Print Page | Close Window

Scope Suggestions

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Rifle Scopes
Forum Description: Centerfire long gun scopes
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=40877
Printed Date: March/29/2024 at 03:09
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Scope Suggestions
Posted By: parshal
Subject: Scope Suggestions
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 10:51
Hi, first post here.  I've been researching some new scopes and figure this is the best place for answers.
 
I've got a rem 700 BDL .264 win mag that's been blueprinted and will shoot under .5 MOA in the right hands.  It's got a Brown's Precision stock and is pretty darned light.  I've had a 4.5-14x40mm Leupold VXIII on it for about ten years.  I've shot a few antelope and pigs with the scope before it was blueprinted.  On my deer hunt a couple weeks ago I got a nice muley at 293 yards but I had a heck of a time finding that deer in the scope.  It wasn't so much the FOV as it was trying to find the sweet spot (side to side) behind the scope.  I had an elevated position and a rock rest so stability wasn't an issue.  The scope was having issues when sighting in (it would move 2 - 3" rather than .25) so I sent it in for repair.  I'm looking for a better scope and will probably stick that old one on my .22 rimfire.
 
The rifle is my all around rifle.  I live and hunt mostly in the west.  I have 13 preference points for mt. goat and will be using this rifle to pack in.  I've also got 13 points for elk and antelope so it's going be used for just about everything.  I have a 600 yard range and will be practicing at that distance.  I don't expect to ever shoot at game beyond that.

The load I'm shooting is a 130 grain Swift Sirocco II at 3250 fps.  It's sighted in a 275 yards.  The PBR is pretty flat. 
 
I have Swarovski EL binos so I'd be using my scope for shooting and not spotting game.
 
Here's what I'd like to have:
 
1) Larger objective
2) Low rings mount
3) Minimum 14x high magnification
4) Elevation target-type turret
 
Price is important but if it's got the features I want I might suck it up although I'd prefer to keep it under $1500.  I realize #2 might be tough unless I look at the Leupold VX-L series.  For #4, even though I don't plan on dialing in my shots due to the PBR on the round I'd like to have it for shots longer than 375 yards or so.  I like the idea of Leupold's CDS for shots beyond that.  I believe that simple is faster in a hunting rig and will be shooting up to 600 yards to confirm my setup.  I think I prefer the SFP reticles over the FFP.
 
I've looked through the following:
 
Leupold VX-L 4.5-14x56mm
Leupold VX-L 4.5-14x50mm
Swarovski Z5 3.5x-18x44mm
Burris Veracity 4-20x50mm
 
The Swaro was the clearest/sharpest of all.  The Leupold 50mm was adequate and I like the warranty.  However, I know there are better values out there in scopes in recent years over Leupold.
 
I've got a 6mm Creedmoor being built and will need a scope for it as well.  It will be a 10# target rifle (although it might be used for antelope or suburban deer with a suppressor) so the scope would be geared more for targets.  I might shoot to 1000 yards with it but most range work would be a 600 yards or less.  Although the ranges are similar to the .264 it's a different type of scope need, I think.
 
Sorry for a long first post but I wanted to provide as much information as possible.



Replies:
Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 10:59
Oh, I forgot to mention that I like a simple reticle.  The BDC type reticles are just too much especially if I can dial the elevation turret.


Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 11:03
I would pick the Swaro.  I have a Z-6 on my 300 wsm and just love using it.  The optics are fantastic.  I have a real nice set of bino's as well, and I hate using my binos and then having to look through a crappy scope.  Sometimes, I can see the animal just fine in low light with my binos then when I put up a rifle with a lesser scope, I cannot even see the animal well enough.  The swaro surely helps in that regard. 

I have several Leupolds and they are good scopes no doubt, but they are no Swaro in regards to optical clarity.  A VX-L I believe is VX3 glass, so I don't think you are going to be improving much in that area. 

