8ality between VX 3I and VX6
Replies
13
Views
3K
Pdvdh
P
Darryle
Swarovski X5 Glass versus Z6 glass
Replies
7
Views
2K
Darryle
Darryle

Recent Posts

Top