Monstrum Panzer vs Vortex Razor: How does a $200 scope compare to a $2500?

[@Monstrumtactical]

Holy smokes, at $2500 I thought the Razor would blow us out the park but it's crazy to see that distortion and chromatic aberration. We did put a lot of effort in developing the Panzer and I'm glad it showed. I didn't have time to look through the Razor before sending it to you but I do admire how sharp the Razor is when looking at the USAF resolution chart and that daylight bright reticle very impressive. I believe our next priority is to create an affordable daylight bright reticle in the Panzer's future iteration. Thanks again for reviewing the Panzer!

[@Moondog2A]

Great job! If the reticle on this Panzer was as even equal to the Razor at #6 intensity it would be a category killer. I would also love to see a reticle similar to the one in your G3 or this CM2 reticle in a SFP Banshee.

[@linkchen8245]

it is made that way to get better image in higher x, the menstruum is the other way around

[@georgeclarke4235]

Great comments. Good to see a company pushing the limits to provide quality affordable products. I use your rings a lot with my builds. I’ll look at this product and your other scopes in the future.

[@thewrongneighborhood7847]

good move sending him one, cause im fuckin sold homie. 200$ for that nice of an lpvo? shit i wont even feel bad paintin it.

[@harveylin3548]

Do it, all of budget scope builders have the same problem - their reticle lighting is practically useless in daylight, all of my Arken scope have the same problem too and I think they are also in the budget scope field.

[@LiveLo0t]

For me it's easy... Buy the Monstrum Panzer and put the $2300 you save into upgrading/building the rifle it sits on, or ammo, or courses, or lunches for a year, or a vacation. $2300 is a lot of money to spend on "daylight bright" illumination in the reticle and a +/-5% clarity bump.

[@Moondog2A]

That's the best answer. Hope you subscribed.

[@justsomeplantcells-]

give a poor man 2000 bucks, he can pay his rent give a rich man 2000 bucks, he dosent care.

[@TheSpicyBoi]

they apparently even got rid of the green illumination and updated the reticle. it gives more information and is even brighter :O

[@wesman7837]

​@@TheSpicyBoi Oh that's disappointing, I like green much better than red!

[@alejandrocalori6298]

Hell, there's premium canon lenses that are not even near that price, and you'd think those big ass canon elements would be more expensive.

[@CalzaTheFox]

As it's been said before, we're in a race towards the bottom - newer, affordable scopes can punch well above their expected weight class due to great performance for the cost. It's a fantastic time to be in as a consumer.

[@Moondog2A]

That's a great point. We are very fortunate with how much performance has progressed in gun accessories. Hope you subscribed.

[@paulbarclay4114]

try dropping it a few times and see what happens

[@brentharrington9235]

This can be said about _MOST_ current technologies. Thanks to capitalism and automation, ''budget'' level gear is on par with top tier gear from just a decade ago.

[@Splarkszter]

​@@paulbarclay4114 Why would you EVER drop your sights?

[@paulbarclay4114]

@@Splarkszter why would you ever assume you wont accidentally drop it Usually at the exact moment when you need it to work That's how things go

[@KahshinLiu]

Wow, I dont know whats more impressive. The 200 dollar optic or how absolutely incredible this presentation was. By far the best "Gear vs Gear comparison" ive seen on youtube

[@Moondog2A]

Wow, thanks! I hope you subscribed.

[@peterto8050]

It’s refreshing to watch something so well presented and honest

[@stephen6640]

Agreed, I'm impressed. I gonna checkout his channel out for other reviews.

[@sethlaughlin6955]

I have three Monstrum optics now and am very impressed. I’m on a budget so I simply cannot go with high dollar scopes. I’m so appreciative to Monstrum for making really good quality glass that middle class people can afford. Awesome video. Thanks!

[@Moondog2A]

Good choice! Hope you subscribed.

[@JacksonCarter-hh7hd]

I was skeptical too but have had nothing but good times w their prism and forward mounted magnifier I'll be grabbing this soon. Gotta love a company that's reasonably priced AND worth a damn

[@joshuaroberts2837]

Agreed man not everyone can afford thousands of dollars for optics and let's be honest a decent brand 100-200 dollar scope is more than adequate for the majority of shooters and situations

[@Jeff-oo8gx]

Wow, honestly that weird 1 power fisheye effect was the biggest deal breaker for me. That's so odd that they couldn't get that perfect at that price point.

[@Moondog2A]

I gotta ask that at the Vortex booth at SHOT next week. Hope you subscribed.

[@loganwatts5985]

@@Moondog2Awhat did they say?

[@Moondog2A]

@@loganwatts5985 They weren't at SHOT. Apparently they skipped SHOT the last 2 years.

[@wesman7837]

​@@Moondog2A That's disappointing! 😞 😕 😔

[@loganwatts5985]

@@Moondog2A laaaaaame😒

[@HillbillyUp]

WOW, in a blind test I would of definitely picked the Monstrum for the outdoor view sunlight test. But at the range Vortex did look better at the targets. But for the money difference, I would choose the Monstrum . Great review, I really enjoyed it.

[@Moondog2A]

If the reticle were brighter, the Panzer would dominate the market.

[@Shoob__]

WOULDVE WOULDVE WOULDVE WOULDVE WOULDVE WOULDVE WOULDVE

[@poopymcface9792]

@@Shoob__It drives me crazy, too.

[@GetMeThere1]

Excellent comparison! Thanks for taking the time to do it and put it up for us.

[@Moondog2A]

Glad you liked it! Hope you subscribed.

[@newlifemedicalcenter]

I’m glad I found your channel, exactly the type of reviews and comparisons I have been looking for. Thanks

[@Moondog2A]

Glad I could help! Hope you subbed

[@yooperland1]

Just bought the Panzer and it's my 3rd Monstrum LVPO. I am very pleased with Monstrum's value per dollar and sold two entry level Vortex scopes that performed poorly in my estimation. All the Monstrums work very well on the 3 AR's they are set up on. The Panzer is on an AR-10. Monstrum has more than earned my business!

[@Moondog2A]

I have a lot more respect for Monstrum since testing them, that's for sure.

[@joeculver6227]

Best optics review I have seen in a longgggggggg time. Subscribed and can’t wait to see your next video!

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks for the sub! I'll be posting coverage from SHOT Show soon.