Any scope on higher mag is going to be harder to get behind.  When the exit pupil gets smaller you have a smaller band of light coming through the scope your eye has to line up with.  Obviously some scopes deal with this better than others, but that is one of the tradeoffs you have to deal with when you turn the mag up.  I personally don't have any big game scopes over 10x for this exact reason.  But that is just my personal preference. 


-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: SVT_Tactical
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 11:07
Swarovski Z5 3.5x-18x44mm
I've had this and with its weight and glass, going to be hard to beat.   There are also a few good leica's in your price range but I think the mag range and glass on the swaro get my nod

-------------
"Most folks are about as happy as they make their minds up to be" - Abraham Lincoln


Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 11:09
I certainly noticed the lighter weight of the Z5.
 
I see the Leica ER's are priced to sell with the change to the ERi.  I've got no way to get my hands on one to see them, though.
 
I assume there are aftermarket custom turrets dialed for my load for most any scope I can buy.  Is that a safe assumption?


Posted By: helo18
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 11:27
You can't go wrong with either the Leica or Swaro.  I love the Swaro glass!  I would lean that way if it was my choice.

-------------
To be prepared for War is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

GEORGE WASHINGTON


Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 11:33
I should be clear that the scopes I listed are not the only ones I'd buy.  I just listed what I recently looked through.  I'm going to take a look at the VX-6 as well in 44mm.  That should give me the low ring height and from what I've read here it's got a nice large eyebox which is what caused me to start looking for another scope to begin with.


Posted By: bugsNbows
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 12:16
That VX-6 ain't no slouch... but I'd still take the Swaro.


-------------
If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat?
               Anomymous


Posted By: Obi Wan Kenobi
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 17:37
Originally posted by parshal parshal wrote:

Hi, first post here.  I've been researching some new scopes and figure this is the best place for answers.
 
I've got a rem 700 BDL .264 win mag that's been blueprinted and will shoot under .5 MOA in the right hands.  It's got a Brown's Precision stock and is pretty darned light.  I've had a 4.5-14x40mm Leupold VXIII on it for about ten years.  I've shot a few antelope and pigs with the scope before it was blueprinted.  On my deer hunt a couple weeks ago I got a nice muley at 293 yards but I had a heck of a time finding that deer in the scope.  It wasn't so much the FOV as it was trying to find the sweet spot (side to side) behind the scope.  I had an elevated position and a rock rest so stability wasn't an issue.  The scope was having issues when sighting in (it would move 2 - 3" rather than .25) so I sent it in for repair.  I'm looking for a better scope and will probably stick that old one on my .22 rimfire.
 
The rifle is my all around rifle.  I live and hunt mostly in the west.  I have 13 preference points for mt. goat and will be using this rifle to pack in.  I've also got 13 points for elk and antelope so it's going be used for just about everything.  I have a 600 yard range and will be practicing at that distance.  I don't expect to ever shoot at game beyond that.

The load I'm shooting is a 130 grain Swift Sirocco II at 3250 fps.  It's sighted in a 275 yards.  The PBR is pretty flat. 
 
I have Swarovski EL binos so I'd be using my scope for shooting and not spotting game.
 
Here's what I'd like to have:
 
1) Larger objective
2) Low rings mount
3) Minimum 14x high magnification
4) Elevation target-type turret
 
Price is important but if it's got the features I want I might suck it up although I'd prefer to keep it under $1500.  I realize #2 might be tough unless I look at the Leupold VX-L series.  For #4, even though I don't plan on dialing in my shots due to the PBR on the round I'd like to have it for shots longer than 375 yards or so.  I like the idea of Leupold's CDS for shots beyond that.  I believe that simple is faster in a hunting rig and will be shooting up to 600 yards to confirm my setup.  I think I prefer the SFP reticles over the FFP.
 
I've looked through the following:
 
Leupold VX-L 4.5-14x56mm
Leupold VX-L 4.5-14x50mm
Swarovski Z5 3.5x-18x44mm
Burris Veracity 4-20x50mm
 
The Swaro was the clearest/sharpest of all.  The Leupold 50mm was adequate and I like the warranty.  However, I know there are better values out there in scopes in recent years over Leupold.
 
