I'm Travis Bader, and this is the
Silvercore Podcast.
Silvercore has been providing its members
with the skills and knowledge necessary to be
confident and proficient in the outdoors for over
20 years, and we make it easier for people to
deepen their connection to the natural world.
If you enjoy the positive and educational content
we provide, please let others know by sharing,
commenting, and following so that you can join
in on everything that Silvercore stands for.
I want to take a moment to reflect on the life
of Paul Rogan, who recently passed and who
founded and produced the Canadian access
to firearms newspaper since 1984, my friend
Donovan is carrying on the legacy that Paul
created by continuing publication of the news.
Canada's largest print by itself and the shooting
sports for those who are interested, I've put a
link in the description.
If you've ever had an interest in optics,
weather, scopes, binoculars, thermal
night, vision and more you're in luck today,
I'm joined by the dark Lord of optics himself.
Welcome to the Silvercore Podcast, iLya Koshkin.
Wow.
Thank you for having me.
And it's a self-proclaimed
dark road of optics.
So the, I did not really come up with that.
Well, I'm going to ask you about that in a
little bit, but for the listeners, for those
who aren't aware is an optical physicist
who has a talent for taking complex ideas
and problems and relaying them in the
most simplistic way.
So that they're understandable
by everyone.
He does this through his website and YouTube
channel named the dark Lord of optics and
https://darklordofoptics.locals.Com.
And I'm gonna have links to that in
the description.
So you guys can check it out.
Now Eylea, I received an email from a good
friend of mine and past Silvercore Podcast
guests, Paul Ballard, who in turn, got the
email from firearms instructor and mutual
friend, Curtis Miller.
Chuck saying, you have to check out this
Elliot fellow I did.
And the content that you provide is amazing.
And so I jumped at the chance to have
you on as a guest here
and amazing.
I don't know either one of those guys know
you probably don't.
I probably should.
Well, you know, we spoke off air about kind of
the best way to get this information across.
And we're talking about breaking this into
segments and where we do a general overview
of you and what you're about and a bit about
optics and what people should be thinking about.
And we can follow this up at a later point
with questions that people might have more
specific to optics.
And you're talking about more of a, sort
of a white board lesson where we get into the
ins and outs of what.
What people should be looking for in
optics and a bit of an education there.
So, uh, we'll, we'll have that available at
a later date as well.
So I was like a good plan.
So Ilya, can you tell me a little bit about
yourself and how you got into this wonderful
world of optics?
Uh, three lectures, OCD?
Uh, no, uh, it was kind of a funky story.
Uh, I'm an optical physicist by education.
I have degree in applied physics from a place
called Caltech in California, but not on
a, what we call classical optomechanical systems
like rifle scopes.
My field of expertise is actually electronics, uh,
image, sensors, cameras, surveillance systems,
targeting systems.
I worked on things at top in space flight
and the drones, that kind of stuff.
I, when I was in college, I purely by
accident, uh, ended up getting into guns and
shooting mostly because I don't handle failure.
Very well.
Friend of mine dragged me out to a shooting range.
We rented a gun that fired five shots at
the target from I think, seven yards.
Uh, another single shot even touched the paper.
Oh no.
So I think I've mentioned that I don't handle
failure very well.
So fast forward, 25 years here we are.
But basically I started shooting, right.
I bought a hand gun.
I bought a rifle.
I bought a cheap Chinese, uh, scope to
put on that rifle and it promptly fell apart.
I hit the internet looking for, uh,
looking for information and the stuff I got.
It's a nice way of saying this.
Let's go with asinine.
I think that's not getting anybody
to democratize.
And here's the catch.
I didn't know much of anything about rifle
school, but I had a good background in optics.
So I started digging, took a couple apart,
uh, bought a couple here and there.
And I started, uh, talking about my
impressions and comparing optics and
trying to explain why everybody else is
wrong and I'm right.
Something that makes me want to do that.
Uh, but in this case, most other people were
wrong and I was right for a simple reason
that I did not approach this from a shooter
standpoint, I approached it from a nerdy guy
standpoint and that was different enough.
Uh, when the company called as WFA op in
Texas, they have a forum called optic stock.
That's where I somehow landed
purely by accident.
Uh, they reached out to me and said,
Hey, um, we'll like what you do with.
And we will offer you a deal.
And the deal was that whatever they
had in stock, I was able to purchase at a
reasonable discount.
So I could play with it, do a review,
sell it, sell it and not lose money.
And that's really what got me into this.
Okay.
So you owe it all to a significant degree
to has WFM still friendly with them.
They're good people.
And, um, I started basically writing
things up and it went from there.
I, uh, then at some point I got tired
of repeating myself on different forums.
So I started a website where I could write
this up a post it and then link to it.
And then I did another website because
I needed a better blogging function.
That's the download of options.com.
I started YouTube channel purely by accident.
Once again, after shot show, I want you to
talk into a camera to record things while
I remember them.
And people started watching that, so, okay.
I'll have a YouTube channel.
Yeah.
I and that at some point I realized this is taking
me a lot of time and that it can be monetized.
What was, I was trying to figure out how to
monetize had guns.
And Emma came on, came knocking and said,
do you want to do some writing for us?
So I started writing for guns and animals,
especially in just publications.
And here we are, my hobby became a side
business and my wife could no longer tell
me to stop doing it because it is a job.
Right.
Because a
job.
Yeah, I hear you.
Well, w what is your full business that you
do?
So for my day job, I run a small company that
builds electro-optical test equipment, the
types of things that they use to test that
characterize once again, all the different optical
systems I've mentioned before, including rifle,
scopes, among other things, and lenses and
cameras, uh, lots of, lots of targeting systems
would go on unmanned, aerial vehicles, things
like that, more or less.
Anything that has to do with optics
or electronics.
We do equipment to test and make sense of it and
in an odd sort of way.
So I've spent a part of my career, developing
image, sensors, and cameras and stuff like
that for movies and also for the military and
probably an even larger, even when I was doing
that, a very significant part of what I did was
always test measurement and characterization.
So the specific niche where I've always
worked, wasn't trying to understand and quantify
how well things work.
Right?
So when I started, uh, doing reviews and rifle,
scopes, the mindset I had was extremely applicable
because I've spent my entire professional
career trying to figure out how things work,
whether they do what they're supposed to,
if not what is wrong, and then verbalize it
to non-technical people who can tell the us
from an album as far as anything technical goes,
that is what they did.
Right now, when I say, get Del DAS from an
elbow, I'm not trying to be derogatory.
Right, right.
They do other things that I go to the stand.
Sure.
I spent the entirety of my career sitting
on this board a bit with the technical and
non-technical people because they don't
understand each other.
And I translate and
you're rushing background will lend you to
being very forthright.
And so would say blunt in your approach to relaying
information, which
is refreshing, that's more of a personality
than Russian background
really well.
I think a lot of my Russian friends
have the same personality traits as
yourself.
I think that says more about you than
Russians, for sure.
It,
it very well may be you select your
friends, right.
You know, show me your friends.
I'll show you who you are.
Right.
Well, there you go.
That's a spirit.
Um, you also have a patent out on.
For image sensor, combining high
D dynamic range.
I did some work with HDR, high dynamic
range imagers in the best, but to be fair.
So my patent, in that case, just combined a
few existing techniques because we were trying to
develop an image sensor that would eventually be
applicable for automotive applications or something
called ADAS or automated driver assist systems.
And that is a very different, it's an
imaging application, but it's also sensing
application because you're trying to send
the dangerous and you will need image sensors
that are able to see both very dark and very
bright, uh, parts of this in simultaneously.
Right?
So that was an attempt to do that to the
best of my knowledge.
Only one company is currently using my
patents because I came up with it when I
worked at somebody else, they have the rights.
Gotcha.
Fair enough.
So we were talking a little bit off
air about how.
Relay your information through the dark
Lord optics, calm and as well as YouTube.
And if people were to check one out or
the over the other, where would you prefer
to see people going?
Okay, well, this becomes, this becomes
a little bit of a complicated question.
YouTube is undoubtedly a bigger audience, and
I'm also the rumble and all of those, right?