[@ericchdjdjnx]

Got one mainly because of this review and am going to return it. Seemed okay, but the reticle in mine was rotated before even shooting with it. Multiple reviews said they had this issue, but I gave it a chance and ended up having the same problem. QC issues are apparently very common. They also lowered the price to 150 dollars shortly I bought it. It feels really bad finding out that I overpaid by 33% on what's supposed to be a value purchase.

[@Moondog2A]

Man that sux. Did u buy it from Amazon or in Monstrum?

[@ericchdjdjnx]

@@Moondog2A Amazon. Luckily it's easy to return. About a third of the reviews are 1-2 stars so it seems like QC is an issue.

[@66justariot]

Canes upon your channel last week looking for monstrum reviews. Really enjoy your ways of reviewing and comparing.

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks. Hope you subscribed.

[@Moondog2A]

This month for my Subscribers, I'm giving away N4 night vision goggles. Enter to win at moondogindustries.com/n4dcontest

[@sokoand]

Optical quality (until it is OK) is not the most important factor in my opinion. Far more important is how it tracks, holds zero (shooting magnum calibers, accidental drops, impacts, etc), protected from weather and geometrically and mechanically perfect. That directly affects you ability to reliably hit the target much more than soft edges or chromatic aberrations. For example, some $200-300 scopes do not hold zero if you zoom in/out. You sight it at the max zoom and then use it at low or mid magnification. Others work differently in cold and hot weather or can not withstand even minor abuse. Not many people ever realize it. And this is what should be tested first.

[@Moondog2A]

Extremely valid points. Hope you subscribed.

[@GunsBlazingRanch]

Awesome review.

[@Moondog2A]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@gala021]

Amazing comparison Sir!!! That's the kind of stuff we all need to understand how to spend our money better!!! I'd love to see something like that with the long range scopes with more than 30x magnification: Night Force, Zeiss, March, Leupold, Vortex....vs some budget optics like Monstrum, Arken, Vector Optics, Hawke. I think many people will love a big and nice comparison done by you with all these optics...

[@Moondog2A]

Great suggestion! Though Hawke is rather expensive, no? Prices on their high end magnification scopes are more like Athlon or Riton? Hope you subscribe.

[@gala021]

of course I am! @@Moondog2A ! Hawke is kind in the middle to be fair...nothing compared with the high end brands mentioned before tho...

[@brettlindberg7895]

New subscriber here. I've been binge watching some of your comparison videos and have to say that I am very impressed. Your reviews are very thorough and objective. I appreciate that you just present the facts and let the viewers draw their own conclusions.

[@Moondog2A]

Welcome aboard! Thanks for subscribing.

[@mikehenthorn1778]

ok 2 videos in and i have subbed. well done sir. looking forward to going through your old videos.

[@Moondog2A]

Welcome aboard!

[@GldenRetriever]

Love how you are running the monstrum mount on the razor lol. Gets people rowdy.

[@Moondog2A]

LOL. Glad you noticed. The Razor HD doesn't come with a mount (which the Vortex sells for another $250!). Thanks for subscribing.

[@docholiday5872]

another $250 DAMN !!!!

[@ballsack8937]

Monstrum sells whatever mount you need and they perform just fine. No need to drop 250 it's honestly a slap in the face how much some of this shit costs when it's probably made right next to the budget stuff

[@thomascampbell7407]

I appreciate your time making such an informative video. Thanks!

[@Moondog2A]

Glad it was helpful! Hope you subscribe.

[@timothybryant2898]

I just ordered a Panzer about an hour ago because I want something that can reasonably engage targets from short to medium range without investing exorbitant amounts of money. I'm hoping it does well.

[@Moondog2A]

You planning on using it for target or hunting? Thanks for subscribing.

[@timothybryant2898]

@@Moondog2A Probably a little bit of both but I don't really have a lot of room to stretch it out. Hunting or target shooting I probably won't have much more than 200-300 yards too span.

[@timothybryant2898]

@@Moondog2A As for subscribing - thanks for being a fair and reasonable reviewer. I know this isn't the best optic but I'm looking for "good enough"

[@GhiIIie]

How have you been liking it?

[@timothybryant2898]

@@GhiIIie I'm ashamed to admit I have yet to shoot with it yet but do have it mounted on my rifle. The illumination of the reticle leaves a bit to be desired as it isn't very visible in the light but the magnification itself works well. The eye box gets really tight at the higher magnification levels but up till somewhere between 4 and 6 the sight picture is easily obtained.

[@stephen6640]

Your comparison wes well done! Thank you for being honest about your thoughts and opinions.

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks for watching! Hope you subbed

[@destroyerofnuggets3644]

I've used their mounts in the past, but it seems like their optics are quickly becoming interesting as well. Amazing to see some ED options in that price range, and it's absolutely hilarious that it has a truer 1x and less fisheye than the Razor. Obvious point of weakness is reticle brightness, but honestly for plinking/hunting you really only need twilight brightness. The biggest lingering concerns would be durability, quality of the internals (adjustment accuracy, repeatability), and whether or not the reticle holdovers are right. If it does end up being a durable, precise optic in addition to punching above its weight in glass quality, then it's a no-brainer for an entry level LPVO. I'd be interested in seeing how much of the

[@Moondog2A]

Monstrum has a new supposed, daylight bright LPVO that I'll be testing soon.

[@harveylin3548]

I also buy their cheap mounts on Amazon a lot, I like they have it for all heights and tube sizes. If you are not a competition shooter, nothing wrong with those cheap mounts.

[@brianwhite7686]

Your comment is exactly why I spend as much time as I do with reviews and testimonials online. There is no justification for a price difference that large. Bragging rights are extremely expensive.

[@underdogg0]

What a great comparison, wow. Great job on this!

[@Moondog2A]

Thank you! Hope you subscribed.

[@rustymiller194]

For $2250 in a difference in price I can live happily ever after with the Panzer……….Good job Moondog 👍👍👍👍👍

[@Moondog2A]

You're welcome. Thanks for subscribing.

[@belt1974123]

I think it is about time to ask why do we pay this much difference. And spare me the hand ground lens is expensive argument. I would bet there are very few that are done this way with today’s tech.

[@rustymiller194]

@@belt1974123 like TV’s , appliances, and everything else, they are all made in the same few factories ……

[@kavancooney214]

Ive watched two of your videos so far and I am a huge fan of how you do your video comparisons, clearly unbias, to the point, and best of all the media quality really shows the best side by side comparisons!!! Much love brotha keep making these videos. Im gonna subscribe and see if you have more videos on prism optics as I have stigmatism

[@Moondog2A]

I appreciate that! Hope you subscribed.

