Expensive optics

[ShamrockIV]

Ok guys. As a guy that grew up on bushnell banner and tasco scopes. i need comvincing that a 900 dollar scope is that much better than a 300 dollar scope. i know some of you boys shoot nightforce and leupold mk4's etc. Convince me that i should spend as much on glass as i do my rifle.

my wife and wallet do not thank you in advance :)

 

[W C]

$600-$900 and GREAT glass....Meopta........Minox.....Nitrex(Weaver Grand Slam)..........and I've had and later sold my Nightforce. Love my Nitrex

http://www.natchezss.com/product.cfm?co ... ID=WE94535

 

[paincave_2000]

Compare the side by side and you'll see the difference.

 

[ShamrockIV]

those weaver gland slams look nice.

what about leupold mk4?

 

[mr.big]

the Mark 4 is a very good scope,,but for that money you can have a Nightforce,,to me the zero stop makes it better than the Leupold,,they both track awesome,,

but when I buy for my long range outfit I am gonna get the Sightron 6-24 with MOA reticle and MOA knobs

 

[Andy S.]

i need comvincing that a 900 dollar scope is that much better than a 300 dollar scope.

Which $900 scope and which $300 scope are we talking about? What will be the sole/main purpose of the scope? Hunting, target shooting, long range shooting, etc? That all plays into what I purchase and how I choose to allocate my funds. Some $300-400 scopes are darn near as good if not better than many twice their price. (Zeiss Conquest & Minox)

 

[Rubberduck270]

I recently bought a 3-9x40 Minox and for the money I don't think it can be beat. Very satisfied with my purchase.

 

[jetwrnch]

The sweet spot is around $400. However, there are GREAT scopes under $200 and poor ones over $500. In general though after $400 you start to get dimminishing returns. There are differences in scopes betwee $400 and a $1000, but they're small. Over a grand and the differences are even smaller.

 

[TeamMainStreet]

Everybody is entitled to do with their own money what they wish. With that being said, I aint spending $1000 on a scope. I wouldnt spend $150 on a scope. If I cant get it done with what I got then I will stalk my way in a little closer and kill it(paper or animal) with iron sights. Thats JMO.

 

[ShamrockIV]

i am looking for a good scope for my 308 to be accurate and repeatable with good knobs that are precise and will return to the same point. i dont think a 1200 or 1500 dollar rifle setup will be at its best without the proper glass. opinions??

 

[TheLBLman]

The sweet spot is around $400. However, there are GREAT scopes under $200 and poor ones over $500. In general though after $400 you start to get dimminishing returns. There are differences in scopes betwee $400 and a $1000, but they're small. Over a grand and the differences are even smaller.

I'd agree on that "sweet spot" being somewhere around $400 to $500. Not sure I'd go so far to say there are GREAT scopes under $200, but certainly scopes like the Burris Fullfield (for around $200 more or less) provide a lot for the price.

Another thing:

You'll generally get a lot more quality glass for less money when sticking with a common configuration such as 3-9 x 40 (which is commonly "just fine" for most uses). You might find a Zeiss Conquest 3-9 x 40 for around $400, but in the 3.5-10 x 44 the same quality glass adds several hundred dollars to the price tag.

I've always been a little predjudiced towards the price/value of the Leupold VX-3 (or any of their "3", "III") series scopes, in part because they're "Made in U.S.A.". I also like the price/value of the Burris Signature Series (also "Made in U.S.A."). Both these scope lines also carry a lifetime guarantee from companies that have been in business for decades. I'm a little leery of some of the new kids on the block.

But sounds like Minox is putting out some very decent glass for a relatively low price.

 

[mr.big]

i am looking for a good scope for my 308 to be accurate and repeatable with good knobs that are precise and will return to the same point. i dont think a 1200 or 1500 dollar rifle setup will be at its best without the proper glass. opinions??

