Understanding Variable Magnification Classifications - LPVO | IPVO | MPVO | HPVO

[@CDOES]

IPVO Comarpsion Is being dropped this weekend.

[@toasti5]

It's a little late for the submission for the IPVO video but I have a NF 2.5-10x24 and a NF 2.5-10x32 if your interested in checking them out!

[@GraizenBrann]

Good job, Can't wait to see what you got brewing 👏👏🎉

[@HoldenNobles]

It would be awesome if you could do a small video covering your personal favorite optics. Your videos have been extremely helpful and made learning about different optics so much easier.

[@emtothedee]

@@toasti5x42 is the best version imo but not as sexy as the x24

[@toasti5]

@@emtothedee oh I totally agree! I was just saying I have both the x24 and x32 sitting in my safe right now not mounted to anything

[@willl4219]

I walked down the street today and I overheard some chatter from the town folk “Do you think C_does will have the NXS 2.5-10 x 42 in the IPVO comparison?” The people are on the edge of their seat for this video😂

[@CDOES]

@@willl4219 lmao

[@kyleg1166]

Literally the best scope for IVPO!!

[@lordhellfire153]

You're just reminding and reinforcing to me that the Nightforce 2.5-20x is my dream scope

[@willl4219]

Looked through one the other day. It’s pretty nice. I have the atacr 4-16

[@brucecampbell1838]

@@willl4219 that’s the scope I’m trying to get now the 4-16🤤🤤. I also have the 2.5-20

[@Bitter_Blueberry]

I want more 2-12s

[@crossan008]

Hell yea! new C_Does with coffee

[@juliusgregorio]

Thanks for all you do. Merry Christmas to you as well.

[@markgarcia5563]

Very good analogy using the minimum magnification to categorize them into "class". I agree with you on the IPVO opinion as you made a very valid point. Personally, I love the LPVO in the 1-8 or 1-10 range for the AR platform.

[@pocketbike698]

I've been running an Athlon helos 2-12 on my 6.8spc for a daytime coyote setup for the last couple years. That reticle is completely usable at short distance, but it also retains the ability to reach out if I need it to. I'd love to see more companies make that 2-12ish range

[@halledwardb]

Cool. Nice video. Sending it to my daughters.

[@protectpersevere2030]

Great video, can’t wait for the ipvo comparison.

[@irongiant_actual]

To anyone saying that this is unnecessary, just know that no one cares about your opinion. Most of us are here to listen to whatever C_Does says about scopes because he knows his stuff. I have yet to buy an optic that he hasn't done review on and all his reviews from my own experience and purchases has been spot on. If you disagree make you own rebuttal video and see who the audience agrees with.

[@icsheeple2]

You just got me to subscribe to C Does

[@elterga6224]

Quit glazing, I like C_Does, but he’s not the be-all, end-all of scopes. Just watch the video without white knighting

[@youngsmith5647]

IPVO is a new classification for me. I used to be more inclined to classify the scopes with this magnification range as MPVO, and regard 4-16x and 3-18x as regular magnification scopes. But I think it is just a difference in naming, because in essence, our views on magnification are similar, just give them different names.

[@rufusrizzo78]

On my hunting rifles I prefer 2x-7x. It's amazing how much difference 2x makes over 3x. For me I don't really need 9x, but I really like the wider FOV at 2x.

[@drdan9158]

@cdoes refrences to use cases really helps. Like what is good for QP,Tactical Games, Proving Grounds etc is awesome.

[@johnm5131]

excellent info!

[@lipidi1542]

Zeiss V8 line of scopes follow these categories perfectly

[@CDOES]

@@lipidi1542 they will be discussed in depth

[@martino7263]

Tipical hunting scopes are IPVO. In the next months i am going to buy a meopta meostar R 2.5-15x50 for my first hunting rifle. At first i was going for an MVPO, but friends hunters agree that i will never need more than 15x for hunting, here usual ranges are 200-300 meters. And a 2.5x comes handy to attach a thermal clipon to the optic.

[@RuBearUSA]

Would you say that IPVO is a scope that at minimum magnification is easily used at short distances with both eyes open? It is not a replacement for red dot, but still usable. I wonder where would 2-8. 2-7 scopes would fit?