So I tried to kind of cross-pollinate the way
the modern political environment goes.
I am assuming that at some point, Facebook and
YouTube will get rid of all the people like me.
They start with a bigger channels, first budget
monetizing and all that.
Then they'll get to the small fish like me.
So dark Lord of optics.com is hosted by
a platform called locals.
And that's sort of the focal point of
everything that.
'cause, uh, it's a first amendment friendly thing.
I do talk about politics.
And when I do that on YouTube, they
basically kill all my videos, right.
Because they disagree with my,
uh, political stance.
Unlike the people at YouTube, I used to live
in the Soviet union.
So my political stance is extremely ambiguous.
I don't want to clarify, I don't want to live in
a Soviet union again.
I hear you.
So locals basically has everything that I do is
converged on, uh, locals.
But if you're trying to find me, there's
only one dark load of optics, squid, literally.
So search for dark, lot of optics and all my
different content pops
up.
How do you come up with that name?
The dark Lord of objects.
Somebody
called me that actually.
Um, what was the guy's name west?
I think we were having some sort of a profound,
uh, argument on the internet forum on optic.
Right.
And as one does, yeah, this, this is going
to sound very modest, but you guys will
have to forgive me.
I don't lose arguments about
optics very much sure.
For several reasons.
Not because I'm that good because I don't
get into arguments that I'm not going to win.
Right, right.
Uh, because I got to choose my battles.
Uh, Wes felt,
and as argument gets protracted, my natural
dark sense of humor and cynicism kind of
float to the surface.
Right.
So fel west felt a little bit wounded and came up
with this dark Lord of optics because I think
he made it fellowship, but he took it with a
good sense of humor.
And I thought it was hilarious.
And somebody else started calling me
that I said, oh yeah, I'll just do that.
So I don't have
to, do you remember what the
argument was about?
Yeah.
And I can rifle sculps um, Wes, uh, mark and I
were, are getting mark.
Uh, he, unfortunately I'm still in touch
with a guy, but he kind of deleted most
of his online presence.
Uh, loved Nick and rifle scopes.
I did not like the low-light before months
of those, because similar priced at the
time Zeiss conquest was better and where skim up
with a dark Lord thing.
And, uh, the other guy says, you go descend into
your a base, you know?
Yeah.
It is absolutely great place to check
low-light performance and that's sort of how
Steve rolled from there.
We were all having an absolute blast
with it, with the.
That's
funny.
So we were also talking about any affiliations
with any other optics companies out there,
and you made it very clear that you aren't
in order for you to be able to do what you do.
You're not directly affiliated or sponsored
through any, right.
So I cannot be sponsored by an optics company
because I have to remain unbiased.
And the reason why people listen to what I have
to say in the subject is that I am unbiased.
I'm quite friendly with good number of companies.
And I rip them a new one at one time or the
other, and most of them will take it like adults
think it's instructive.
Goodness.
As men get better.
Yeah.
From a standpoint of, uh, monetizing my
presence on the web.
I gave it a lot of time.
So my YouTube channel is monetized or though
there's almost nothing there since so many guns.
He use D monetized.
Uh, I do have some affiliate accounts,
but most of the larger companies, like if I
provide those into, let's say brown, your Optech,
I will make some small sort of a commission,
but then very particular, I mostly deal with
people who sell a large variety of brands, right?
They don't care to commend and neither do I.
The primary revenue stream for me is
actually a subscription on my dark Lord of
optics.com website.
If you want to comment, there is a small payroll
and going forward, I am planning to rely
more on that than on anything else, because
that way my loyalty is only to my audience.
I don't owe anybody else.
Anything.
That's.
So you lived in the Soviet union up to what?
Age?
15.
I came to United States in 1991 and finished high
school in California?
No.
Okay.
So most of your formidable years were
spent over in the Soviet union union?
Yeah,
the first major world event I remember was
a bridge near the general secretary
of the communist party of the Soviet
union dying in 1981.
Then I was too busy being an obnoxious kid.
And then I remember Chernobyl hit in 1986.
And that was sort of around the start
of the Perestroika.
My formative years was essentially the
collapse of Soviet union.
Very memorable.
Yeah, I'd say so there's some definite
lessons to be learned by watching what happened.
I don't
know.
I don't think we learned them very well.
Not looking at what's happening
now.
Yeah.
I'd have to say.
Yeah, interesting without delving too
far into the, uh, the political realm, but
that's another podcast right
there.
I think so.
Yeah.
You know, the Silvercore Podcast, I started
this as a way to share positivity within
the industry and to highlight people who
have a passion for what they do and share that
passion with others.
And I have no problem talking about different
political things that are going on.
I always try to highlight it with like, what, what
can we do moving forward?
Or what can we do in a more positive light?
Cause I don't know too many problems that
were solved just by sitting in a basement
and complaining about them, that,
um, health attitude, the problem with talking
about politics is it's, uh, it, uh, soon enough
all other conversations stop, right?
The only thing I can say that's short and
fundamental is it stop trying to make
the world better, make yourself better?
I like.
I like the whole problems start within.
When you give up on making yourself and
people around you better and start solving
problems, you have no reach or impact
understanding of, and that probably translates
to the vast majority of problems we have.
Now.
That's probably the most concise I've ever heard.
My fundamental thoughts on the issue made.
I don't think I could have said that in such a
short snippet, but that is that's very true.
The more you want to change things that are
happening outside, the more you start applying
your value structure on to other people and
putting your expectations as to how it should
be solved without introspectively looking
at how you can make things better yourself.
There's that, but there's a lot, there's
a lot more to it.
Um, we have a drive to feel good about.
And then, uh, by that same extension, it's
much easier to feel good about yourself.
If there is no way to evaluate whether you did
anything good or not.
And if you're protesting global warming, poverty,
monk, penguins, and Antarctica, or something
like that, do you feel good by protesting, but
there is no actionable way to measure if you
made the difference.
So you get to feel good without
producing any results.
The closer to you are the things you're looking
to change, improve, whatever, use the word,
the verb that agrees with you, the more
actionable things are.
And the more likely you are to be disappointed
with your efforts.
Yeah.
Okay.
That's a good point.
We should be doing things that we can see,
feel, and touch and be ready to be disappointed
because it'll make her a better man.
I like that.
Well, let's talk a little bit.
Upticks.
Let's talk about w from a very broad,
general sense.
Cause I know we're going to delve into this from
a more technical aspect of things in a future
chat, but what are some of the more common
misconceptions in optics that you hear you find?
And that's, that's a massive open question.
Yeah, let's see.
So there are a few years ago started
writing two books, one of the politics, one
on this rifle scopes, and I've been kind of,
I decided that instead of publishing them, I'm
going to convert them to a bunch of essays.
And that's one of the things that goes
out to my website bit by bit times just
started doing that.
The biggest single biggest,
most fundamental.
Problem is that, and this is driven by rifle,
scope, marketing, really all by document, whatever
else is that we spent too much time worrying.
What's inside that thing.
What kind of lens it has, what kind of coaching
it has are, what kind of metal it has, what
kind of what, and these are things that are
easy to talk about, but it's very hard to
ascertain whether any of that makes any real
practical difference.
If you really want one concise thing, I think
of a rifle scope or binocular as a spotting
scope as a black box, something is going in,
something's going out how Ian it gets converted
to our should not matter to you as long as what
comes out is good enough.
Uh, so think, uh, and this is, uh, once again,
this, my background is, uh, making some stuff.
How do you test a rifle scope?
Take a rifle scope.
You put a camera behind it, you project some
reasonable image at it.
That's you know exactly what you're projecting.
You take a camera.
Hopefully the camera is very high quality
so that it's not corrupting the image.
And you look at the image that comes out.
The image that comes out is what matters, what
the rifle scope does.
There's a bunch of lenses in there and all that.
How exactly that image gets massaged
makes no difference.
All of them phrase it, it makes a difference.
Makes no difference to you.
The details of what happens is that
they're intellectually interesting.
They're interesting.
From a technical standpoint, I can't
explain most of them to you in a way that we
will truly understand.
Now, you think you understand that you
don't, they're not that difficult, but they
really weird optics is a very strange science
because you can't really touch and feel it right.
Mechanical engineers going to optics.
It takes them a couple of years to
change their mind.
Because you can use your intuition does not work
in optics if you are a mechanical guy, right.
Without some background, but we all understand
what an image is because we all, or most
of us, everybody who uses the rifle scope
has eyes and can see let's talk about that.
Right?
Sure.
And we all understand what an
image gets, right?
That's this rifle scope holds zero.
Is the image pleasing it, dealing with it
by not colors, is the image pleasing.
Does it give me a headache?
You have to think about it in terms of
output, not in terms of what's inside the box.
Does that make sense?
It totally makes sense.
Yeah.
So it would be kind of like.
Getting glasses, right.
Prescription for one person, I
don't wear glasses.
I put them on and they're not going to work for me.
So what could be pleasing to my eyes or
pleasing to somebody else's eyes could be
two very different
things.
It's rather simple.
Yeah.
There will be some differences.
Right?
Uh, but you know, nice rifle scopes will be
nice for nearly everyone.
They are designed for a broad range of human
eye conditions and the IPS can adjust for it.
But when you start trying to figure out
what exact kind of lens material was used inside,
and I see this all the time, people on forums
go, readopt something on shot websites.
Oh yeah.
This rifle scope is amazing because it uses
this type of glass and this type of glass or
this type of glass, absolute bullshit.
You can barely spell the word glass,
not just the type.
And it makes, and they only think they know
about it because somebody told them, oh yeah.
When you use this glass, it's amazing
ads nonsense.
It's amazing when the image that comes out
of it as good that's.
If it stays zeroed the radicle doesn't move
on the recoil and the image is good enough for
you to see really well without eye fatigue.
Then it's amazing.
If somebody comes up and is able to do this
in a rifle scope with every lens is made out
of cheap plastic and the image looks good,
you should buy that.
One's going to be cheaper.
And the images in the image is good.
Reticles moving.
Do you find that happening too often?
And most modern rifles skills.
I know some older ones that I've worked with.
I see radical moving, but those bottom
ones seem to be meet.
Yeah, pretty good.
It depends on the price.
The nice scopes are they're robust, uh, some
inexpensive scopes, not so much, but then there's
also always a sample to sample variation.
There's a, there are quality control issues
and you will find some stuff that shifts around.
You will also find things that, uh, break in.
I'll give you an example of.
Uh, vortex strike Eagle five to 25 56.
It's about self harm bucks.
So it's not a cheap school, but not a
very expensive one by modern standards.
Um, it's a nice scope overall, but you know,
whenever you think that vortex, uh, a lot of
people have accused me of, uh, uh, getting, uh,
preselected samples from manufacturers, right.
And tested to be good.
And they are not always, and also whenever I
recommend the scope, then I get my hands
on a few more that who bought through
retail channels and double-check, but then
you have, so vortex sends me this strike giggle.
I start doing a tracking test and I'm adjusting
vertical tracking.
And when I'm two meals up, the radical moves
left, I go three meals up and it comes back and the
regional adjustment line.
Right.
Oh, interesting.
And, uh, that's where it helps.
I know how it's built.
There is a pressure pad that sits in
the rector tube.
They must've been in the non-uniformity there.
So I sit in front of the computer and spent
10 minutes twisting journals, uh, charity.
And this deviation goes away, but the
reticle did move.
And if you did not spend the time figuring out
what it actually does, and you decided to go
shoot the competition with it when adjusting
to mills your radical jump left half a mil.
That's interesting.
So I've never actually, so I'll do a scope
break-in which for me really is just me turning
the turrets on the thing, counting how far it goes
and checking it out.
That's about all I do when I break in a
scope, I don't know.
Is there much more, that really goes
into that process?
Yeah.
You'll have to S you have to look where the
point what's happens to the point of, uh,
aim and point of impact when you do this.
Right.
So, okay.
I took that as the logical step within the,
the, the twisting and turning up and down.
So I
do this thing.
Uh, that is sort of the first thing I do
with a lot of scopes, eh, because it gives
me a good idea of, uh, uh, if I'm going to
other, if there are any obvious problems, right?
That's subtle problems, but are there any
obits problems?
Um, uh, zero it, right.
I get excited and get some ammo and uncle
always could use some, uh, bench practice.
Anyway, I do this from bench approach, shorter
round adjust, one mil up, shoot another round,
one mil up, shoot another round until I essentially
run out of paper.
Every one meal, every two meals I get to the top.
Then I just done one bill.
And every time I make one shot, I go up
and down a few times.
So every morning the region I end up with a
three or five or four, whatever amount of am
I head shot groups.
If I did my part, and this is once again,
this is also my shooting practice Eve.
I did my part.
I should have roughly the same size group lined up
vertically one minute.
Okay.
What does does, um, sometimes adjustments
have histories as meaning adjustment
op is not the same as adjustment down older
scopes did this a lot.
You adjust, then you shoot them that
settles a little bit.
It moves, right.
And you will scopes.
Don't do this as much, but I do run into this.
Uh, I do run into this occasionally, right?
So it tells me what happens when you adjust
up, tells me what happens when you just down.
It tells me if there any lateral wandering,
and that does happen, not just with
vortex strike Eagle.
I've seen this with a few scopes here and there.
Um, it kind of gives me an idea of what
I'm dealing with.
If, if the scope passes this with flying colors,
I'm unlikely to run into mechanical issues.
Right?
So that's sort of the first thing
that I do because it gives me a lot of.
Different things any directly translates
into the way I should.
What I normally should almost never dial
for when I called for window elevation.
So work out the elevation church, quite thoroughly,
the windage store at NAVAIR don't care.
I check it because other people want me to, but
the way I shoot other than zeroing and never
touched the windage dirt.
Interesting.
Not even from making compensation for a spin
at diff at distance,
no bullet dredges, the reticle holes.
Okay.
So I prefer, well, okay.
Assuming electrical I'm using cards, reticle
holds for it, but yes.
Well what, what's the preferred F and
everyone's got opinions on this, right there
would they like, as their preferred, uh,
radical that they're going to be used.
Some people just love the full-on
grid or a Christmas tree, you or some
people want something that's really fine.
W what do you like, what do you
typically like to see?
Well, so I'm very fortunate in a sense
that I occasionally designed radicals for.
So I get to use the radicals that I like
because I designed them.
Awesome.
Um, a good example of the type of radical I like.
And so in every new design I do is
slightly different.
They all kind of carry some of the same themes,
but then I look at the market response, use
it to change something.
A couple of years ago, I designed a heretical
for a company called March, uh, scopes.
It's a nice high-end Japanese company,
the radicals called F M L T R one.
Okay.
So it's a tree type reticle, uh, cause a
slightly more prominent primary aiming point,
you know, kind of seduction in the center.
And then a lot of people like I don't
like ultra small dots.
I think they disappeared a little
bit too easily against complex backgrounds.
It does have a tree, but I sized that tree so
that when you're below 10, 11 power essentially
disappears, it looks like a much simpler reticle.
Interesting.
So I made the tree fairly thin, so it's
quite unobtrusive.
I like three radicals.
I liked some abbreviated grid radicals.
Um, I don't like ho so they could essentially
three radicals are the Horace radicals, right?
They're basically a mosquito net
designers were dream and mostly useless.
Um, there's, I've done videos on this.
If you want to, that's a separate conversation.
There is a ton of things that are wrong with them.
The guy who convinced the us military to use
them as a world-class snake oil salesman and,
uh, most chorus designs, in my opinion, take a
good idea and then extend it to the point where
it becomes a bad idea.
Interesting.
Want a good grid type radical
Schmidt and vendors.
G R is a good example.
I did some very clever thing.
Once again, the radical detail, radical
discussion as a whole video, but I basically
like somewhat compact three, three agreed type
radicals where on lower magnifications the three
other grade essentially fade out and you rather
than distraction.
Got it.
And would that be your biggest, uh, negative
point that you see about a horse style?
Radical is just that it's just too distracting.
Uh,
oh no, God, no, that's just the beginning.
Um, uh, several, uh, several, if you want
to go there now.
Sure.
I want to hear
so when you design a reticle, what are you
looking to achieve?
What are trying to get?
What kind of functionality are
you looking to build?
And the catches you have to build in all
the functionality that you need and none of
the functionality that.
And once again, that's a, I like these simple,
somewhat from the mental phrases in case
you didn't notice.
Right.
Uh, try to define it's a fundamental principle
in the short way.
And this is the most fundamental thing I can
say about radicals in your long range shooting.
How many times have you used the radical to hold
30 Millar agent holdover?
I haven't.
So why do so many chorus radicals, extended grid
all the way down to the Logan notification
that just looks, it looks like mosquito net
30, 40 million agenda.
That's a good point.
Probably from a marketing standpoint, central
market's great.
All them Monday night quarterbacks
in bold ninjas.
Look at us.
Oh yeah.
I can shoot a testicle off of, uh, off of a
mosque oxides in Alaska while I'm an Oregon,
you know, it's does not need to be there.
And it is district, you know, Since then
they'll put a normal rifle, scopes, a virtual
or rifle, scopes have some sort of distortion
as you start going away from the center.
And you're kind of like setting for the edges and
the centers different.
We all dial it in for the center, right?
Not want to use the radical holes that
would require different paradox compensation.
That's a good point.
We want to be aiming that far away from
the center, right?
Practical terms that the 50 million radio for
most schools, it varies from school to school.
And when you move you're on loan modification
and exit people as big, when you move your eyes
behind the scope, you will see all the edges
kind of swim and distort like almost like a,
um, fishbowl effect.
Right?
Right.
Notice that that stuff is there.
That effect is not particularly distracting.
Unless some income Pope decided to extend
his reticle all the way to the edges.
And now the lines of the radical it's supposed
to be straight, all look like waving crap.
Right.
And you will see nothing else.
You will just be like.
Right.
Okay.
That is distracting.
Yeah.
When you are taking a quick glance at
heretical, there has to be center primary aiming
point, and your eye has to be drawn to that.
When you look through a Horus radical Egypt
denied tremor three, or God forbid, tremor
five, uh, when you glance at it, where's
the primary aiming point.
What's somewhere in there.
Right?
Right.
Where when you haven't slept for 36 hours,
can you pick it out in one glance?
You can't.
No, it's, it's a little
bit of surgeon.
Okay.
Correct.
So you want and low magnification.
So when you are using, and then on
top of it, right.
So if you're shooting far away and it requires 20
million agent of holdover or whatever else, okay.
You're probably going to be on somewhat high
magnification, except with the, if you're
trying to do 20 million region with a radical,
you have to dial back on magnification
because when you made the Reginald.
Right.
So why is it there?
And if you're trying to keep the unification
comparatively high, so you just see the
20 million radiant holdover point, you're
aiming with the edge of the field of view.
How are you going to spot something if you missed?
And I guarantee if you are doing 20 million
region of holdover, that is a really good chance.
You cannot miss and have to correct.
See that in the edge of your rifle scope.
No.
So you'd have to drop a notification
even further.
Right?
Right now, everything is waving distorted, and
you could don't see your target as well because
you got gaming with the wrong part of the image,
scope manufacturers and Ms.
Love you.
Oh, so you brought up a term, which, uh,
people who've used rifle scopes will
understand some people who might be getting
into it might not be.
You talk about parallax now.
Uh, On the side of some scopes, you're
going to have a parallax adjustment.
And some people will call that they're focusing on.
They say, Hey, I just bring it into focus.
And some people say, no, no, no, it's a,
it's a parallax thing.
I've heard some say you have to gently
move your head back and forth and watch that
reticle to see where it's moving in, adjust
that parallax knob until the radical deviates,
the least amount, which is difficult without
inducing other movement on the, um, on the scope.
And some people say if it's in
focus, you're good.
Uh, what, what are your thoughts about,
uh, yes.
And all of the above, uh, depends on what you're
looking to do depending on how big of a target
you're shooting, uh, site focus or paradox,
not easy to focus.
Knob rifle scope has three optical
systems in it.
Objective, erector and IPS.
Right?
There are two focal planes front for
co-parents second focal plane for
most long range.
Precision scopes these days, uh, in front of
focal plane, clearly.
Uh, so let's say you have your reticle in the
front focal plane and it's fixed to the front
of your Eretria tube and it's fixed in place.
It been scores up and down when you adjusted
with a digitalization, but front back it's
fixed in place.
The way optics work, the objective of the rifle
scope is kind of like a camera lens, right?
When you're looking at an object, let's say a
hundred yards away, the objective creates an
image at a particular spot behind it.
We want that spot to be where the reticle is, so
that the image created, but objective as a super
imposed on the radical.
Okay.
So you adjust your side, focus, snob
and what it does.
It moves the image that's generated by the
objective lens, front and back a little bit
for enough movement.
Okay.
Now you've switched and you're looking
at something that is 500 yards away.
And when you look at something that's
further away.
If you did not adjust your site focus,
snob or whichever focusing method, you
have the image more forward a little bit.
It's no longer superimposed the reticle.
And now when you move your head, the
radical superimposed on the image.
Okay.
So focus in parallax adjustment
are functionally the same thing.
So then you go to your site, focus now and
adjust that very slightly and it physically moves
location that image and superimposes on
the superimposes, that image and the reticle.
Again, you with me 100%.
Excellent.
All of that works if you just did
the IPS correctly,
right?
Okay.
So the site focus, essentially it just the
objective lens or the rifle scope to super
impose the image on the radicle while the IPS
focus, adjust everything.
That's uh, everything is behind the radicle
sorter so that your art.
Is looking at the spot where the
radicalism focus.
Right.
Okay.
Did you have, you have to set up your IPS correctly
and there is a couple of methods to do that.
If your IP is set up correctly, from the
standpoint of the site focused dirt, the
sharpest you mentioned was Al will also be the
one that's superimposed in the radical, you
know, we'll give you minimal paradox.
I love it.
So when people talk about a parallax free
scope, there's no such thing would there be,
or I guess if it's at a set distance, you
could say everything at this distance.
Yeah.
So
you can say that, um, some scopes
will have very high, uh, depth of field.
Okay.
Right.
The greatest depth of field of any
conventional rifle scope.
I know all of you as a Canadian should be proud.
Uh, what the hell is that thing?
Tangent theater.
I had a couple of them here just a moment ago.
Good.
Old hands and feta.
Uh, you day like misplace a $5,000 school.
So here's a tangent data.
Five to 25 by 56 is cause the greatest depth
of field of them all.
Interestingly, uh, interestingly, when
the score has very high depth, the field, it's
actually harder to figure out where that focus
is perfect, but now the are was, is not going
to be very large the way it's, uh, the way
this thing is designed.
Okay.
If you're shooting bench rest, you need it to be
perfectly dialed out.
If you're shooting objects of finite size,
let's say metal plates.
That's not what we're talking about, but
let's say metal plates.
Uh, your error is likely to be with it.
Okay.
So for example, with all that, my danger dangerous
that I use, and I use a lot of different scopes.
So when you see if you in front of me behind
me, I mean, I'm doing a comparison right
now on some fancy 50 millimeter scopes
who we grow.
There's a couple of bucks.
Hey,
uh, that's about 20 grand on a truck to drop that.
That's okay.
On the one of them is mine.
Hold on.
There we go.
For the list.
As you can see this, uh, Ilya just held up
a bar with what was it?
Was there a
seven on there?
Six rifles, scopes, tangent theater, us
optics, Steiner, Schmidt, them bander March.
And did all, this is the religious direction.
The rifle scope.
Yeah.
Zeiss is supposed to becoming shorter
when you deal with that much.
Oh
yeah.
Uh, I just sent one back there.
Yeah, but anyhow, so to get back to their
original depth of field conversation with danger
theater scopes, if I'm shooting further out, I
essentially just, uh, uh, set the parallax in the
three to 400 yard range.
I never have to mess with it.
So the paradox is never perfectly Del dog,
but it's good enough where I can keep hit
the small things and I can transition between
targets quite quickly.
One of the strings let's have tangent
datas and quite a few like his accomplice.
Good.
And, uh, Minox a few others, but the agent
is the best at that.
