AR Sponsor
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
248
EE: 100% (28)
USA
Posted: 3/25/2026 4:16:24 PM EDT
| Appreciate any input from those that have one. Been looking for a bit more magnification than most LPVOs and this is on my short list. Don’t really have anywhere near me I can shoot past 500 yards so not trying to do any wild long range shit with it. Thanks. |
| My only complaint, and the reason I sold it, is the lack of parallax adjustment. But that’s not a dealbreaker for everyone. |
“Necessary? Is it necessary for me to drink my own urine? No, but I do it anyway because it’s sterile and I like the taste.” -Patches O’Houlihan
2023/24 Arfcom FPL Champion
2023/24 Arfcom FPL Champion
|
The reticle is a bit small at 2x as to be expected with FFP, but I can bracket large targets up to 70 yards pretty easily between the thicker "T" stadia. The tree needs at least 6x for me, but relatively simple and easy to use with adequate mil markings, I wish the 1 mil marks were better defined, but you get used to it. Glass quality is excellent for the price point. Durability is also excellent; drop testing on rokslide indicate that this is a pretty rugged scope that isn't likely to lose zero if roughed up a bit (along with Nightforce.) The whole tree illuminates when turned on, which I don't like for a low light reticle, but its functional otherwise, and does make the tree contrast better against dark backgrounds during the day and works well for dusk/dawn conditions overall. Depth of field is pretty wide; however, you do have to take care to set your diopter correctly and mark it, It's very sensitive. It can be found on europtic for about 1k the last time I saw it for sale. There are other MPVO options coming to market soon (like NF 2-12,) but I think the credo still remains a competitive option for the SPR role. I also have a steiner H6xi 2-12x42 which I like as well, about the same weight as the credo, with noticeably better low light performance, glass quality about equal in day, maybe a hair sharper due to the side parallax, but honestly very difficult to tell apart in the day without a resolution chart to look at. Both are solid options, IMO. I would give the nod to the Credo though, if you want a set and forget type of MPVO. |
|
Originally Posted By Luny421: My only complaint, and the reason I sold it, is the lack of parallax adjustment. But that’s not a dealbreaker for everyone. Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest |
|
Originally Posted By Marex: Not bad except the reticle is small on the low end. Much prefer the MK4HD Leupold. I think I slightly prefer the Mk4HD overall when comparing simply the optic, but the TMR kills it for me. This puts them into different niches where the Mk4’s thick and simple reticle favors hunting whereas the Credo leans more tactical mid-range shooting. |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
250
EE: 100% (28)
USA
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest This is kinda where I’m at with it. I considered holding out for the NX6 2-12 but I don’t really wanna spend twice as much for parallax and the dmx reticle given the ranges I have available to shoot at and the shooting I most often do. Went through two 1-6 LPVOs and they just don’t have enough magnification to justify the size and weight over my TA02 imo. I looked at a credo in person and rather liked it. And it weighs the same as my last 1-6. |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
251
EE: 100% (28)
USA
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: I think I slightly prefer the Mk4HD overall when comparing simply the optic, but the TMR kills it for me. This puts them into different niches where the Mk4’s thick and simple reticle favors hunting whereas the Credo leans more tactical mid-range shooting. The reticle killed the Mk4HD for me. Liked everything else about it. |
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest Originally Posted By doty_soty: Originally Posted By Luny421: My only complaint, and the reason I sold it, is the lack of parallax adjustment. But that’s not a dealbreaker for everyone. Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest Yep. I had a nxs 2.5-10x32 that didn’t have parallax. I never once thought it was needed. With some scopes(think modern compacts) it’s absolutely necessary. |
|