[@papapoonpoon]

This is a great video. We are in a golden age of firearms and accessories - including optics. The improvements in Chinese glass have made budget optics significantly better. For recreational civilians, budget options are looking nicer all the time.

[@Moondog2A]

Agree 100%. That's an excellent insight. The budget optics of today are as good as the expensive scopes from just a decade ago and they keep getting better. Hope you subscribed.

[@loydta]

I'm going to do it your way. First comment , the reason we buy a scope is glass clarity and turret tracking precision along with the ability to hold zero. I'm betting the tracking on the 200 dollar scope is just fine and I'm also betting the glass will be good enough.

[@loydta]

Just as I thought. It's all about practical shooting. Buy 10 of the one over 1 of the other !

[@Moondog2A]

Excellent assessment.

[@terbltim8214]

I see the Razor as NOT 10-times "better than" the Panzer. For the price differences it was astonishing to see how close the Panzer's over all performance compared to the Razor. A very useful and informative video. Big thanks for making this production.

[@Moondog2A]

Well said!

[@The02seta]

Nice fair review. I have to say there are LPVO's out there with better glass than Vortex for the price point.

[@Moondog2A]

Which are your favorite LPVOs? I'm partial to the EOTech and Primary Arms.

[@The02seta]

@MoondogIndustries I'm fond of a couple Riton X7 series on bobro qd mount. I do like the Eotech, I just don't have one yet.

[@zzzgoodnight2883]

Nightforce

[@shaymcquaid]

Great review, I really enjoyed it.

[@Moondog2A]

Awesome, thank you! Thanks for subscribing.

[@brianwhite7686]

Yo Moondog . . . I have been trying to compare various scopes through many dozens of reviews for over a week as I am about to get into the AR-15 platform. This is perhaps the most revealing comparison I have come across, and at this point I can't see myself buying anything other than the Monstrum Panzer 1-10 LPVO. I wish your recording camera could reveal more of precisely what you see with your naked eye, but aside from that, I agree with nearly everything you say in your comments. Based on this, there is no way that the Vortex is worth over twelve times the price of the Monstrum. I would go so far to say it's not even worth double the price, with the possible exception of the no-fault warranty. I currently run the Arken SH4 Gen II 6-24 x 50 on my Ruger Precision 6.5 Creedmor, and I couldn't be happier with the feel of those turrets. But there is no way I'm going to shell out an extra $2300 for that type of feel on my first step into the AR-15 arena for the privilege of getting to gloat about owning a Vortex. If the Monstrum works at the level you present it, I'll be twelve and a half times happier being able to buy more ammo and train properly while getting to know my new rifle. Thank you for all the reviews you do. I trust your opinion and value your critiques. Keep it up Brother!

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks so much. It really makes me feel good to hearcthat. Hope you subscribed. BTW with my naked eye I could make out 1 or 2 elements better than my camera seems to record.

[@brianwhite7686]

@@Moondog2A Cheers for the reply Brother! I have, in fact, subscribed to your channel, and will continue to rely on you for what's available in the market. All the best to you and yours!

[@DPBida]

So, durability and ability to hold zero don’t matter to you at all? 🤨 I’m not saying the Monstrum would do good or bad but there’s more to the cost of an optic that just looking through it. An Aimpoint T2 is worth the price cause it’ll take the beating that other budget optics won’t. This is a good baseline comparison, but there’s factors missing obviously

[@ismaelrios7046]

A comparison between Panzer, Banshee and Spectre would be great! I’m stuck in between them three. I’d like to see all three of the reticles on the screen at the same time. The format on your comparison/review videos is the best. Back to back straight to the point. Showing strengths and weaknesses on both. Glad I found your channel 💯

[@Moondog2A]

Optically they're pretty much identical as far as I can tell. The difference is in the body, turret style, and reticle (first or second focal plane). Thanks for subscribing.

[@lenzielenski3276]

OK. A Panzer is a tank, a Banshee is a mythical spirit that screams and a Spectre is a ghost. You're welcome.

[@collinstremick5015]

In my experience with Vortex scopes they have always had sup-par glass quality across all of their scopes when compared to other scopes in that same price range. I think what makes them so popular is their warranty and sheer variety of their cataloged. Vortex makes a scope for pretty much any use case you can think of and at a variety of price ranges.

[@Moondog2A]

Great insights. I hope you subscribed and join my community. Some Vortex models are better than others but you're 100% about the warranty.

[@GhiIIie]

I’ve gotta disagree with you there. In all of the price ranges they’re near or at the top. Obviously your companies like Leopold and Athlon make killer optics, but Vortex is absolutely competitive with them. There are tradeoffs with going with each brand, there might be something that one scope can do better than the other, and vice verse; you will have a personal preference and choose one over the other. And I’ve just gotta also let it be known that the glass of Vortex’s Scopes, spotting scopes, and binoculars within the Diamondback line are absolute gems for their respective price points.

[@RamikinHorde]

@@GhiIIie I'm a big vortex stan, but I gotta say they don't match up well on high power scopes vs athlon. The build quality on the athlons is much higher while the glass is slightly better in my experience. The tightness of the magnification adjustment and turrets is a huge disappointment on the midline vortex scopes, a really big hit to "quality of life".

[@GhiIIie]

@@RamikinHorde interestingly, in my opinion my Vortex Diamondback 6-24x50 has noticeably better glass than my Athlon Talos BTR 4-14x44, my dad has the Diamondback 4-16x44 and that is a bit nicer than the Talos as well. As far as the build quality goes I would beg to differ, both are very rugged and waterproof, It’s negligible at best. And as somebody who works with power tools all day building Caterpillar 797 transmissions all day, I really like when my gear is sturdy. My instinct is to be “aggressive” with tools, when I’m hunting or in a 2a scenario (in Minecraft) and adrenaline is pumping, I’m not going to be gentle. I want audible clicks, which both Athlon and Vortex provide, which again is negligible at best in comparison. They’re both great optics, no point in complaining about the fact that we have some great options in the budget realm. I also would just like to point out how awesome that Monstrum Panzer is for under $200

[@collinstremick5015]

I have strike eagle 3-18x44 on an "SPR" ar-15 build that a actually really like. it has all the features I would want in a scenario where it would make seance to need a rifle build like that (We know what I mean). It is lightweight super durable and tracks well. But the image quality does drop off hard bast about the 14x mark. Other than that, a great scope. @@GhiIIie

[@cerebralfirearms]

Excellent video, this was very very well done brother.