[@CDOES]

@@RuBearUSA yes. I would say that most of the IPVO's I have reviewed were capable of both eye open shooting.

[@christophercasanova3968]

In your opinion what scope would you put on a q fix in 8.6 blackout that would also be used for a 308

[@davidhartley6232]

Help me choose a 2-12x scope. Currently leaning towards the Vector Continental x6 2-12x44 🤔

[@Rebel_Spirit_Operations]

HE DID IT!!!

[@Geno106]

I can't decide between LPVO + redDot or an LPVO for my HK416 16". For the lpvo I'm torn between the PA PlxC 1-8 or Delta Stryker HD 1-6. Here in Germany it's hard to get hold of Trijicon or Leupold. If you do, it's an extra €1000. What would you recommend? We shoot between 50-200m. Thanks!

[@MegaGouch]

MPVO had always referred to what you have called IPVO, which was always a problem as HPVO encompassed everything from a 3-15 to a 7-35, but on the other hand it seems fairly normal to have LPVOs and MPVOs (or IPVOs) separated, and then everything else is just a normal scope. It'll be interesting to see if your naming convention catches on or not. As you mentioned it also begs the question where does HPVO end and a new category start? With 6-60, 8-80, 10-60, 12-50 etc scopes existing, does there need to be a 5th category? In which case do we just stick with LPVO, MPVO, and then everything else.

[@ghostriders1806]

Question for people, my new scope came in and the reticent is not level to the scope housing should i make a warrenty summit or do you think its not an issue?

[@HBCuatro]

Contact the manufacturer not randoms on the interwebs

[@dustinmclean7899]

I will never understand why a very common optic setup is a 1-10 LPVO with a red dot on top. If the individual is admitting that the 1x on the lpvo is not up to par and needs supported, then why bother getting an LPVO? Would it not be more beneficial to get a 2-12+ with a red dot on top? Currently doing this with the Athlon Helos BTR Gen2 and love the setup.

[@bmattmcneilly013]

Putting a red dot on a 1-10 is not saying you're not using the 1x in your LPVO as your primary 1x. Go watch Joe Farewell shoot for example.

[@Sleepy7666]

Sometimes you need better angles, eye relief, FOV, and spatial awareness.

[@MasterReptile25]

I would factor in the usability of the reticle as well as the power range.

[@CDOES]

That will be one of the serious talking points on the comparison video.

[@brandonrupp5880]

So many reticles fall apart at one end of the zoom or the other

[@bigfootdrums]

Viewer number 9!

[@fndrr42]

You’ve made it bro 😂

[@zacbarnholdt5984]

love my athlon 2x12 btr 2.

[@GldenRetriever]

I can agree that there should be a short range or intermediate PVO category. That being said, and what you said, the 1.1-1.9 is so murky that it's hard to categorize those with the 2-2.9 min mag. Leupold is one company to blame for this for the most part lol due to stuff like their Mk8 1.1-8 and their 1.5-5 vx-3i being basically LPVOs. I consider LPVOs to be 0.5x-1.9x. Basically most people would say these are good in close quarter engagements. As for the max mag, I don't really see there being a cap as 1-12s exist like you said and I'm sure a 1-14 could happen in the future. I personally consider anything 10x and under to be a standard LPVO and anything over that, an enhanced LPVO (eLPVO). Under 10.1x, even if the LPVO isn't a 1x, it still fills the same role. And if it is over 10x, you don't need to use it past the 10x except for when you just want that last little bit of zoom, even if just for PID and not for shooting. A prime candidate for this is the march 1.5-15x42 series. For some people (myself included), can use the 1.5x like a 1x as my eyes are just screwed up like that. I rarely push past the 10x, but it's nice to get that extra 50% stretch when you want it. I feel like it shouldn't be compared to an MPVO as I don't think it is. With it being a 10x zoom, you'll find a lot of 3-15s and 4-16s to be much better in the image department at that max mag. It's really the best and worst of both worlds, but is more of a LPVO, thus the eLPVO designation. Not to mention with the larger exit pupil at those LPVO magnifications, you are getting a much better experience behind it. All that to be said, trying to coral all these scopes into nice little boxes is really just not going to happen lol, even if we want to.