I agree,,the absolute cheapest way for you to get out is a 4.5-14 or 6.5-20 with a 30 mm tube used from somewhere for 600-700 and sent to Leupold for the M1 knobs 130$$,,you need at least 80 MOA internal adjustments and then you need mounts that will let you zero at 100 at the bottom of your adjustments,

most of the cheaper scopes have 40-50 MOA adjustments and if you got zeroed at the very bottom all your adjustments wont take you ver far,,if they even track right,,youneed a scope that when you move 35 MOA at 1,000 yards it will actually go there and then come back,,good luck on a 2-300 dollar scope doing that 3-4 times much less 20 times in a day twice a week for 10 years,,

 

[REN]

On a brite December afternoon at about 2 pm they ALL look pretty good!

In a showroom, under lights a Nikon Prostaff looks pretty good as does a VX3 Leupy as does a 30mm Swarovski. Under such conditions you likely WON'T see the price difference between the three. However, comma, but... take those 3 scopes into the woods at 5:30pm and you'll quickly see the difference!

It is THEN that you'll come to see the extra money between the 3! Optics are like boobs and speed, there is NO SUCH THING as "to much"!

;)
HL

this is the one argument that most never really give the other side though. While i dont agree one bit that one is much better then the other in low light conditions....how many deer are actually shot when it is "dark"? I only ask because you only get 30mins before and after so is an additional $400 worth that 30mins on either side. Also it is not even really 30mins because for 15 of those mins a Nikon Pro or Redfield or Leupold VX1 will still be able to see fine.

I have had a TON of scopes, Very expensive ones and mid level ones like the Redfield and prostaff. While i dont care to own another prostaff the redfield seems to be a very nice scope for the price. Could keep mine at 6x all last year at dawn and dusk and still see plenty to shoot.

My point is one of the main arguments for the extra money is low light conditions, which are in fact very few and far between in the grand scheme of things. If the glass is crisp, no blur on the edges and has a good warranty it will work for me.

having said all that, sure overall the higher end scopes are build a bit better and still have some advantages but TO ME it is hard to say they are really worth it for the style of hunting most people do in the state of TN.

 

[Wildcat]

I got my Nightforce scope as part of a package when I bought it from a friend. I had never ever looked though one before. This scope has turned out to be the best I've ever owned. Tracking?? No problem, this baby will track better than any other scope I own.

I'll tell you the truth here. If I was to take my Nightforce scope off and replace it with another scope the entire set up would not be anywhere as good as it is now. I'm not talking price here but how good it all works together.

 

[megalomaniac]

The reliable and accurate tracking is the key! I just haven't found the lower end scopes to track adequately for my applications on longer range rifles.

For a reasonable amount ($300), you can go with a leupold VX3 3.5-10x40 lightly used, then add M1 elevation knob. It'll track great and the glass is more than adequate without breaking the bank.

But I've also got a few $100 scopes that I use and are fine for their application (on a ML, 22 rifles, etc). I just don't spin the knobs on them at all, and am willing to sacrifice a bit of clarity for the money. They hold zero, and that's all I really need when shooting 100 yards and in.

 

[REN]

totally agree, i am not downing on expensive optics...just hard for me to justify it these days (i still own some older Leupold vari-x III as well as redfield and nikon) just not worth it these days for the places i hunt. Back when i hunted more in bama it was more of a need as hunting in pine thickets it gets DARK early.

Now as far as Binos i will by the best i can afford, i dont really skimp much on those.

 

[mr.big]

the 12 -40x60 Leupold spotter I got last fall is awesome also,,I dont know how I lived 45 years without it..

 

[vonb]

Instead of looking at cost, ask yourself truly what you plan on doing with the scope. If hunting in an area where the shot is 100-200 yards, I believe most any scope will work.

As for the dawn/dusk argument, the better optics/coatings are going to give you the ability to determine whether the deer has horns vs. just seeing a silhouette of a deer during the last 5 min. of shooting light. The optics matter if you want to make the determination to make the shot or hold off.