I've got a 6mm Creedmoor being built and will need a scope for it as well.  It will be a 10# target rifle (although it might be used for antelope or suburban deer with a suppressor) so the scope would be geared more for targets.  I might shoot to 1000 yards with it but most range work would be a 600 yards or less.  Although the ranges are similar to the .264 it's a different type of scope need, I think.
 
Sorry for a long first post but I wanted to provide as much information as possible.

Sounds like you have a great rifle there sir. Let me say to you that I'm not trying to sound harsh or like an elite know it all. Its just in my humble opinion after owning a few and hunting in some dark twilight. Leupolds are junk scopes and Leupold has made a mint off American hunters for generations selling shotty OVER PRICED scopes with shotty  Japanese glass. It drives me crazy to see guys like you with great guns with what I'd call horrible scopes atop them. Right before 30 minutes past sun light most Leupolds are completely worthless. It makes me angry with their gimmick commercials. Putting a rifle scope on the bottom of a jet ski in a lake for 30 minutes then thinking its impressive because its able to shoot a few rounds. Who abuses their rifle scope to the degree of putting it on the bottom of a jet ski? And its still not the point. You can't shoot what you can't see in low light.

Of that group you mentioned please scratch the Leoupolds and don't let anyone fool you or tell you other wise. The Swarovski Z5 will be your best bet but if you would like to save an additional 400-500$ you will do just as well with the Zeiss 3x15-50s or the Zeiss 5x25-50s. Zeiss has really upgraded their Conquest and Conquest HD lines. The Swaro has slightly better glass than the Zeiss Conquest HD line. But Zeiss makes better overall glass than Swaro in their Victory FL and HT lines.

What you're looking to do, I'd say its a coin flip Z5 vs Zeiss HD5 line. The great thing now is that everyone can afford something from Zeiss, their lowest quality scope the Terra is better or on par with what you can get with Leupold's Vari Xs for the same price.



Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 17:49
Originally posted by Obi Wan Kenobi Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

Of that group you mentioned...

I'm open to any and all scopes.  I'm not set on those particular ones.

Thanks for the replies.


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 18:09
Originally posted by Obi Wan Kenobi Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

Originally posted by parshal parshal wrote:


Hi, first post here.  I've been researching some new scopes and figure this is the best place for answers.
 
I've got a rem 700 BDL .264 win mag that's been blueprinted and will shoot under .5 MOA in the right hands.  It's got a Brown's Precision stock and is pretty darned light.  I've had a 4.5-14x40mm Leupold VXIII on it for about ten years.  I've shot a few antelope and pigs with the scope before it was blueprinted.  On my deer hunt a couple weeks ago I got a nice muley at 293 yards but I had a heck of a time finding that deer in the scope.  It wasn't so much the FOV as it was trying to find the sweet spot (side to side) behind the scope.  I had an elevated position and a rock rest so stability wasn't an issue.  The scope was having issues when sighting in (it would move 2 - 3" rather than .25) so I sent it in for repair.  I'm looking for a better scope and will probably stick that old one on my .22 rimfire.
 
The rifle is my all around rifle.  I live and hunt mostly in the west.  I have 13 preference points for mt. goat and will be using this rifle to pack in.  I've also got 13 points for elk and antelope so it's going be used for just about everything.  I have a 600 yard range and will be practicing at that distance.  I don't expect to ever shoot at game beyond that.

The load I'm shooting is a 130 grain Swift Sirocco II at 3250 fps.  It's sighted in a 275 yards.  The PBR is pretty flat. 
 
I have Swarovski EL binos so I'd be using my scope for shooting and not spotting game.
 
Here's what I'd like to have:
 
1) Larger objective
2) Low rings mount
3) Minimum 14x high magnification
4) Elevation target-type turret
 
Price is important but if it's got the features I want I might suck it up although I'd prefer to keep it under $1500.  I realize #2 might be tough unless I look at the Leupold VX-L series.  For #4, even though I don't plan on dialing in my shots due to the PBR on the round I'd like to have it for shots longer than 375 yards or so.  I like the idea of Leupold's CDS for shots beyond that.  I believe that simple is faster in a hunting rig and will be shooting up to 600 yards to confirm my setup.  I think I prefer the SFP reticles over the FFP.
 
I've looked through the following:
 
Leupold VX-L 4.5-14x56mm
Leupold VX-L 4.5-14x50mm
Swarovski Z5 3.5x-18x44mm
Burris Veracity 4-20x50mm
 
The Swaro was the clearest/sharpest of all.  The Leupold 50mm was adequate and I like the warranty.  However, I know there are better values out there in scopes in recent years over Leupold.
 
I've got a 6mm Creedmoor being built and will need a scope for it as well.  It will be a 10# target rifle (although it might be used for antelope or suburban deer with a suppressor) so the scope would be geared more for targets.  I might shoot to 1000 yards with it but most range work would be a 600 yards or less.  Although the ranges are similar to the .264 it's a different type of scope need, I think.
 
Sorry for a long first post but I wanted to provide as much information as possible.


Sounds like you have a great rifle there sir. Let me say to you that I'm not trying to sound harsh or like an elite know it all. Its just in my humble opinion after owning a few and hunting in some dark twilight. Leupolds are junk scopes and Leupold has made a mint off American hunters for generations selling shotty OVER PRICED scopes with shotty  Japanese glass. It drives me crazy to see guys like you with great guns with what I'd call horrible scopes atop them. Right before 30 minutes past sun light most Leupolds are completely worthless. It makes me angry with their gimmick commercials. Putting a rifle scope on the bottom of a jet ski in a lake for 30 minutes then thinking its impressive because its able to shoot a few rounds. Who abuses their rifle scope to the degree of putting it on the bottom of a jet ski? And its still not the point. You can't shoot what you can't see in low light.

Of that group you mentioned please scratch the Leoupolds and don't let anyone fool you or tell you other wise. The Swarovski Z5 will be your best bet but if you would like to save an additional 400-500$ you will do just as well with the Zeiss 3x15-50s or the Zeiss 5x25-50s. Zeiss has really upgraded their Conquest and Conquest HD lines. The Swaro has slightly better glass than the Zeiss Conquest HD line. But Zeiss makes better overall glass than Swaro in their Victory FL and HT lines.

What you're looking to do, I'd say its a coin flip Z5 vs Zeiss HD5 line. The great thing now is that everyone can afford something from Zeiss, their lowest quality scope the Terra is better or on par with what you can get with Leupold's Vari Xs for the same price.



Its people like you gives forums like this a bad name. I know very little about scopes but, listening to people like you makes listening to politicians pleasant.
I don't have a dog in the hunt one way or the other, I have looked at many scopes in the store, under artificial light. I have a hard time telling the difference in the glass. You remind me of an used car salesman, All opinion.

Anyway, trying to learn as much as I can here your post told me nothing but your opinions.


Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 20:17
Give me a break. Leupolds are not nearly as bad as u make them sound.

-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/09/2014 at 22:15
No doubt, I can't imagine this brand of scope being useless junk with everything they make. Sure every brand has their lemons and models that are not all that great.
But according to Star Wars guy that this particular brand can not be successfully hunted with is reaching to say the least.

His advice to the op and anyone else reading is not at all helpful.


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 09:28
Parshal, yours is a tough spot: on the edge of needing certain features that make a scope more cumbersome to use, but still needing the light weight and low profile of a packing/stalking gun.

Leica scopes are nice, great glass, but some of the older exposed turrets spun a bit too easily.  Be sure if you get a Leica that the turrets don't move too easily - or that the elevation has a zero stop, so you can always get back to good.

I really like Swaro, hard to go wrong so long as you have the features you need.  Also look at Zeiss, there are a few variants on the sample list (www.samplelist.com) now that could work for you.  I am a firm believer in glass quality over magnification, and I think you will be exceedingly pleased with almost anything from Zeiss (Victory and up) and Swaro - especially when comparing to your Leupold.