I'm trying to say like by a measurable amount or
are we just talking, but
I can see it.
I can measure it.
And this Delfield has other advantages
for shooting in strange air and stuff.
Um, so stranger, you mean just like more particles
float in the air?
Uh, when, uh, so I have more experience shooting
when it's hot and not super humid because I
live in California now.
I live in New Mexico.
Yeah.
Um, once in the civic show, I've had a
bunch of fences, 56 millimeter scopes.
I started looking at them with a PRS buddy of mine.
And so we're looking at them and they
look good in closer distances, close to
distant tangent theaters.
It doesn't have the highest resolution
contrast to call.
They're very good.
Um, then we start looking further out and the it
starting warming up and Niraj starts popping
up at 6, 7, 800 yards.
And looking at the target through that neurotic
tangent, uh, aged out other scopes, and the
difference became Opus and that's depth of
field and, and, and, uh, um, the ability
to rent a color color is very important.
So just in terms of how we perceive images,
but that's going to be pretty subjective to
yes and no.
Uh, how was he?
Color's a little bit subjective, but
we all see color.
And a color is a huge component of how we
understand images, right?
Um, if you have an image that's super
sharp, but the colors are a little bit blend.
It is super sharp objective that
can measure it.
But in terms of how sharp it looks to your
eye, it will frequently lose look, especially
under difficult lighting conditions, less sharp
than ultimately lower resolution image,
where the colors pop more, right, because
of how we perceive.
So something that's not well covered in
the industry is that how we see things is
more about the brain than the eye, as far
as far as the camera and go to the eyes, a
very primitive camera.
What is remarkable is how well our brain makes
sense of those things.
Right.
And we have no idea how it does it.
We have no means to replicated within the
machine vision world.
We sort of give up and trying to understand how
human brain does this.
And we've gone off on a different tangent trying
to make automated machine vision cameras better,
but the way we are doing this as glued different
than the way our brain does it, no idea how
the brain gets an image.
So remarkable out of such a primitive camera as
a human, right, right.
Big part.
We know of how the brain processes, this
is color information.
One of the big reasons you use your lose, your
visual acuity as the light drops is that all
of a sudden, you see colors, a look less and
a rifle scope that has good enough contrast to
maintain some semblance of color vision into
lower light levels will look markedly better
than objective is sharper imaging optic
that does not pertain the view ability to see
color and to as late of a, as late of a light,
uh, It's a little bit light environment.
Right.
Okay.
Makes sense.
It totally a hundred percent.
Absolutely.
Excellent.
So,
uh, so when you talk about the IPS being set
up and, and the parallax being dependent on the
IPS being properly set up and we're talking, I
guess we're adjusting the diopter on your scope.
There's a few ways to do it.
How often do you find people are incorrectly
adjusting that diopter?
Oh, how much of your audience do want to lose?
Maybe we saved that for the, um, uh, for
the next podcast.
We get a little bit more technical.
No, nine out of 10.
Really actually did a couple of videos
on YouTube on how to focus, how to focus
rifles, go by pieces.
And it's different for front vocal
pen versus second focal plane scopes.
And it's different for conventional
rifle, scopes versus low power variables.
It's not markedly different, but you're
trying to achieve a slightly different
effect and there are different priorities,
but that is a fairly lengthy conversation.
Well, tell you what, if you want to get
those links over to me, I'll put them in the
description so people can just go straight over
to your YouTube page.
Uh,
I will, uh, dig them up.
I need to redo those videos.
They're fairly old, but it's just me sketching
things in front of the whiteboard, but they
should be legible enough.
Well, so light gathering.
So there's, there's a lot of people that
talk about the whole light gathering myth.
When I asked, is this something we got what?
A maximum of eight millimeters for the
human eye to be able to actually accept.
You told me about this.
Okay.
So in Mong, the very vast field of marketable
bullshit out in the optics industry,
that's one of them.
Uh, everybody goes, all right, I can only dilate
to seven millimeters.
And because of that, uh, exit pupil, that's more
than seven millimeters.
Doesn't do anything for you.
Ass nonsense.
First of all, um, some people I can dilate the
12 millimeters they're young and have large eyes
sunken or Deloitte, much.
As you get older, your ideal elation
ability for your eye to dilate goes down.
That's why you lose the ability to see at night,
uh, your ability to have, uh, your eye of your eye.
People to contract also goes down.
That's why you can see things up close.
I don't know how old you are.
Travis.
44 as of
the same age, 45.
So you're beginning to see some of those
wonderful effects.
Um, I started a couple of years ago, almost cried
my eyes, but, um, uh, we don't know, basically we
don't know, you can kind of measure how far your
IPO dilates, but what kind of light conditions
and dilates onto how dark it needs to get.
And then your eyes are wonderfully dark
adapted, and you look at your rifle scope.
There's an image, looks a little
brighter and there's something bright in it.
That's far away and immediately, uh,
IP will contracts.
Again, it changes all the time, but the way
your eye works, it doesn't elect to be
fixed in one spot.
So if you have a large editor for your eye,
if it's forced to be fixed in one spot, it
gets tired really fast.
It likes to move around.
And as it moves around that, essentially
think of it as almost like snaps images
and construction.
That's one of the things that helps.
Uh, brain to see much better, so larger
exit people can be helpful, but in the
rifle scope, exit pupil is a large exit.
People means lower magnification
magnification also helps you see, right?
So there is a balance and it's going to
be different for different situations in
different environments.
Hmm.
Okay.
Uh, light gathering by itself as an godawful
term, uh, because your rifle scope does
not go start walking out of the metals
and gathering light.
Uh, there is an objective lens day immature and
everything that falls on that objective lens
from whatever field of view your are dealing
with, which is the magnification, uh, enters
into the rifle scope.
Some of it last, you have the reflection
of different surfaces, sketching, a little
bit of absorption and stuff like that.
And most of it makes it out of that.
Okay, so it doesn't gather anything, but
you do have a larger collecting aperture than
your unaided art, right?
So this is, I have this danger data here, 56
per meter objective.
Right.
If you have it sitting, let's say on, I don't
know, uh, for, for the ease, let's say I've got
it sitting on 23 power.
Right?
So that means I have two millimeter
exit pupil, right?
Yeah.
So all of the light that got into that rifle
scope, uh, got, uh, barring some transmission
losses through the, through the scope gods
to your eye, but here's the catch, right?
So your objective lens diameter for most of
the magnification is stays the same, but on
lower magnifications, there is more light.
It's collecting it from a wider angle.
You feel the views, right?
Or lower modifications.
Right.
So it will look a little bit brighter, but no
matter how you slice it, it's going to give
you more light and more information than
your, I need your day.
So if we were to, well let's, how
would the iBox?
So I remember there was a handhold.
I was using one time and had a really large
iBox on there, which I thought was desirable.
I liked that it was easy to get clear glass from
a, from a large distance.
Is there a drawback to having a large iBox
other than perhaps a cost of making
these sort of things?
Yeah.
Every time somebody says I box, I imagined this
wooden box full of guys.
I hate that term, but I don't have a better one.
I, uh, I often say I really flexibility, but
I think I'm giving up and beginning to use
iBox I read the box.
Um, there is a certain re uh, range of, uh,
positions for your eye that the IP is correct.
And it's not shaped like a box,
right.
It's more clinical, right.
It's more like an ellipsoid action.
Okay.
Um, but um,
nice designed IPS will give you better.
iBox right.
So there are trade-offs right.
Everything in optics is a compromise.
For example, you mentioned the scope as
Eco's eco zero compromise optics, really nice,
very, very high in the scopes that have
done a very good job marketing themselves.
And the company has done a very good job
marketing, but the scopes market themselves,
why they are designed.
So they're extremely forgiving to get behind.
And all of the user controls are
really well done.
Small calibrated, no sharp edges, just a
great user experience.
Objective, if you looked at the images,
very, very good, but let's say attention
to is obstacles.
In my opinion.
So the guys I'm friendly with the guys at Z comp.
Every time I say that, I think they're about
to have an aneurysm, but so far nobody died.
They're good people.
I like them.
They don't like it when I say that, but
to their great credit, they still talk to me.
Right.
It just speaks well of them.
There are companies who no longer do, uh, to get
that super forgiving IPS, uh, uh, I box, they ended
up giving up a little bit of field of view.
The image looked huge because of how
the IP stands field.
The view is, is a bad mid-pack for
fancy scopes, for example, right?
That's one of the compromises.
You do not have to make that compromise too much.
I just started looking at the latest vortex
razor, a gen three, six to 36 by 56.
It has extremely forgiving iBox Adams
has rather than wide field of view.
So they changed something in design, right?
Every time they come up with a new design,
the compromise gets less restrictive.
Um, really, really nice scope by the way,
uh, amazingly nice.
Give her what it costs.
Um, but my significantly better than I expected,
I'm friends with a bunch of people at
vortex that told me it's going to be very nice.
I told them they're full of shit.
I'm looking at it.
Those Besters were right.
It is a unusually nice for what it costs.
They wouldn't be able to keep them in
stock for a couple of years, at least.
But then, but I digress.
So that's the, there are compromises, uh,
to the iBox their regional rifle scope.
That was the most forgiving of my position.
Wasn't did the hand salt, uh, one of my favorite
designs overall, it's still the three to
12 by 56 cents sold.
I thought it was a wonderful scope.
Yeah.
Um, but, um, it's also easier to do
when you have lower magnification larger.
That's a good point, add lower erector ratios,
menu, the ratio between a high, low magnification.
So all of those help, but a lot of it is
just good design
and technologies move forward.
Right?
So I mean, w what I was going to just
mention with the same Hensoldt right.
The saw the cancel doesn't care about
civil and market, and it's, they develop a
scope for the military.
And while there, then they'll sell it to
civilians the latest and greatest, not that
new anymore is a three and a half to 26 by 56.
Right.
And, uh, when it first came out, it was $7,000
and everybody was running around saying
how wonderful it is.
Uh, you know, that's, that's either people
who haven't seen it to people who justify.
Shelling out seven grand, right?
It was built for a particular purpose.
They had to make it very short.
Um, the elevation, it has to have a lot
of adjustment image.
Quality is not that great compared to the speaking.
It's not as easy to get behind as the
older simpler consults.
And the church is unadulterated crap
because the military forced them to stick with
18 minute radiant and the comparative small
dam or the tourists.
So the clicks are not that distinct.
It's, well-built, it's robust.
It's good for the constraints,
the food on it.
But if you are not operating with the same
constraints, the military wants you to very short.
So they put a clip on in front of it and all
that sort of stuff.
The German military, if you're not operating
with those constraints, you just wasted seven
grand and you'll go buy something else
for less money.
Right.
But here's a confirmation bias for you.
If you, people who bought them, they went around
saying how wonderful, how amazing this thing.
Because if you just spent seven grand, what else
are you going to say?
You're
not going to turn around and say this piece of
garbage, unless you got lots of money,
not a piece of garbage.
No.
It's w if you're operating within the
constraints that were in that large tender,
that it was designed for, it is a very
impressive effort.
It's not that great of a scope for the rest of us.
Well, with constant advancements in
optics and scopes, I mean, everyone looks
like they're a lot of it's marketing
from my perspective.
And from talking to you now, uh, integrating
electronics within the scope, whether
that'd be illuminated reticles or like, uh,
uh, laser rangefinders or, uh, levels digital
levels to tell you if your level or not.
Is there anything that is being currently
marketed that you think is like, what a gimmick?
And is there anything that's kind of really
getting you excited that, uh, the optics
world is, is moving to.
Uh, the other things that are interesting
and within those that get mix, um, I've
been looking a lot at thermals and clip-ons
and stuff like that.
That's sort of my field of expertise, right?
So I've spent a lot more time with thermal
imagers than everything.
Anything else?
Some of them are still orbiting the
earth and looking at your license plate.
Uh,
a lot of, uh, gimme craze in the marketing.
I have to say a lot of the gimme Curie is in,
when you start going into electronics, you
have this tendency to put everything and
the kitchen sink into the wifi ser the 28
different versions of Bluetooth plea porn
from your cell phone as you're looking for
the school, but I don't know what else to do.
Right.
All that crap just drains the battery really.
Uh, but a lot of it is useful innovation and the
market will eventually kind of filter through
all the nonsense.
I think I eliminated radicals that there
stayed the most exciting thing for me is the
active, radical stuff.
That's going to make a huge difference.
Uh, vortex, just, I think one or $2.8
billion contract for the next, uh, NGS w rifle
scope, uh, look that up.
Uh, it's a rifle scope with integrated laser
range finder, a normal radicle and an active
projected radicle.
So that I think is all the information that's
publicly available.
So I can say more all the select obstacle
integration makes a ton of sense when you
can overlay some sort of projected reticle
features that reflect the ballistic solution.
When you can combine a normal fixed, radical to
use normal conventional shooting with a active,
actively controlled projectors radical that's
when you have something special, because then
everything else, all your Clevelands, all
of those sorts, other things can easily,
uh, fetal on there.
Right.
Right now, for example, I'll give you an example.
You have, let's say you're hog hunting
at night, right?
You have your thermal clip on, in front
of the rifle scope.
You can only look through the clip-on.
If you have your laser range finder built
into the rifle scope.
Normally like, actually, like a lot of them are
now no longer works because it doesn't see
through the clip-on.
Right.
Okay.
So while this new solution has an offset
is a range finder that can see around the
clip on whatever else.
And it could project a ballistic
solution radical.
What if you extended it?
Uh, what if you extended it further,
you could, uh, use the next generation of this
actual radical technology to project and.
And, or just overlay an image on there.
Now, your Cleveland doesn't have to
be in front of the rifle school.
Couldn't be on the side of the hand
card, uh, more cited.
So that will point you in the same
direction and you'll use a normal scope.
And at some point, whether you're kind
of on a hand guard, you press a button
and you just got your thermal image overlaid.
Very cool.
Uh, I familiar with the Shiner a CQT,
uh, I, I, I've not used one note, but
I've, I'm somewhat
familiar.
So I saw I've played with it for quite a
long time, but then I find the, remember that
I have it and asked me to send it back.
I'm a little sore about that.
Uh, it's basically a combination of a normal
reflects a site with a projected thermal.
When you look a use the thermal
optic, uh, you lose situational awareness
because the image looks very different.
And you're looking through this thing.
CQT souls, the situational
awareness problem.
If you're going to be doing, using a fused
optic for self-defense purposes, It's
expensive, 10 grad, that's expensive,
but it's basically reflex site that also
gives you thermal.
You can't hide from this stupid thing and you
have not lost any of your situational awareness.
You can use a magnifier with it.
You can use a flashlight will work fine, you
see it all, and you still have a little
interesting it's, uh, you know, a really,
really impressive effort.
You know, it's going to come down on prices.
They sure make more of them and all that.
So these are the kinds of things that excite me
that I find interesting.
And most of them are in a fusion of a traditional
optics with electronics.
Um, so if you were based on the current market and
you're telling somebody entry-level, let's
say, and I don't know, price range, K keep it.
What would you consider a good, rather than
constraining you by the amount of money
that somebody is going to be sending.
Uh, what would you recommend somebody
be considering when purchasing
their first optic?
And we'll break it into, let's say for a
hunting optic and maybe something that's going
to be used for maybe PRS 10 style shooting.
Uh, so two different categories.
So conventional big game hunting,
right?
Yes.
Are they ever going to do PRS or other things?
Is it the same person?
Is it just the guy who's going to take
out his rifle and go try to, uh, shoot a
deer twice a year.
Okay.
Well, originally I was thinking like,
you know, just the guy shooting, just a
hunting and the separate one, but you know, you
raise a good point.
A lot of people will want an all-in-one
thing that they can do their target shooting
and their hunting with.
Uh, that's actually not where I was getting, um,
normal, uh, shooting at point blank distance.
Well, you don't have to do hold overs
and stuff like that.
Most conventional context scopes will work fine,
but if this is a guy who will spend most of his
time shooting PRS through the year, then we'll
go hunt in November.