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks! Hope you subscribed.

[@TheOldFatDadGoober]

75% of the quality for 10% of the price. I know folks like to chase the best goodies but for a guy on a budget we are living in great times.

[@Moondog2A]

100%

[@doncowboy6625]

There are times we're spending a lot more to get a little more is worth it and there are times it's not. every rifle every situation is different. But if I'm spending over 2500 on a scope it's not going to be a vortex. I'll wait for a sale and get a NightForce Zeiss or swarovski.

[@doncowboy6625]

There are times we're spending a lot more to get a little more is worth it and there are times it's not. every rifle every situation is different. But if I'm spending over 2500 on a scope it's not going to be a vortex. I'll wait for a sale and get a NightForce Zeiss or swarovski.

[@TheOldFatDadGoober]

@@doncowboy6625 That's a good point. There's a lot of competition in that premium price range. I don't think most people buy the G3 razor at that price though. It can be found a good bit cheaper.

[@QP154]

Excellent review, thanks for taking the time to do it. I will have to correct you a little bit, the Vortex warranty is far and above the best warranty in the game. It kind of can't be overstated. Any malfunction whatsoever, intentional or not, and they will repair or replace it no questions asked. You fill out a form, they send you a label and you get it back in less than two weeks. I had a faulty dot they just...replaced. Lifetime, transferrable, and unlimited.

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks for the info! They pretty much set the standard for industry warranties. Hope you subscribe..

[@ballsack8937]

But shouldn't that be expected when they're selling optics for 2k that aren't worth it. The fact is that most of the components of both scopes were most likely made in the same city in China. Same parts sourced, tolerances might be different but we all know our shit is made in China. 2300 to 200 it's flat out bs. It sounds like they really depend on that top of the line warranty. But it's not a flex it should be the norm when spending the same amount on a scope as you would a DD

[@mobilegamersunite]

Awesome video people need to see! 🎉

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks. Did it turn out like you thought?

[@mobilegamersunite]

@@Moondog2A it's my take exactly, I even took a trip to Great Lake Crossing Mall to compare some of the 2000💰 scopes they have. The 1x is honestly awesome 👌 just unheard of for the price. The fact that these can even be compared to each other means Monstrum is bringing the goods! And where is PA?....lolz

[@thomaspotthoff3139]

Great vid man. New Subscriber!

[@Moondog2A]

Welcome!

[@pasjooter1039]

Nice detailed review, one thing I miss in your testing is low light conditions, normally the better glass aka Vortex should take the advantage. You could test both next to each other and see how much longer you can still detect something vs the other one. Meaning how much time do you buy more with the high end scope….

[@Moondog2A]

Great point! In the shaded cove section with the targets you can see how much better low light performance is by looking at the backstop. You can see the individual fine speckles of old bullet hits on the steel backstop. On the lower priced glass of the Panzer, it's just a blob.

[@pasjooter1039]

@@Moondog2A Yes, correct, but you tested within a static situation. Look at it as a hunter, when sunset starts to set in, how much longer are you able to identify not just a silhouet, for example a deer and see wether it’s doe or a buck and be able to take an ethical shot. That’s what I mean with buying time in a more expensive optic with better glass. Not sure if you will win a lot with the more expensive Vortex or not.

[@bobwiese6128]

​@@pasjooter1039Great points all. Thanks

[@lenzielenski3276]

Uh, actually its not called a fisheye effect as that is a 180 degree field of view and not a distortion. What you're seeing is barrel distortion, outward curving of straight lines near the edge of the field of view. Moreover the contrast (difference between light and dark) is actually about the same. The difference is in overall brightness which I'd expect from a larger objective. It would be interesting to see both images adjusted to the same brightness so actual contrast could be judged visually. In practice brighter images usually look sharper. Frankly, if I saw that quality image from a $200 photographic lens, I'd be pissed. Neither seem sharp or very contrasty. Fringing or chromatic aberration means diddle. If I was trying to spot species of bird at half a mile it would matter, but, then I'd be more likely using a telescope or binoculars. In field use I'd expect the difference to make or break a shot in less than 1% of situations. What I would expect to make a difference is the brightness of the dot. If you're sighting on a target, especially a moving one, a brighter dot is easier to pick up and I consider it noteworthy that you can always power the dot DOWN but you are limited to how far you can power it UP.

[@Moondog2A]

True, "fisheye" in photography is a lens with a 180º FOV. But "fisheye" has become common term in LPVO reviews when there is noticeable curvature at the edge of the FOV. Its nigh impossible to fix the aperture, ISO, and color balance on the phones that I use for recording so showing true comparative brightness is not something I'm able to capture reliably in my videos.

[@lenzielenski3276]

@@Moondog2A Adjustment and comparison would have to be done in post. Brightness adjusted in Photoshop and then highlight and shadow values measured with color picker. Nothing is perfect and your tools are limited; still, your review is well above average. Keep it up.

[@KreacherServes]

Love these fair reviews of the high end vs budget brand stuff with none of the underlying snobiness some people tend to have for some better known brands. This one in particular exemplifies the principle of diminishing returns.

[@Moondog2A]

"Diminishing Returns" is right. Hope you subscribed.

[@doctormoo9444]

Your breakdown was very well done it seemed like you covered everything

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks. I tried my best though I did skep the whole zero shooting testing footage because it was getting a bit long. Hope you subscribed.

[@georgeclarke4235]

Good review. Honest and upfront with the your results. Looks like Monstrum is providing good quality and features at very good prices.

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks. Hope you subscribed. My next step is to give the Panzer a durability test.

[@trailerparkwarrior3367]

While I do have higher end optics on a few rifles, its hard to beat Monstrum for the price. I currently have the Monstrum Banshee 1-6x on my bedside and ordered the Monstrum Hornet 6-24x for an upcoming budget 6.5 grendel build. The farthest I've shot with the Banshee was 300 yards and was amazed at the performance and clarity of the LPVO. My introduction to Monstrum was the Marksmen 3x prism in 2019 which was also a solid optic as well.

[@Moondog2A]

You should take part in the Boomstick/LongRifle budget build challenge. mnshootingsports.com

[@boscowang3422]

Does the monstrum hard zero? Would be interested in seeing a followup video after some actual shooting. My experience is that cheap budget optics often do not hold zero. I have a Sig Tango 4 and it's a set it and forget it optic. I shoot competitions and it's definitely not mounted on a safe queen.

[@Moondog2A]

I've only run a few mags but I'm going to do a more robust durability test on the Panzer over the next month. Hope you subscribed because I'll post a follow up Panzer review.

[@95GTSpeedDemon]

​@@Moondog2Acheck out shoot2hunt podcast. One guy talks about scope durability testing je developed and what he found. Might want to use that as a guide. Its like episode 35 or 37 i think.

[@deplorabledave1048]

HOLY MOSES!! I subbed to your channel and LIKED this video!!

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks for subbing!

[@GenXisT]

UPDATE: Since watching your video, 5 days ago (today is 4/10/24, so 4/5/24) I went ahead and ordered TWO of these from Monstrum. They were on sale for $144 each and there was no way I was passing that up. Ordered on Monday (4/8) and already delivered to me here in PHX. I have nothing negative to say about Monstrum or their products. If you require good quality attachments but you're also on a budget, DO NOT pass this stuff up. I'm very happy with my purchase and I can use the other $4500 (ludicrous) that I saved for something else.

[@Moondog2A]

Hope you subscribed. Thanks for the kind words. Please keep us updated on any problems. I only have a sample of 1 to base my experience by so it'll be good to get feedback from everybody who has one how they hold up.

[@jmollick1]

That Panzer is pretty damn impressive for the money to be honest! got me interested in one for sure. Good content and overall a very thorough and well delivered review! Subscribing! One note tho, at about 14 minutes you say the Razor has a longer eye box by half inch but at 2:00 in you post stats that show the Panzer having 1" more eye relief...... so did they fals advertise their eye relief?

[@Moondog2A]

I don't know if it's my impression of the eyebox sweet spot or perhaps a typo on the website stats?

[@yhckelly]

Both LVPO's appear to be solid performers. The cost difference is the key- meaningful upgrades could be had in your rifle for $2300 that would serve you far better than the difference here. Throw in a case of ammo, a dozen mags, and still have a few 100 bucks left. It's Panzer for the win.

[@Moondog2A]

Excellent point. You could buy and outfit another AR, included with its own Panzer, with the price difference between these two.

[@johanj3674]

They're sold out through Amazon. And no retailers here in Europe that I can find.

[@Moondog2A]

Monstrum's are sill available on Amazon here in the US. Maybe it'll take time to get a shipment through to Europe because of all the attacks on shipping in near the Suez? I hope you subscribed.

[@jessiejane6259]

Unless I am a competitive shooter and win lots of money doing it, I will stick to the cheap scopes.

[@Moondog2A]

100%

[@Skitzotech]

Commenting at 1:15 I think they are both gonna perform similarly. What will separate them are: 1. Longevity. (how long it lasts) 2. Durability. (how much abuse it can take before it starts failing) 3. Reliability. (working within spec in more scenarios) Number 3. Reliability will be the deciding factor. how easily the lens gets scuffed or dirty, how they handle adverse whether eg. if it gets water ingress in the rain or if it fogs up in the snow... how well they hold zero while being bumped, nudged or dropped.

[@Moondog2A]

Those are fair criteria. Unfortunately no something was at liberty of testing as the optics were lent to me.

[@Skitzotech]

@@Moondog2A Thats sadly how it is with these things... What differentiates between cheap and expensive can only be found through destructive testing.

[@lenzielenski3276]

I expect a 10-15% difference except in light gathering capability. I'd expect a greater difference there, maybe as much as 50%. Justify the difference? Nah. I know f-all about scopes, but I do know photographic lenses. For $2500 it should 'show me a good time' AND make me breakfast. Coming back after watching I think I was mostly right but under estimated the brightness difference. It seems closer to 100% or, photographically, a 1 stop difference. Parting thought: If my skill isn't 10x the average I won't be able to use or really appreciate the difference 10x the money makes. I'm no where near that good a shot and don't care for bragging rights as to how much money I spend.

[@Moondog2A]

That's a great point. I hope you subscribed and comment on my next video.

[@lenzielenski3276]

@@Moondog2A Seriously, $2500 for a scope is absurd except if its for competition where a 1% difference is a win or loss. That's a lot, even for a camera lens where color, contrast, fidelity, auto focus and mechanical aperture are added in. That's why people are going to miss Nikon scopes. They had all the light/color/resolution down to a science and just needed to concentrate on the mechanical and optimizing design for customer demand. RIP

[@Moondog2A]

@@lenzielenski3276 Tract Optics is a new company founded by form Nikon guys.

[@StrangeTamer6996]

It's obvious that the Razor would be a better and more preferable LPVO but it all comes down to the price difference. An average person isn't going to be able to build a top end AR and put a Razor LPVO on it unless they are the more fortunate few that don't have the responsibilities monetary wise as most. So when it comes down to that I'd rather have the more expensive rifle than the scope. It's all about the operator at the end of the day, plus it's always more fun to out shoot someone that has all top of the line optics with a budget LPVO. That was a good video and comparing demonstrations I'll definitely like and subscribe.

[@allenmays3340]

Very thorough and detailed! The only thing missing (and understandably so) is a torture test. Ultimately, it has to withstand what it will be put through or it's just wasted money. A warranty is great, but it doesn't help when you're in the middle of using it and it breaks.

[@Moondog2A]

That's true. But Vortex has been notorious in the past few years for having a generous warranty but also for users NEEDING to use it often.

[@Juuul89]

Great review. I probably don't have to tell you this since you are clearly knowledgeable on the subject. However, I would have personally really liked to have seen an optical review of say, 5x, half way through the range. Like camera lenses, optics are at their worst at min and max power and the Vortex was both wider at min and closer at max power, adjusting the vortex to match the monstrum's FOV probably also would paint a more favorable picture for the Vortex. So would have been cool to see somwhere in the middle of the zoom range!

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks. I did show the 5x of the Panzer in it's review video so you should check that out to get a good sense of its sweet spot. I plan to do a more in-depth review of the Razor showing it's 5x image quality soon. Hope you subscribe.

[@FClass]

One big difference you didn’t dwell on was the Vortex adjustment is 1/4” MOA per click vs 1/2” for the Monstrum. I’ve not seen a 1/2” MOA scope in years. That’s a ton of adjustment to deal with, especially at distance.

