Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Wow! Differences in optics quality |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
jonoMT
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: November/13/2008 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 4853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: June/19/2009 at 15:04 |
Not that it would be a surprise, but I went out shooting yesterday with my father-in-law and brother-in-law and was amazed at the difference between the optical quality of the Tasco scope he had vs. my Nightforce. Now, I know it is often mentioned that NF glass is good but not the best. However, with my 2.5-10x32 I can spot .308 holes at 200 yards without much trouble. The Tasco 3-9x42 (mounted on an otherwise decent 30-30) couldn't resolve any holes in the targets past 60 yards. The main reason I mention this is 'cause I think it's a shame to not at least match the rifle with comparable optics. I used to get whatever basic Leupold I thought would fit the rifle and was generally happy (and generally still would be with those). But I have become a believer is quality optics in the last couple years. Well, if I get rich, I know what to get the old man for Christmas...although the SS variable isn't a terrible stretch. |
|
bugsNbows
Optics God bowsNbugs Joined: March/10/2008 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 11200 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well said Sir!
|
|
If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat?
Anomymous |
|
3_tens
Optics Jedi Master Joined: January/08/2007 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If that gets repeated enough maybe, just maybe people will start checking the quality of the scope that they are
|
|
Folks ain't got a sense of humor no more. They don't laugh they just get sore.
Need to follow the rules. Just hard to determine which set of rules to follow Now the rules have changed again. |
|
tahqua
MODERATOR Have You Driven A Ford Lately? Joined: March/27/2006 Location: Michigan, USA Status: Offline Points: 9042 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree with all of the above.
Though a lot a questions get asked, regarding cheaper scopes, for a reason. A lot of folks can't afford the step up to the 4200/Monarch/VX3 and the like. I believe there are scopes that can work for them and that's what they need to hear. Fortunately there are a ton of members hear with the experience in the lower price range. |
|
jetwrnch
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/03/2006 Location: Knoxville, TN Status: Offline Points: 294 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
One way to spend less and get more is to be reasonable about the size of scope needed. You can do a lot with a fixed 4x scope of good quality and not break the bank. I see way too many 4-12x50 scopes of poor quality on woods rifles.
|
|
swtucker
Optics Master Joined: September/03/2008 Location: Low Moor Status: Offline Points: 1430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
+1 going with a fixed power is a good way to get better glass for less cash.
|
|
tahqua
MODERATOR Have You Driven A Ford Lately? Joined: March/27/2006 Location: Michigan, USA Status: Offline Points: 9042 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
On lever guns with mile high see through mounts |
|
jonoMT
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: November/13/2008 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 4853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree a fixed power is a great way to go to get a good scope for less. My previous scope was a Leupold 4X. My father-in-law first had this rifle in Nebraska and if he was still there, I'd recommend the 4X. But from the whitetails that I spotted busting off through the trees on my morning runs where they live now (Lake of the Ozarks) that would be too much magnification most of the time. I'd come around a bend and track one with my arm out and estimated about 3-5 seconds to get a shot off. There I'd go with a 1-4X or a red-dot sight. He's a crack shot with a shot gun so that might be just the ticket.
|
|
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ain't we been say'in that! Glass quality trumps magnification every time! |
|
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
|
jetwrnch
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/03/2006 Location: Knoxville, TN Status: Offline Points: 294 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sounds like a candidate for a Remington 760 or 7600 in .308. Have you considered an El Paso Weaver K2.5 on that 30-30? less than $100 and quick. Also the Burris FFII 1.75-5x24. I'm guessing it's a Marlin 336 or similar? I can post pics of both scopes on a 336.
|
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
One comment about Nightforce glass, since I frequently make unflattering remarks about it: I find Nightforce glass unexceptional at Nightforce prices (i.e compared to the optics in Zeiss, Swaro, Premier, IOR, etc). Compared to a lot of lower priced scopes, even some very decent ones, Nightforce glass is very good. Compared to cheap stuff.... well, there is simply no comparison. ILya |
|
jonoMT
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: November/13/2008 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 4853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ha, ha. I love it! Well said. One thing I'll say in NF's favor is that they offer a lot of other features in a scope that at least I wanted...in particular the NXS 2.5-10x32 is a great package. However, that was before the debut of the SS variable, which trumps anything I can think of under $1200. Edited by jonoMT - June/22/2009 at 09:04 |
|
Tranan
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/09/2009 Status: Offline Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well, comparing Trashco (as one aquaintance of mine described it) with a Nightforce sounds very unjust to the Trashco. Those scopes should never exist. They are bad, man, bad.