[@frank7694]

Your videos making me want to buy an LPVO... anyone know what eyebox is best out of the Vortex Venom 1-6, Primary Arms SLx Nova, or the Sig MSR?

[@brandonrupp5880]

The venom is better than the SLx, I can't speak to the Sig. You might look at the Primary Arms Special Purchase 1-6 that C_Does mention in the begining of the video. It comes in a 5.56 bdc and the Nova reticle.

[@Tactical-Practical-SajidShah]

Please Advice Variable Scope for HK G3K (short 12.5 inch barrel). FFP; 2-12x24 or 3-12x44.

[@triviszla1536]

New to all this and I was gobsmacked when I heard you say very high power variable optic. People run telescopes on their setups?

[@jonathanrogers9961]

I understand what you are saying but I do not agree with it. There are always going to be scopes that are pushing the limits and or that don't conform to traditional magnification ranges. You can't just go creating random overlapping classes to fit them all.

[@MrRhsmike189]

Now, can I send you my Trijicon Credo 1-10 for you to give your thoughts?

[@aaronfarnsworth7653]

I wonder if a much more granular breakdown of categories may be more clear? It would definitely be more thorough if someone was wanting to split every hair in a comparison. Something that could be easily listed and broken down in a spreadsheet. Begin the breakdown with the minimum power LPVO, 1-3x IPVO, 4-6x MPVO, 7-9x HPVO 10-12 and even VHPVO or UHVPO. The magnification ranges could have their own similar scale Under a 1x start 3-4 times minimum = low, 5-6 times minimum = intermediate, 7-8 times minimum = medium, 9-10 times minimum = high above that could be very-high and ultra-high as well? After that you could break down objective sizes, tube sizes, eye reliefs, adjustment ranges (vertical-horizontal) and reticle designs into range categories. Focal planes (1st/2nd), lens quality/clarity, light transmission or daylight scale? (Full light, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4) (moon with corresponding scale) followed with light enhancement and thermal abilities.

[@wsigona]

I love to watch your spectrum in action.

[@ChielScape]

IPVO market is very lackluster. Not a lot of zoom ratio available. We have 1-8x and 1-10x LPVOs galore, but very very few in the 1.5-12 to 15 to the 2.5-20 to 25 range. Personally these are what I call MPVO (I always added EPVO at the far end instead for 6x and higher minimum) but what's in a name... IPVO works too I guess.

[@freshofftheplane]

Came here for the Meopta Optika 6

[@brandonrupp5880]

The Primary Arms Special Purchase Nova should be called the Glx 1-6x24 Nova

[@CDOES]

@@brandonrupp5880 completely agree. It's a glx. But I think people wouldn't of been as interested in it.

[@brandonrupp5880]

I hope your review includes a side by side with the SLX, and PLX nova variants.

[@MegaSloth]

Show this to Bruiser so he can cry about these classifications. I don't know why the dude just can't handle the word MPVO, now that we got IPVO and HPVO his head is going to explode.

[@kalashniben9005]

also that 2-12 is interesting i really want trijicon to release a new creedo in 2-12by maybe 44 and have a tree reticle and parallax but alas my hopes do not determine what the market wants and what they will produce

[@exsanguinenation]

Did Vector happen to mention a release date on that 2-12?

[@CDOES]

@@exsanguinenation end of the month. They gave me a discount code good for 10%. My review for that will drop they day they become available

[@exsanguinenation]

@@CDOES Thank you, sir. Looking forward to your assessment. Looks like a decent option so far, but can't find much, yet. Just retail placeholders.

[@flopus7]

Personally i don't think there's a need for the category. Lpvo (everything under 2x for minimum) covers everything you'd use on a carbone. Mpvo (2-4x for minimum) covers everything that allows for precision while maintaining a low end that can be pressed into use at closer ranges. I agree that high absolutely begins at 5-25 scopes. I just dont see a real difference in use from a low end of 2 to 4

[@GldenRetriever]

I like that idea as-well, but if it goes over 10x, I consider it an enhanced LPVO (eLPVO). Like the march 1.5-15 line. Can definitely fill the role of an LPVO, but it gives you at least half (to exceeding triple) the max magnification, as-well as a better eyebox at any of those LPVO mags.