[@Moondog2A]

Good point about the Vortex. But 1/2 MOA is still common in contemporary budget and mid-grade LPVOs: like the Sightmark Citadel, Athlon Helos, Primary Clasic, and SIG Tango MSR www.midwayusa.com/product/1024710580

[@FClass]

@ I guess I haven’t bought a budget scope in a long time 🤣

[@Rwdphotos]

The sort of distortion on the wider 1x is "barrel" distortion; "fisheye effect" is more attributed to lens designs needing spherical projection to allow for extreme field of view. They are somewhat related, but fisheye is an intentional effect to achieve greater field of view (rectilinear vs spherical projection), and barrel distortion is an optical aberration created from imperfect design or manufacture.

[@Moondog2A]

Great technical explanation. The Razor and the Riton 1-10x seem to have barrel distortion despite being premium priced optics. I've tried adjusting the diopter but any attempt to correct the FOV results in an overly blurry reticle to me.

[@Rwdphotos]

@@Moondog2A these sorts of things are only correctible in software if present in a camera system. I’m not sure exactly how these scopes are designed, but diopter adjustment should only attempt to correct the plane of focus of the ocular lens, rather than the scope’s focus, which would explain the reticle becoming defocused. Barrel distortion is often corrected for with lens groups, which also tend to help with other aberrations. A lack of corrections in aberrations suggest compromises being made to either save cost, weight, or both. The sort of lens group designs needed to correct for this sort of thing would probably add a lot of weight and complexity, making it more difficult to create a rugged system that maintains tolerances needed for peak effective operation, but at the prices seen here it should be plausible that multi-thousand dollar scopes should be at least somewhere close to photographic standards in terms of optical clarity for an equivalent focal range. The $200 scope here makes a lot of sense considering the optical quality, but the $2k scope is incredibly underperforming from what I would expect something of that price. In photography, lenses of that price are closer to professional level, with complex designs and materials used, so it’s strange if those same designs and materials would be absent here.

[@salvatoredelgaudio5952]

Well done, great vid. Just subbed

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks for the sub! Did any of the testing surprise you as it did me?

[@bobwiese6128]

Agreed, Me too. 🇺🇸 🇺🇸

[@douglaskennedy2134]

Monstrum is definitely a good value for a budget range scope. My big questions are 1. Will it hold zero? 2. Will it hold up(electronics/ illumination) over several hundred or thousands of rounds? I'd like see it put through a good course of fire. Please don't get me wrong. I'm not bashing the monstrum by no means but there is definitely a reason for the price differences. I've learned that the hard way (in my wallet 😂) Definitely take into consideration what you'll be doing with your equipment before you go budget. Buy once cry once as they all say. With all that being said I still loved the video and appreciate the work I know you put into making it.

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks! Those are all good and fair points you made. I hope you subscribed and comment again in my next review.

[@jayfin5507]

Solid review!

[@Moondog2A]

Much appreciated! Hope you subscribed. I'll be posting coverage from SHOT Show soon.

[@kaasmeester5903]

Vortex also make some pretty good budget scopes. I'd be interested to see how the Panzer stacks up against those.

[@Moondog2A]

For Viper is better than the equivelent Monstrum save for its sloppy illumination turret. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pnPdYqukgrOYeZI

[@FW-od1lt]

Such a great presentation and completely unbiased. Seems like a great entry level LVPO that is FFP.

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks. The Monstrum is indeed.

[@poopymcface9792]

I really appreciate the work you put into these product reviews! Liked and subscribed!

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks for the sub!

[@paulcoleman8103]

Well the Vortex is a higher quality optic the main question I have is which one is more durable in adverse conditions. That’s pretty much a deal breaker. I would rather have a lower quality optic that is more durable to rough treatment than a high dollar optic that won’t hold up to rough field use.(just my opinion). As far as what was shown in this video the question is is the difference between the Vortex and the Monstrum worth the difference in price ?

[@Moondog2A]

That's fair contrast you posed there, I haven't had the opportunity or means to truly abuse a 1000 optic. But what do you mean by adverse? Are you talking about rain and sub zero temps. Or are you talking about dropping out a helicopter kind of adverse?

[@paulcoleman8103]

@@Moondog2A I’m not into some of the extreme stuff I have seen people do in the tests they do. As you know a weapon can take a lot of abuse in field movements under fire. (Not saying you should have someone shoot at you during this) A timed obstacle shooting course where the weapon and attachments are put through the abuse that is common in real life use under duress. In real life a weapon system can take a beating just moving forward from position to position. Thanks for what you do, keep it up

[@deplorabledave1048]

This video added to my FAVORITES!

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks!

[@mavrikmavrik3032]

How does the 1x compare when you start adjusting the diopter? Most LPVOs start to really magnify their image when you adjust the diopter. This makes the optic nearly useless for both eye shooting at close distance. The Razor II 1-6 I have does not magnify the image so it’s very usable for close in work as you get older.

[@Moondog2A]

I adjusted both diopters to get the best image and reticle clarity. My friend's Razor 1-6x does not have this fish-eye issue that this 1-10x either. Hope you subscribed.

[@runrob1]

Enjoy your reviews

[@Moondog2A]

Thank you kindly. Hope you subscribed.

[@timhenry326]

I bought the Monstrum Alpha 1-4x ffp lpvo and put it on my RFB it has exceeded expectations, and it holds zero. I like the idea of no illumination as 1 less thing to fail. I may upgrade to the panzer in the future. BTW it came with the mount and a throw lever for under $100. I can put the other $2400. Into more ammo

[@Moondog2A]

That's a great deal.

[@HarvickOne]

the important test is whether the cheap one holds up to recoils or not, I had one where the internal lenses just started to come loose from being on an AR-10

[@Moondog2A]

Based on the responses I'm seeing sporadic reports of some Panzer's getting loose reticles. An equal number reports of it holding steady on 308s. These are non-statistical reports. That said Vortex has also had QC complains in the last couple of years. Both brands have lifetime warranties so the problem units should be replaced.

[@TheMikeshannon]

Good comparison, only other big thing missing here is low light performance. The 30mm tube is going to be a big disadvantage in darker settings. Was interesting to see the chromatic issues with the razor so i will give credit to the panzer on that one. Also nice to see references like the USAF sheet used

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks. You can see the difference in low light performance in the difference in detail of the dark background of the backstop at the range. You can see the bullet hits on steel with the Razor. It's a dark blob in the Panzer.

[@jackmorrow427]

The panzer wasn't out I got the 1-10 specter mounted on a rak308 c it is holding up so far . At 1x I can use it at night moon lit with no problem seeing my intended targets .....

[@Moondog2A]

Great report there. Hope you subscribe and keep us updated on its durabiltiy!