|
|
CHARLIE DON'T SURF!
|
|
Randall45
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Status: Offline Points: 284 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Isn't the Tasco Titan a very reliable scope or any of the Tasco scopes made in Japan.
|
|
jonoMT
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: November/13/2008 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 4853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well, it wasn't intended to be a direct comparison, more just an expression of my amazement that someone would ever stick a piece of crap like that on a good gun. I wasn't gonna say anything rude to the old man, but he obviously came of age as a hunter back when there wasn't much emphasis on optics quality. Even now, most of his shooting is with either shotguns or pistols, neither of which have optics attached. Before I knew better, I used to spend $600-800 on a rifle then put a $200-300 scope on it. Now I would budget the same or more for optics and mounts. |
|
mastsif man
Optics Apprentice D. Overton Joined: March/25/2009 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 62 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
you definately found out the truth in optics, but at the extremes. one does not have to expend that much money for optics that will provide one with the clarity that is needed for hunting. benchrest competition is another matter. for hunting there are many scopes in the 200 to 500 dollar range that can get the job done, fixed or a reasonable variable scope (ie, 2x7 or 3x9 or some other similar range like the Leupold vx-III 2.5x8 if i am correct that i own is great and now frequently discounted). a tasco on a cheap 22lr or a bsa, would not be a bad choice, as long as you keep it in a reasonable variable. my son has an inexpensive simmons on an inexpensive marlin 22wrm and it will shoot into a quarter at 100 yards all day long in decent light. that is all he wants to do and will never shoot after or near dark, so why should he spend 800 dollars on a scope. think about it.
|
|
jonoMT
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: November/13/2008 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 4853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Those are some good points, mastsif man, especially with the marlin 22wrm. Given a rifle, like the 30-30 I'd probably be happy with any decent scope in the $200-500 range. I've also found that optics like my $49 Leupold 8x24 binos work great most of the time when I use them - which is in broad daylight. One thing I'll say for the high-end stuff, however, is it will never let you down. Seemed like I used to fiddle with my simple 4X Leupold a lot...shoot a group @ 100 yards and have it be an inch to the right so I'd adjust 4 clicks and instead of being right on it would be half an inch to the left. That just does not happen with the Nightforce. For most shots I could take in legal light the optics of the Leupold are more than adequate. But I also bought the Nightforce for the ability to make rock-solid adjustments on the fly.
|
|
Reaction time is a factor...
|
|
Ed Connelly
Optics Retard God of no Chihuahua Joined: December/16/2007 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 24225 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I never did any optical comparisons of scopes back in the old days, but I always thought that the old Tascos were OK for the money back in the sixties and seventies. The old Japanese ones..... And some of the Old Binoculars were decent....kind of like Swift in the sixties...
But who knows where they are built today......I stick with the ancient Tasco stuff now....
|
|
308WIN
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/28/2009 Status: Offline Points: 120 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I'll agree with koshkin here. I spent some days with a NF 2.5-10x32. It fared very poorly when compared to a diavari 2.5-10x42. I don't know if it was better than a conquest.I know mechanically & durability, the NF is solid but for the price, the glass isn't there
|
|
goat
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/02/2008 Location: somewhere south Status: Offline Points: 25 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I don't buy the NF glass thing, I have had so many I lost count and while some have fallen short, by very little mind you, most are outstanding. I currently have 2, 5.5x2256s and the glass is as good on charts and 3x boosters as any glass I have, and that includes a few diavaris, 2 hensoldts a few mk4s and around 8 schmidts. The fov is lacking and some think they can look a bit washed compared to others. This has more to do with the small retical than anything else I think, there is no bold black lines to contrast to as in scopes with larger reticles. My varmint ret sb 4x16 is a classic example, you have to know what to look for. The 50s(NF) usually won't resolve what the 56s(NF) will and they do fall short of other 50s but the 56 is another story, they are just to big for most.
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |