I just ordered one through CameraLand. I am curious if anyone has used this scope and particularly if they have compared it to the Swarovski 1.7-10x42. I ordered the 4C reticle, due to having one in the 1-6x24 version.

I went by EuroOptic's very large booth at DSC this past January. I was able to compare that R2 with a Z6, and the R2 is every bit as good optically (as far as I could tell, hand held, indoors)as the Z6. The illumination system is fantastic, and if I were getting one I'd have the 4C as well. Meopta is a very impressive company that makes some very impressive stuff. I'm betting that R2 takes a back seat to nothing, by anybody, at any price. Please keep us posted what you think of it if you don't mind.

That's the model I have my eye on once they offer it w/o illumination and with a standard Z-Plex reticle. It would go on my custom Husky 06.

Thanks for the reply. I was hoping the optical view would be very close to the Z6. I also like their illumination system and the 4C reticle from what little I have fiddled with the R2 1-6x24 that I have. It definitely dims low enough in near dark to be useful for me, and is bright enough in bright sunshine if one cares to use it. I also like the controls and where they are located, simple and user friendly to me, which I prefer over the digital push button.
I do not have a Swarovski to compare, but do have a Zeiss Victory 2.5-10x42 non-illuminated and one each 2.5-10x50mm illuminated and non. Anxious for the R2 arrival.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I do like the Z-Plex also. Very easy to see reticle for me.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Please do compare (outside) to both the illuminated/and non-illuminated Diavari. Picture through the scope (R2) with the illumination on and off would be appreciated too!

I will give the pictures a shot. I am hoping the scope arrives prior to my work departure date. But, will definitely compare; though these 55 plus eyes ain't what they use to be. Within the past 10 years the quality / more spendy optics have become Much more of interest to me. Though different eyes view things differently.
------------------------------------------------------------------

All I can tell you is I have Z6s and Meoptas and for the price and quality, I'll never buy anything other than MEOPTAs unless their selections don't suit my specific needs.

anyone know how many MOA the 4C R2 center reticle subtends? About two years ago I almost bought an R1 3-12x56 the dot covered too much target, the posts were "big" for my taste.

Its a FFP not a second focal plane scope like what is being discussed.

Per the literature, 4C Dot = 5cm @ 100meters; which is 1-31/32" per my conversation calculator.
It does not state at what power, so I assume 10x.
The info in the box, does not give a break down of subtension at powers / distance
The R2 1.7-10x42 is a 2nd Focal Plane reticle, as in the often referred to American style reticle.

------------------------------------------------------------------

This is correct. All R2 Meopta's a SFP scopes. R1's are FFP reticles. Like the Leica ER scopes, they were designed for the "American market".

I really don't understand this "dot covers up the reticle" business. The way I see it, you use the regular reticle in the daylight which is fine for targets, game, etc, and you use the red dot when hunting game, at which time unless you're hunting grasshoppers I don't see how the dot can possibly cover up a kill zone....????? What am I missing?

Nothing absolutely nothing. Their dot's are absolutely awesome in low light I have used the 4c and the 4k . I like them equally and never had a problem placing it on a deer in the dark. I have the R1R 3-12x56 Hubell It is a second focal plain scope

Some of the R1 models that have a small "r" designation are SFP reticle scopes. They say R1r in their designation.

Don't think this reply was intended for me. But, I never stated anything about "dot covers up the reticle"
From what I see, of the scope R2 1.7-10x42 that I have the dot size is excellent for hunting, as it is intended.

The 4C is a floating dot, and the dot / aiming point is the same size whether illuminated or not.

I also have a 4C in an R2, 1-6x24. I like the reticle.
I have several lower powered, non-illuminated, 1st focal plane scopes; the 4C illuminated makes the use of the lowest power in dimmer light much more user friendly.

But, with illumination for an aiming point, it matters not if any of the rest of the reticle is visible or not, regardless of 1st or 2nd focal. This is not addressing canting of the rifle, just the aiming point.

I think the dot size is excellent for my hunting.

------------------------------------------------------------------

You wouldn't happen to be able to snap a pic of that reticle with both the illumination turned off, then on would you?

Tried the pictures, but unsuccessful. The best that I can explain the reticle, is as a floating dot.
Very similar to a Zeiss #40, but wider area of thin horizontal and vertical cross wires.
The horizontal and vertical thin center portions do not actually touch/connect to the dot.
The representation on the Meopta website is not how it appears. The thinner section is wider and the horizontal and vertical lines do not connect to it.
The 4K on Meopta site is a closer representation, replace the illuminated cross hairs with a dot is more in line with the real deal. But the size of the dot is 5cm @ 100m.

Thanks.

regardless of what focal plane I would not be interested if the dot for instance covered 2MOA at 10X, this creates challenges for load development on a 100 yard range. I have a 4MOA red dot that is wonderful for what it does on an AR15, it is first and foremost a fast, easy to hit with device. I don't use it for load development either as that is not the niche it occupies.