I would actually recommend some sort of
front focal plane object in both cases so that
he, because he will not resist the temptation
to ask me how I know, uh, will not resist the
temptation to use his country rifles, to shoot
at ups in distances.
Occasionally it happens, right?
So the single choice for all of the above
is the vortex razor HD LHD four and a half to
22 by 50 it's a front focal plane scope.
It's under 22 ounces.
And I have a rifle called the fix that
I use for hunting and precision and everything.
Uh, and the scope can do all of that, right?
Because it's fairly lightweight.
Most precision oriented scopes are
our habit, but that's an example of what's.
What's called the crossover.
Uh, a rifle scope has been around
for a long time.
I don't think it's easily available
in Canada, though.
You may want to consider moving.
Uh, it's an as WFA three to nine by 42,
it's a front vocal pen scope made in Japan.
Um, simple, robust, uh, really, really, well-made
not super heavy, simple like meal scale radical.
You can use the scope to shoot far away
or just use it as a regular hunting scope.
And it has a very good reputation for being
robust about 600 bucks.
That's a good price point.
Uh, it doesn't do anything exotic.
It doesn't have elimination radical.
It doesn't, uh, shine your shoes.
Doesn't tie your shoelaces.
It's a, but it's a simple and robust thing.
If you're budget for hunting scope, basically
don't go super exotic.
They've worked x-ray's edge deal HD that I
was talking about as in the $1,500 range.
Now, if I were just setting up a basic.
Hunting a rifle.
There are two options select the most,
although that's not short of two options.
One is that as WFA 3, 2 9 scope, just put it on and
use that also to shoot far away, dial you hold
where the article, if you want a more traditional
second focal plane scope with some learning long
range capability, vortex.
HDL is the second focal plane scopes are under
a thousand dollars in the U S three to 15 by
42 through the 15 by 50.
And they are also reasonably lightweight,
but nice Leopold VX five is in that same, uh, in
that same conversation, uh, tracked toric
three to 15 by 42.
You're looking for the second or front
focal plane scope, but about three or
four on the low end.
That's not too heavy.
Right.
And if I had to list all of them, if I
tried to list all of them here, you will
have enough material for eight podcasts.
There's a lot of them.
Okay.
Uh, You pick one from the company that
has good customer support and has good
enough field of view.
And that has heretical that's visible
enough on low power.
You know, I've, I've used a loophole my
entire life, uh, like their scopes.
And, but from the customer support
standpoint, I got to say, vortex has been
just phenomenal in the way that, I mean, you
could be on Instagram and message them, and
they'll walk you through cycling your rifle when
you're, uh, on the range via messenger system,
big players right now do have good
customer support.
And a lot of it was driven by the pressure
created by waters.
Waters has had that amazing customer support,
arguably the longest.
So they're better at it, but it's generally good
customer support, right?
Uh, across the board, there are some
manufacturers still that insist on not doing this
very well and they'll learn their lesson.
So have you ever come out and had
just blanket warnings for certain types
of optics, stay away
all the Amazon brands fee, Archie monster
from all that crap just don't do it.
Yeah.
I think of it this way.
If they're selling a skull for 200 bucks and
it has every feature known to man, if it sells
for two current box, that means the retailer makes,
I don't know, 50, 60 bucks on it distributor,
another 50 bucks, then the manufacturer sold
it to somebody else.
So basically it costs 25 bucks to make.
It has 16 optical elements, machined,
aluminum jurors, all sorts of stuff.
And it cost 25 bucks to make you
going to trust that.
Yeah, no, here's the catch.
Every once in a while somebody will find
a good one, right?
Then he'll hit every forum saying that yay,
my $25 or whatever it is.
If you have any Russian audience,
they will appreciate what I just said.
Uh, Is just as amazing as the $5,000 Schmidt
and abandon you overpaid by $4,900, right?
It's you just got to have a good one and
it will fall apart in you eventually, but
since you will likely never use it, they'll
sit in the safe to be pulled out and shown to
unsuspecting victims.
Occasionally it will never fail on you because
you're never going to do anything with it.
If you use it full buy, there are cheap, simple
sculpts that have been made for a long time.
Right?
If you are in a budget, go buy burst fulfilled
$250 made in the Philippines they've been
making forever and a day it's cheap to make
because the simple scope it is robust, right?
For the mentally.
There is these brands that are really crappy,
have been weeded out from most regular
competitive landscape.
They go through eBay, Amazon, basically,
they're trying to get to people who have not
been around, got a world, a long enough goodbye.
But if you stick with reputable brands or some
of the smaller companies that were started by
people from reputable brands, athletic will
not as that small of a company anymore, good
company case came out.
Guys came out of Bush, not started their own.
Do really well attract, attract optics, small
company out of New York.
Two guys from Nikon came out, started their
own brand and amazing customer support.
Good guys, small company really take care of
their customers, uh, as WFA does very good job,
but you know, we talked about war techs and
loophole, uh, SIG changes stuff very quickly.
Sometimes I don't know what to make
heads or tails of.
Okay.
I'm not impressed with budgets.
I scopes higher end stuff is good.
It seems to be good budget stuff from Zeiss
has so much variation that I don't know what
to make out of it.
Uh, Bush and other companies that are
mystifying to me, that changing product quite
so rapidly that for a guy like me, who
makes her commendations it's totally useless.
I can just look at the scope.
States could not actually use these things and
spend a lot of time.
Right.
If you're changing your product lines every
year, I can't recommend your products because I
don't have enough time.
Right.
By the time I'm done evaluating it, you
just discontinue at it.
Okay, great.
That's helpful.
Uh, so I look at stuff that's been a, that's
been out in Maine for a little while where I've
been able to, and if I recommend something,
then I'll go and track.
How does for people who bought it from
American foundation.
So I ended up with reasonably good feel of
how the product performs.
So you will not find the recommendations
on my websites, uh, of something that just
gets rotated every year, because I can't
in good faith, evaluate the performance.
There's a type factor too.
Yeah, it makes sense.
So look for things, either from very
reputable companies, all look for things
that have been made for a little while.
Well, on that note, is there anything
else that we should be touching on before we
start looking at rap?
We haven't talked at all about observation optics.
We, didn't not one bet
by not killers and a spotting scopes.
If you're a hunter or precision shooter,
you should have a, by not a hundred percent.
If you are primarily a shooter, you should be
considering a binocular with a built-in laser
range finder or a radicle, or both
mobile barely exists.
They used to be much worse.
Now they're actually getting pretty decent.
Okay.
To be fair.
I still hunt with a conventional binocular
using vortex razor, Ugg 10 by 50 and a separate,
uh, like a rangefinder . Uh, but I'm carefully
investigating all the binomials with built in
laser rangefinders and they get to increasing
the better soon enough there isn't going to be.
Penalty or not optics aware.
I can just switch to that.
They're already laser range finder binoculars.
They do not have enough Pendleton optics, but
they're very expensive.
Like the, like, uh, three, two hundred.com
$3,000, like a sort of size, but
not goes with the integrated laser range.
Finders are amazing.
I might still pick one up, but for now I'm okay
with the separate ones,
but over the SIG, the kilos
with this.
So I actually use the kilo range rangefinder
for quite awhile at the latest, a skill of 10
K uh LRF by not like I haven't seen yet.
Yeah.
So
I've been impressed with their laser range
finder capabilities, I think like has
got better glass.
Yeah, the LRF, uh, on seeks is
very good though.
The lack of has very, very natural Ahrefs.
I mean, I just switched from a sick
to like a dedicated laser range finder.
Um, I can compromise in the binocular
on this so much.
And as far as the laser range finder works.
So it kind of depends on what you're doing
right for hunting.
Do you really need to laser rate to laser
that pronghorn at 8,000 yards now for longer in
shooting, sometimes you want to be able to laser
them into a ballistic solution fairly far out.
Right?
So from hunting for hunting standpoint, I, I
am not really willing to compromise on the quality
of the binocular doesn't.
I'm going to spend a lot of more time staring
through binocular than lasing stuff.
Okay.
And if the animal is 2000 yards away, I'm
not shooting it at that distance anyway.
Right.
And better modern laser range finders will
raise, will laser a large object at a distance.