[@ronin2963]

Great review

[@Moondog2A]

Thanks! I hope you subscribed.

[@pkdude5334]

I have a Razor 1-6. I also initially thought the 1x was less than 1x, but then after setting the focus, it was perfect. You may have to adjust the focus again.

[@Moondog2A]

When I adjusted the diopter so that the 1x distortion was gone, it made the reticle blurry, so that's the problem I found.

[@TonyYork-KB9RAO]

I have 2 Monstrom 6X24x50 scopes and was very suprised at how good the things are.

[@Moondog2A]

Hope you subscribed. Go you have the G3 or G2? Is there anything you don't like about them?

[@TonyYork-KB9RAO]

g2 they are a bit heavier than some old scopes i have around but it isnt a complaint@@Moondog2A

[@milspecmike8440]

I’m glad to see options and that they’ve managed to make usable glass work well at a budget, but what’s the point of an LVPO if the dot is unusable at 1X because it’s washed out? I get people can’t all afford the Razor but I’d rather have a decent 1-6 with a usable dot than a 1-10 without.

[@Moondog2A]

Agreed. I prefer a nice visible SFP. Hope you subscribed. I'll be posting coverage from SHOT Show soon.

[@billwiley7216]

Budget, use and longevity all must be weighed, for a person with deep pockets to the degree the Razors cost is not even a consideration the yes you get what you pay for although on a very notable scale of diminishing returns. For those of us on a budget though the Monstrum is a welcome option that performs very well at its price point and if the longevity on these proves to be good will work well for the majority of people in the market for this type of optic. Great review and honestly I think the Monstrum performed a lot closer to the Razor than I would have thought given the price differences. Glass the Monstum seemed to punch way above its price point while with the Razor I would have expected better at its price point. Razor larger elevation adjustability range with its 34mm tube and better less sloppy turrets seem to be two of its major points of being in a higher tier class of optic.

[@Moondog2A]

Very well put. I hope you subscribe and offer input on future videos.

[@dansgunsnstuff]

I have a monstrum 3x18. 100$ scope. Honestly pretty good for what I use it for, impressed for the price, I’m not shooting past 200 yards anyways. I did upgrade the scope rings, ones that came with seemed pretty cheap

[@Moondog2A]

The Panzer's are nicer than the Banshee's mount.

[@dnchrist]

I like my Panzer just fine! I paid $149.99 on Amazon. Especially good on SBRs. I have over a dozen Monstrums, all in use.

[@Badhagis]

Umm, "Better by far" and "No contest" seems to be a bit of a stretch. The Razor compared to the Panzer on the paper targets, and as far as the visibility of the red dot was better, and also in clarity. However, in real world testing (where it matters), when you were at max power, you could see the sign at the top of the hill clearly with the Panzer as opposed to the Razor (which I couldn't see at all with the Razor until you pointed it out). Also, in my own experience, "red" dots as opposed to "green" are always harder to see. I would like to have seen a comparison between the red and green on both. And then there was the fisheye thing at 1x and also the chromatic aberration with the Razor...So, as has been pointed out, a 10x difference in price is significant, and wasn't borne out in and real way in favor of the Razor by your testing. For my money, I'm DEFINITELY more impressed by the Panzer. JMTC

[@Moondog2A]

Hope you subscribe. Check out my Panzer review for the difference in green and red. Usually green is brighter in daylight, but oddly, that wasn't the case with the Panzer? kzbin.info/www/bejne/gKjHhqOKipqnj6M

[@jbuck9821]

I'm surprised at the color difference on the peak of Mt. Davidson. At both 1x and 10x, the Monstrum had more contrast in color between the grass and the bushes. In the Vortex, it looks more green. Browner in the Monstrum. I tend to believe the brown to be the correct color as grass tends to hibernate during winter and look brown and dead. Which one is displaying the colors correctly? Also, I wonder if adjusting the focus on the Monstrum would have cleared up the muddiness at 50 and 100 yards. I'm not saying it would be as clear as the Vortex, but it looked out of focus as well as muddy. I say this because it was clear enough to see the trail marker sign at 1400 yards away, when you couldn't see it in the Vortex. But then at 100 yards the Vortex was much clearer than the Monstrum. I think focus has something to do with it.

[@Moondog2A]

Hope you subscribed. The blurriness and muddiness I think is largely due to the lower light throughput on the Monstrum at 10x. More light on the Vortex allows the camera to pick up more details sharper given the same lighting conditions.

[@jbuck9821]

@@Moondog2A Yes, I subscribed. To the naked eye, what is the color of the vegetation on the hill? Through the scopes, then through the camera, the Vortex was just green. The grass looked green, the bushes looked green, the trees looked green. But through the camera, then the Monstrum, the grass looked brown. Like it usually does during the winter. Without the color correction from the phone, what is the difference? That and the question about focus from the diopter were my two biggest takeaways. Did you change focus from the 1400 yard peak to the 50 and 100 yard range? I find it hard to believe the Monstrum was clear enough to see the sign at 1400 yards. Then so muddy the targets were not clear. And the Vortex was the opposite. Like it was adjusted for 100 yards but not 1400.

[@Spaget453]

Would love to see a comparison to the Rapidstrike 1-6

[@fmbga]

I'd like to see a follow-up after a year or two of regular use. After all, in a riflescope the lenses are just a part of what you pay for (although an important part to be sure). If your turrets start to stick and your inversion tube starts to randomly move your POI, that won't be good - it will often happen just when you were really counting on it not happening. I'm also thinking the edgy-looking shapes of the Panzer may snag on branches more than the sleeker-looking Razor.

[@Moondog2A]

Stay tuned then for an update on the Panzer. Hope you subscribed.

[@modernwar2ghostrp]

you should check the turrets. the largest issue ive had with cheaper optics is the accuracy of the turret adjustments. some cheap optics do great while others can be over 10 percent off.

[@Moondog2A]

Good point. Though both of these scopes were capped turret so weren't deisgned to dail in dope.

[@BoomchacleV0]

Can you slap one of those monstrum ones onto a 12 gauge shotgun?

[@Moondog2A]

I bet you could. I've heard folks do that, though I'd probably suggest the SFP Banshee rather than a FFP. Hope you subscribed.

[@BoomchacleV0]

@@Moondog2A What's the difference between a SFP and FFP optic?

[@Moondog2A]

A SFP is what most folks would call a "normal" reticle. A FFP (First Focal Plane) is where the reticle grows and shrinks in sync with the magnification setting. This keeps the spacing between hash marks consistent relative to the target.