[@flopus7]

@GldenRetriever I was under the impression March scopes have unusable eyeboxes

[@GldenRetriever]

@@flopus7 Not the case at all with the 1.5-15x42mm. Their 1-10 shorty can be a little tight, but that's all 1-10s. Now their side focus adjust are almost universally tight, but that's a different story. Exit pupil and eyebox are basically the same thing (more or less) and with the 1.5-15x42, you have a 4.2mm exit pupil at 10x. You won't find any 1-10x with anywhere close to that. Most are 2.4-2.8mm, so ~33-50% smaller exit pupil, which is extremely noticable. So 4.2mm on 10x with the march is roughly equivalent to what a razor gen 3 gets at 6x (4mm exit pupil) given that it has a 24mm objective.

[@null2470]

I remember when Tasco made better scopes for way less money through the 80s and 90s, at any power, than the jumped up monocle tubes these companies are charging 1k$ and upwards for.

[@weridebikes1000]

Better than what?

[@bghiggy]

​@@weridebikes1000tasco is 22 and airsoft tier, nothing else 😂

[@weridebikes1000]

@ exactly my point!

[@sssss8700]

There was a time when TASCO was fairly well regarded. They even had at least one foreign military contract

[@newphillysports]

​@bghiggy Tasco had a contract with the USN supplying fixed 10X42 (Super Sniper) scopes for their rifles. When Tasco went under, SWFA bought the name and original design of Tasco's Super Sniper scopes. They are rugged scopes manufactured in Japan as was the original Tasco supplied to the military

[@PistoleroJesse]

I think you need to specify the non-tunneled minimum magnification.

[@ivang18]

Bushnell DMR

[@kalashniben9005]

8:18 1.5-15? oh man I hope it's the march

[@GldenRetriever]

It is. AFAIK no one else does it and he teased it about a month ago. It isn't the DFP 34mm version though.

[@douglascuvillyed.s8211]

I think the classifications can be organized by objective lens of the tube/bell 24mm low _1-6,1-8,1-10 30mm low_ 1-8, 1-10 44mm med _4-16 50mm med_ 3-18 50mm high_ 3-18, 4-24 56mm high_ 5-25, 5-30 There are a few instances betweeners...like 2.5-10x from Primary Arms i would consider that an IPVO or a 2-12x Meopta. I said what this video said but i said it dumber lol

[@nickolasthefrog]

We’ll have a winner when someone slaves the parallax adjustment to the zoom. We’ll have a better winner when slightly canted mounts become standard and we can go back 1” tubes. And we’ll be golden when small, capped turrets are available with xmas tree reticles.

[@bghiggy]

Why on earth would you want your parallax slaved to your magnification range? If you're shooting a target at 300 yards and it's in a deep shadow you'll need more magnification to see it than you would if it's in sunlight and that would completely screw with your parallax. Also a 1 inch tube just makes the light have to be bent more which introduces more chromatic abberation and limits your maximum field of view. Go compare almost any 4-16 with a 1 inch tube to one with a 30 or 34mm tube and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. Scopes with a 1 inch tube have a smaller sight picture than tubes with a larger diameter.

[@rogerwood5228]

Not a good idea

[@newphillysports]

Take a look at the Ultralight SS from SWFA. 2.5-10 x 32. 1" tube, capped turrets, good glass, weighing in at 9.5 oz. Made in Japan

[@nickolasthefrog]

@ Wasn’t aware of them. Looks like a small texas company is ordering private label from two Japanese manufacturers. Interesting.

[@Shrapnel-tj3il]

EPVO (extreme power variable optic) rather than VHPVO

[@CDOES]

@@Shrapnel-tj3il I like that

[@brandonrupp5880]

Nailed it, but in true gun fashion it has to be XPVO.