I know roughly where that animal is.
I don't have to laser the actual animal just to
being, uh, further than I can lays is already
a piece of information.
Good.
So with the laser, I try and you can
buy an ocular.
There's up to a certain point.
I'm not willing to sacrifice an obstacle
course for comp for precision PRS use
and stuff like that.
Uh, get the high magnification, get a
high-quality 15, 18 power binocular, because
you'll be staring through this thing a
lot and looking through things with two eyes
as much less fatiguing than with one eye.
And everybody goes, oh, it's not that bad.
My eye will just rest.
No, it takes a long time until you sleep.
Your eye is not fully rested.
If you're going to be glassing for a while
and then shooting, you want to cut
down a knife at you.
So I, I always will glass with my, um, my left
eye because I'm shooting predominantly right.
Eye dominant.
I do
bless with a spotting scope.
Yes.
Yeah.
Glass with binoculars.
So I'll, I'll do both by nose and spotting scope,
but you'd say doing both eyes to restrain on
both is better, is it?
Yeah.
So the, if you're only looking through
the spotting scope, are you all right?
I still straining less than the last
it's still straining.
Okay.
Because remember it's the brain that's interpreting
the images, right.
Okay.
Good point.
Uh, my, what elk hunting in New Mexico.
We never needed a spotting scope.
Once we'll use 10 to 12 power binoculars,
sheep hunting.
We only needed a spotting scope to judge, uh,
the horns for finding sheep and et cetera.
If I wasn't going for the biggest stuff, I wouldn't
need a spotting scope.
Right.
But fifth generation power binoculars that
a couple of people had ended up being
extremely useful.
Okay.
Um, by.
Bye high-power by an, on a tripod is quite
a remarkable tool.
You you'll be amazed in how far you can see with
what you don't think as much manifestation.
Um, if you see powered by an ocular will
generally over any length of time will
give you a better image than comparable quality
at 2223 power spotter.
Interesting
last week for everyone with this trade-off
this, uh, is a little bit different for everyone,
but that's the ballpark.
I did some tests a little while back,
uh, on, uh, 20 power by not killers versus
15 power binoculars versus a spotting scope.
Uh, the 20 power binoculars had 56
millimeter objectives.
So there's the pupils got a little bit too
small for me glassing off of the tripod,
15 to 18 powers where the sweet spot was.
Okay.
I could see really far away with not
that much effort.
You're going to go through the glass
for a long time.
Interesting.
Let's weaken the pack, which is nice too.
Now if you are Traficante, you
really need to look at antlers in animal
ease indeed far away.
The spotting scope might not be a bad thing,
but, um, I'm probably a less experienced
hunter than you are.
So use your best judgment, but if I'm
dry or riding around in a four by four and
ATV or something like that, I'll, I'll happily
have a spotter in it, but I'm not going to
hike with it up here.
yeah, she punting I'll bring the spotting scope
for just making sure you're making that legal
shot, but you're right.
The majority of the work is done with
your, your by knows.
And it's another thing, if you think
it might be taking a longer shot, right?
If there's a lightweight scope that gives you
a mobile notification and it's a very high
quality scope, is that a spotter right here is.
Uh, that's a March five to 42 by 56.
Really amazing obstacle quality look heavier
than I want on the sheep rifle, but it's, uh,
it takes less weight to put this on a nice
long range rifle than to carry an extra spotter.
That's a good point.
It goes up to 40 power.
Yeah, that's a good consideration.
Right?
So there is more than one way to skin.
A cat, um, spotting scopes do have their
place, but for me, that place is not
in my backpack.
I did not get fat by doing
unnecessary exercise.
Right.
So you're usually using your spotting
scope, the range
on the range all the time.
Yeah.
Um, but when I'm shooting a yards and stuff like
that, when I'm doing precision stuff, like.
And not magnification the rifle scope.
So I'll use a spotting scope of him setting
up behind the shooter.
If I'm shooting with somebody, I
set up behind them.
When I look at the trace, that kind of
stuff, I'm not going to set up my rifle behind
somebody shooting.
It could be, I mean, I'm cocky with it, but
the guy in front of my
rifle might be, might not be.
What are your thoughts on those
core spotting scopes?
Um, the balance again, I'm a shooter,
not, not a birder.
I will not buy a spotting scope without a radicle.
Okay.
If I am spotting for somebody, I need
the radical to call out corrections.
If I'm trying to find something, I can use
the radical for quick range estimation.
Since I'm not trying to distinguish a, kolibri
eating a mosquito, uh, three miles out,
the radical does not get in my way.
Colwell doesn't like guns.
So they refuse to put the radical in their raffles,
in their spotting scopes.
Yeah,
unfortunately, well, And so what, what radical
spotting scope, uh, are you currently using?
I use an Athlon, uh, S uh, UHD Athlone Kronos.
Uh, they have a, kind of a field spotter
with the radical.
I helped them conceptualize
those radicals.
So they work well for me.
Very nice.
If I could afford it, I'd be using a consult
it's even expensive.
Uh, there's another spot or coming out
to the market soon.
They haven't announced it yet.
Which if all goes well, should work kind
of like the canceled for less money.
I might pick that one up.
Okay.
Um, so it's going to be interesting.
Uh, vortex razor has a radical IPS for the
85 millimeter spot.
It's actually quite nice.
Uh, for quite a while I used the.
Um, Swarovski S T R spotting scope with
a projected, uh, eliminated radical.
That was very, very nice.
Let's just sold it in used Hensoldt
for a while.
I think Hansel had better that the field
a little bit better.
Okay.
Both are very nice expensive though, right?
Yeah.
In practical terms, the one I use the most
is the Athlone era's a UHG and I have a, I
think it's a 22 power IPS for the radical,
and that's basically enough for my purposes.
I don't really need more than that.
And it's small and light and I could move
it around easily and we find one to more of a
field support or take something into the field,
actually use this guy.
This is also.
This is a Kronos, it's a seven to 42
magnification, 50, 60 minute Metro
objective module.
It's not the most amazing school, but it is quite
good, but because it goes down to seven power, I
can use it as a handheld monocular wouldn't
I need to, right.
So I actually use this quite a lot.
That's good enough for my purposes.
Well, I think we've, uh, we've kinda
covered the broad gamut about you, your
background, about dark load of Octa XR, calm.
Uh, it gives people some food for thought when
thinking about a rifle, scopes and binoculars
and spotting scopes.
Um, I think, uh, from a, a more technical in-depth
sort of standpoint, I would love to, to, uh,
do a deep dive into some of the optics and,
uh, how they work and how people should be
setting them up properly.
But I think that's something probably safe
for, uh, for a future.
Food for thought, go shoot.
Just shoot.
If you don't shoot, you do not know
what you need.
Shoot in different lighting conditions,
shoot from different shooting positions.
Get off the bench, shoot with the rear of
the rifle on support.
It will change how you look at rifle scopes.
Yeah, it will put sitting, standing
kneeling fraud, supported rear supported,
learn to shoot with a sling undershoot prod
with a sling, learn to shoot kneeling
with a sling that supports you slightly.
If you're basing your rifle scope decision
based on, uh, if you're basing a rifle, scope
decisions, primarily on shooting from the bench
at a hundred yards, you're doing a troll.
Yeah, there's a hell of a lot more to it
than just that the
choice over a rifle scope is primarily driven
by the application.
Not by the gun.
You have it sitting on.
Like I keep on hearing this nonsense
thousand dollars.
God need a thousand dollars scope.
No bullshit.
The scope has to be matched to the targets.
You're shooting.
How far, where you're shooting them with
lighting conditions, you're shooting them
with and the requirements for the iBox meaning
shooting positions.
I have not said anything about what rifle it's on.
I've had $5,000 rifles rifle scopes
on $500 rifles.
They were quick if you only shoot off the
bat, you can put the $500 scope in a $5,000
rifle it'll work.
Great.
Okay.
It's not about the rifle.
It's about what you do with it.
That's how you choose a scope.
Thank you very much for being on that social core
podcast relief really enjoyed our conversation
and learned a lot.
Oh, excellent.
Nice conversation.
I reckon we should do this again.