[@menotyou8958]

Good review but it would have been nice to see how they hold zero after 100 or so rounds

[@RamikinHorde]

That has more to do with your mounting setup than the scope, I have never seen a correctly setup LPVO, even a super budget one, lose zero that fast (or at all). Unless there is something badly mechanically wrong with the scope it won't lose zero

[@menotyou8958]

It is a $200 FFP LPVO. I think it's worth testing zero. I wouldn't want to bet my life on it without testing

[@Moondog2A]

I ran a couple of mags of 5.56 through both scopes to see if they held zero until I was satisfied they would. Crappy scopes I've shot in the past, lost their zero pretty quickly. Ill post a video after a month or so of range visits. I hope you subscribe.

[@menotyou8958]

@@Moondog2A thanks for the info

[@anon_laughing_man]

I'd like to see the Monstrum Spectre 1-10x28 SFP LPVO compared against a more expensive 1-10x28 LPVO. The new Specter is the highest in Monstrums 1-10x28 LPVOs.

[@Moondog2A]

You should also look at the Banshee. The main difference between the Specter and Banshee is the Specter has exposed turrets. They have the same ED glass.

[@musek5048]

where did you find that out? i've been trying to figure out which of their lpvo models are the best ones they offer. I thought it was the panzer but the spectre and banshee have better looking turrets.

[@IsaiahChapter53isAboutJesus]

I didn't see enough through my screen to warrant such a vast price difference. It seems that diminishing returns plays a huge role here with the Vortex.

[@Moondog2A]

Agreed.

[@mc4056]

How come they can make redots so bright and last so long but they cant do it with an LPVO?

[@Moondog2A]

Good question. I dunno. With fiber-optic illumination LPVOs (Monstrum Banshee or Primary Arms Nova) I would think it should be able to last 50k hours like a red dot because both use a red LED beam. But with the Razor they use some sort of laser which uses up more power? Hope you subscribe. I'll ask around to Monstrum.

[@mc4056]

@@Moondog2A Already subbed been subbed for awhile you have quality content keep it up!

[@Moondog2A]

@@mc4056 Awesome. Thanks!

[@majortwitched]

I would have loved to see, is a drop test/zero retention. May not apply to most shooters but I want to know that an optic will survive and preform when things go wrong. Cheaper optic tend to drift more easily.

[@Moondog2A]

They wouldn't let me drop the Vortex but I'm going to do a zero hold test over the next few weeks with the Panzer. Stay tuned. Hope you subscribed.

[@bg3160]

The overall quality of glass today is incredible whether a $2500 scope or $200 scope. I have Nikon lenses from the 1970's that were best of breed in the day. Today, crappy kit lenses are just sharp if not sharper. The comparison didn't surprise me on glass quality, Yeah, the Razor does resolve slightly better than the Panzer, but do you need that resolution? If you are a true long ranger, yes maybe, but if you shoot under 100 yards like me, not so much. The one thing not really covered here is build quality. Which one will last longer in the field under your use conditions? In that case, maybe the Razor is a better deal. After all, you don't want to pack in for 3 days and have your scope crap out on you. Me on the other hand, due to physical limitations, strictly a range shooter. I can buy another rifle for the price difference. It all depends on your needs. Excellent review, good information, THANK YOU!

[@Moondog2A]

Excellent point. Now we photographers value "vintage" lenses for their warm soft focus qualities lol. Hope you subscribe.

[@justbrian3487]

Bought one of these to replace my 1-8 Strike Eagle after watching this video, the monstrum panzer fell apart within 100 rounds suppressed on a gas piston .223 gun. The rear optic glass unthreaded itself and the optic would not hold zero. Tried it in the included monstrum mount, as well as my ADM mount. Was really let down because the optic was super promising and the glass is very clear, compared to the strike eagle it was barely an inch longer with a larger window. But didnt last more than an hour bench shooting at a flat range.

[@Moondog2A]

No way! You should contact Monstrum right away and get a replacement. I just stopped by their booth at SHOT and they were really responsive to user feedback. The Panzer their new flagship and they want to make it right or make it better.

[@justbrian3487]

Ill have to get into contact with them, ive used monstrum mounts and stuff in the past with great success

[@Korruptor]

At any time was the Razor tested with the sunshade installed? At 34mm, it is transmitting far more light than the Monstrum, as evidenced throughout.

[@Moondog2A]

I forgot the sun shade. But in a way its a fiarer comparrisonof the glass without? The 4mm larger size of the occular lens and the glass quality gives the Vortex more low light performance

[@brettconey5616]

I can live with a scope that may not be quite as clear, or as sharp, as long as the reticle itself is clear. What I would like to know is which one holds up better under the stress of day to day use. I despise having a scope that will not hold 0 while under storage or daily use.

[@Moondog2A]

That is a valid concern. I have read some viewers have been succssful with both after 200+ rounds of 308

[@patfetizanan5055]

Awesome comparison. Curious the reliability of the Panzer.

[@Moondog2A]

So am I. I've stress tested it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gGnWiX6Jnqd8qJo Hope you subscribed.

[@brandon1910]

Nice video. I wish it was easier to appreciate what you get for the money in optics. This video obviously helps between these two. The razor is obviously a better scope but a 10x in price better? IMO no (or at least I wouldn't fork out 10x more). Everyone is different, only thing that is a bit surprising is how bad the lighting is on the panzer compared to the razor, however I'm not a big LPVO person so if it's the norm I guess spending a couple bucks more likely won't get your that daylight bright.

[@Moondog2A]

Glad it was helpful! Hope you subscribed. LPVOs have their application. For the weight I prefer Rlrunning a traditional scope with sidecar red dot.

[@BD103-z7n]

I’ve seen a few of your videos on the Monstrum optics. What exactly is the difference between the Panzer LPVO and the Banshee?

[@Moondog2A]

The Banshee has a second focal plane reticle. The Panzer has a first focal plane. What that means in the real world is that the Banshee is better for distances from 10y-100yrds, the Panzer is better at distances from 100yrds-600yrds. Folks may argue about that statement but that's my take on things.

[@BD103-z7n]

@@Moondog2A Interesting. Thanks for the info!

[@gaggle111]

One point that I would make is that I personally like the compactness of the 30mm tube over the 34mm. I personally don't need that much internal adjustment in a LPVO. It makes the rifle seem bulky to me.

[@Moondog2A]

That and the weight, right? I hope you subscribe.