[@Sleepy7666]

I vote XPVO. Mostly cuz windows xp was great. 😂

[@SantosGunworks]

If a 3-18 is an MPVO, then the 2.5-20 should also be an MPVO

[@jaredmatthews9403]

Hoping someone sent you an Eotech VuduX 2-12 haha

[@sethperry1323]

I want a 1.5-2 to a 10-12 x 30 or 32 short compact similar to the mk5 but a quarter the price 😅

[@MrJayBlackwind]

Swampfox Warhawk 2-10 or 2-12 Athlon BTR

[@bghiggy]

We all need to bully nightforce into putting their fc-dmx into the 2.5-20

[@CDOES]

@@bghiggy you think I haven't tried?!?! 😭

[@jwedfwdast]

We also need to bully NF to do an ATACR 2-12 FCDMX FFP

[@chef7734]

No we don't. I'm fine with my fc-dmx staying on my atacr 1-8 on my carbines and my 2.5 nx8 having the mil-xt on my mk12s.

[@bghiggy]

@@chef7734 the mil-xt is basically invisible at 2.5x and only starts becoming usable at like 5x which makes the magnification range going down to 2.5 kind of irrelevant. That's why I want the fc-dmx. You can actually use it on minimum magnification

[@Anthony-jo3rz]

EPVO > VHPVO

[@Sleepy7666]

XPVO supremacy

[@JoseChung21]

Watching so many videos on LPVOs - to me the compromises including eye box/bad reticles/bad illumination/limited usable magnification/weight/big expense are just not worth it to put on a gun. For civilians a red dot on top of a IPVO or MPVO is the best combo to run. The red dot can handle most unexpected close engagements which should be the norm if you're a civilian. I would imagine that in a breakdown situation - the combo I just suggested would rein superior assuming most offensive engagements would take place at distance. It seems to me that no one is ever going to make an LPVO that's worth a damn - thoughts?

[@X-ForceBro]

I'm actually going to disagree on this one I'm going to say LPVO sub 2X magnification MPVO 1.6x and up HPVO 20X Plus And I feel like any MPVO Need microDots

[@ChappySinclair]

2-10 2-12 range has always been in the mpvo category. Creating another category seems like an excuse to make another video and passively shill some optics.

[@willl4219]

You think hes shilling? You must be new here

[@ChappySinclair]

@willl4219 You must be new to KZbin. Been subscribed to this channel before he was a dedicated optic reviewer.

[@gregpace4676]

I don't see a need for "catagories" at all. I would rather hear 1x8 rather than LPVO. 1x8 actually tells me the magnification range. You waste all this time whining about another designation, when all I need is the actual magnification, which is actually useful.

[@ImOldGregg]

Does this really even matter?

[@socaljarhead7670]

Absolutely not but it’s still interesting.

[@ImOldGregg]

@ sorry disregard, misread your response

[@thepracticalrifleman]

No, it doesn’t matter. Hobbyists coming up with terms to classify things that are already classified doesn’t matter. Especially considering there are scopes that fit within those numbers with distinctly different properties. Tech changes and twenty years ago, what was considered “high” and “low” has certainly changed. Instead of classifying things with an acronym, say 3-18x. Say 1-6x.

[@brandonrupp5880]

Ultimately no, but it is helpful for people who get overwhelmed by all the options on the market.

[@Longshot762x51]

These are completely unnecessary classifications... Its a magnified optic - either fixed or variable. Thats all.

[@weridebikes1000]

Yea, nobody is going to your channel for advice tho 😂

[@Ascendant7Justice]

It's helpful to classify things that have such a large variability to them.

[@fndrr42]

Why not differentiate between power ranges that alter the intended use? 😂

[@USAsportsmanIdaho]

I would comment that LPVO can be a life saving choice for dangerous game hunting, being able to find a charging animal in your scope may determine who walks away from the encounter. There are a lot of people who think they know a lot about optics and give what I believe is questionable advice, it’s good to find someone who is very knowledgeable and is sharing his knowledge with his viewers, thank you !

[@Coopaloop-gg3kw]

When you are shopping they are useful classification for finding what you are looking for.

[@Ndjdieiejdjekenenenejee]

Bro please seek help