Originally Posted By Duck_Hunt: Yep. I had a nxs 2.5-10x32 that didn’t have parallax. I never once thought it was needed. With some scopes(think modern compacts) it’s absolutely necessary. Originally Posted By Duck_Hunt: Originally Posted By doty_soty: Originally Posted By Luny421: My only complaint, and the reason I sold it, is the lack of parallax adjustment. But that’s not a dealbreaker for everyone. Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest Yep. I had a nxs 2.5-10x32 that didn’t have parallax. I never once thought it was needed. With some scopes(think modern compacts) it’s absolutely necessary. I find parallax adjustment less necessary (if at all necessary) on SFP scopes. On FFP scopes, for me, it’s a feature I want. |
“Necessary? Is it necessary for me to drink my own urine? No, but I do it anyway because it’s sterile and I like the taste.” -Patches O’Houlihan
2023/24 Arfcom FPL Champion
2023/24 Arfcom FPL Champion
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest Originally Posted By doty_soty: Originally Posted By Luny421: My only complaint, and the reason I sold it, is the lack of parallax adjustment. But that’s not a dealbreaker for everyone. Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest I bought one a while back, as it checked most of the boxes I was looking for. I didn’t think the lack of parallax adjustment would be an issue, but when I got it, I found that I was mistaken. It was wonderful from 2 up to about 8x, and just fell apart from 8 to 10. I could never get a satisfactory image no matter what I did. I ended up selling it. A few weeks after I sold it, I found a video from who CDoes who had the exact same problem. I couldn’t put to words the issue I had with it, but my experience mirrored his. I have seen lots of people who are happy with their Credo though, so perhaps either I am just too picky or maybe there was something wrong with my specific optic. I wouldn’t write them off based on my experience. |
|
I have one, I like it, but I haven’t shot it a lot. I shot 4 deer with mine this season, from maybe 75y to 265 (lasered). I like the fine crosshairs. I like the illumination. It’s decent in low light. A parallax adjustment would be awesome, but I am not shooing at extreme range. At the ranges I’m shooting, it’s decent. Mine is for carrying around in the Polaris, killing cull deer, varmints, and hogs. In that context, it’s a fine optic. |
Not fly enough to be halal....
|
Originally Posted By Razzman1: I bought one a while back, as it checked most of the boxes I was looking for. I didn’t think the lack of parallax adjustment would be an issue, but when I got it, I found that I was mistaken. It was wonderful from 2 up to about 8x, and just fell apart from 8 to 10. I could never get a satisfactory image no matter what I did. I ended up selling it. A few weeks after I sold it, I found a video from who CDoes who had the exact same problem. I couldn’t put to words the issue I had with it, but my experience mirrored his. I have seen lots of people who are happy with their Credo though, so perhaps either I am just too picky or maybe there was something wrong with my specific optic. I wouldn’t write them off based on my experience. Originally Posted By Razzman1: Originally Posted By doty_soty: Originally Posted By Luny421: My only complaint, and the reason I sold it, is the lack of parallax adjustment. But that’s not a dealbreaker for everyone. Many would consider that a pro. One less thing to mess with. It’s been a complete non-issue for me, given it’s meant for rapid shots at UKD not benchrest I bought one a while back, as it checked most of the boxes I was looking for. I didn’t think the lack of parallax adjustment would be an issue, but when I got it, I found that I was mistaken. It was wonderful from 2 up to about 8x, and just fell apart from 8 to 10. I could never get a satisfactory image no matter what I did. I ended up selling it. A few weeks after I sold it, I found a video from who CDoes who had the exact same problem. I couldn’t put to words the issue I had with it, but my experience mirrored his. I have seen lots of people who are happy with their Credo though, so perhaps either I am just too picky or maybe there was something wrong with my specific optic. I wouldn’t write them off based on my experience. He had an updated video with what was presumably a non-broken Credo, or at least it was a markedly different experience. I think what most people perceive as a focus issue is actually just a fairly sensitive eyepiece focus. It took me a few range sessions to really dial it in. With something like a NF I can rotate the eyepiece around a good bit and barely change the focus. With the credo even barely twisting it can be the difference between great and a fairly gross image. I’m sure individual eyesight plays a part in that experience though. But once it was dialed in it’s been a great experience on all mine. I consider it a quirk of the optic and just keep a sharpie witness mark on mine. |
AR Sponsor