If you are competing @ 1,000 yards in a F-class match, you will not see a BSA on the line if they have shot a match before.....Promise you. What you will see are March, Nightforce BR/NXS, S&B, Leupold and some other higher-end scopes. This is due to 1) Parallax adjustment 2) Range of adjustment and 3) Optical quality. Most of these scopes will have at least a 30mm tube to allow for more adjustment. If not, they're gonna need a 20MOA base or better to dial their dope.

Be realistic about how you plan to use your optics and they will serve you well. I believe in spending on decent glass but that doesn't always mean $1K. The older Nikon Monarch UCCs were a steal when they closed them out. Leupold is very well-known for their customer support. You can't argue with that and the fact that is an American company.

 

[Model70Man]

The more expensive optics are not only better at low light, better tracking, and have better glass, they also have other qualities and features that, to me, are often overlooked. For instance, etched reticles. I absolutely hate reticles that change colors, like Leupold, Redfields, and Nikon just to name a few. I want my reticles to stay black and not blend in to the surrounding limbs and brush when light enters the scope at a certain angle. Another is constant eye relief. I hate having to adjust my cheek weld if I have to zoom in. Another is the eye box. Does your eye have to be perfectly lined up to see thru or does the scope allow you more room for adjustment. Most of these features will not be seen in your low end cheaper scopes and even your mid to upper end scopes. I make sure the scopes I buy have the features that I like and are within my price range. Always check to see if the scope you are looking at has the features you want and then compare it to what you have and see if that's what you would like.

The scopes that best suits me and have all the features that I like are the Zeiss Conquest and the Minox ZA scopes. They flat out perform and do not break the bank. You get high end optical quality at a very affordable price. Getting them on sale makes it even better.

 

[Rackseeker]

Most of the time you get what you pay for. I get tickled at people that buy good rifles then mount a POS scope on it with POS mounts. Then they wonder why it will not hold zero. I have bought more than one rifle because the scope will not hold zero and the owner thought it was the rifle.

 

[pass-thru]

expensive is a relative term. The first scope I bought was $65 simmons and that was all I could afford. 5 years later I upgraded to a $300 Nikon, and although I could afford it, it took a lot of arm twisting to cough that up for a scope at the time.

However, after experiencing a good scope, I never looked back. For anybody who can afford it, top quality glass like Zeiss Victory, is a very justifiable expense.

 

[Boone 58]

:)

 

[mr.big]

yesterday in a small flood I could see the B&C reticle in my 4.5-14 LRT better than the NPR1 or the NPR2 in the two Nightforce Scopes I was shooting,,
I wish Leupold would make the TMR reticle in MOA calibrated hash marks.

 

[vonb]

I would buy one for F-Class if they did.

I wish Leupold would make the TMR reticle in MOA calibrated hash marks.

 

[Model70Man]

yesterday in a small flood I could see the B&C reticle in my 4.5-14 LRT better than the NPR1 or the NPR2 in the two Nightforce Scopes I was shooting,,
I wish Leupold would make the TMR reticle in MOA calibrated hash marks.

It's a shame Leupold doesn't make all of their scopes with etched reticles like the B&C reticle. The upcharge for that reticle is highway robbery.

 

[remke]

I have a $300 Mueller, a $200 Mellit, and a $1400 Nighforce.
I havent mounted the NF yet, due to the fact the fire stick isnt here yet, but the other 2 due just fine for what they are on. The Mueller is on, or was on my 204, and did great. The Mellit is on my 300RUM and has held zero for 4 year now, without any adjustments. I am looking forward on putting the NF on the new one and letting it play with the rest of them.
It just depends on what you are putting it on, and what your going to do with it.

 

[rem270]

I grew up having the simmons 8 point 3-9's on all my guns. Never had a single problem out of them. I now have a Nikon monarch on my encore but thats just because it was on there when i bought it. If i was to buy a brand new scope for a deer rifle it would be the nikon prostaff 3-9 or 4-12. in my opinion where i hunt i dont need anything else. I still have a simmons 8 point 3-9-32 on my mz and i dont see any reason to change it. Its been dead on for yrs and killed many a deer