As said above, as you go higher in magnification, getting a good sight picture becomes more of a challenge, head position has less forgiveness. If you were set on 14X for a 293 yard shot, I think you would benefit greatly from a lower max power scope, ,maybe something in the 10X or maybe 12X range.  I avoid highest power for anything other than where it is absolutely needed - which isn't often.

On Leupold, I'll not wade into the conversation too far, other than to say I generally don't buy Leupold. I haven't been impressed with one in a very long time, and I think the competition has far exceeded - in quality and features, but not in price - what Leupold offers.  That said, some shooters I respect have recent tried Leupold's newer stuff and been pleasantly surprised.  There are great options, be sure to look at everything.

Lastly, not exactly what you asked for, but I'd consider the Trijicon Accupoint 2.5-10.  It doesn't have exposed elevation but it does have a very simple reticle, great glass for the money, and tremendous low light capabilities.  It isn't a small scope, but is among my favorite hunters in that category and where low light is assured.  I have yet to hear a hunter regret running a 2.5-10 Accupoint in any circumstances similar to yours.

One more point: consider acquainting yourself with a more complicated reticle.  The drop reticles, once understood, are amazingly useful.  I am an "old dog", learned precision marksmanship on a mil reticle and MOA turret, because that was the way everything ran; and I have learned to embrace and love the drop reticles for their speed, precision, and accuracy.  I was a turret-spinner for many, MANY years, and now dope most shots on the reticle, with great confidence.  Learning a new reticle can be daunting, but is very, very worth the effort.  Just a suggestion.


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 10:29
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

I really like Swaro, hard to go wrong so long as you have the features you need.  Also look at Zeiss, there are a few variants on the sample list (www.samplelist.com) now that could work for you.  I am a firm believer in glass quality over magnification, and I think you will be exceedingly pleased with almost anything from Zeiss (Victory and up) and Swaro - especially when comparing to your Leupold.

I agree about the glass.  I have a Swaro ATX with both 95 and 65mm objectives.  It's fantastic along with two pairs of ELs in 42 and 50MM.

Quote On Leupold, I'll not wade into the conversation too far, other than to say I generally don't buy Leupold. I haven't been impressed with one in a very long time, and I think the competition has far exceeded - in quality and features, but not in price - what Leupold offers.  That said, some shooters I respect have recent tried Leupold's newer stuff and been pleasantly surprised.  

Exactly what the gunsmith who's building the Creedmoor said.

Quote
One more point: consider acquainting yourself with a more complicated reticle.  The drop reticles, once understood, are amazingly useful.  I am an "old dog", learned precision marksmanship on a mil reticle and MOA turret, because that was the way everything ran; and I have learned to embrace and love the drop reticles for their speed, precision, and accuracy.  I was a turret-spinner for many, MANY years, and now dope most shots on the reticle, with great confidence.  Learning a new reticle can be daunting, but is very, very worth the effort.  Just a suggestion.

I'm actually quite familiar with using the complicated reticles.  I just choose to not want to use them on a pure hunting rifle.  I'll be getting one for the 6mm, though.  Regarding the drop reticles, every reticle I've run through calculators have very odd ranges for the load I'm using.  That's why I'm leaning toward using the MPBR to my advantage and maybe using a custom top turret with yardages.  It's simple and can be dialed in at my range.  The vast majority of my shots are well under the MPBR of the rifle.

Right now I'm investigating the Vortex HST and I'm leaning toward the Leupold VX-6 3-18x44 with illuminated reticle (to get the thicker reticle).  I can put the CDS dial on the Leupold and get most of what I want.  I'd put the HST on the 6mm.

Lots of choices out there and I'm not set on anything quite yet.

Thanks for the responses!




Posted By: Alan Robertson
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 10:29
I've owned Leupold scopes in past and liked them just fine. The Leupolds I've owned would take me to the end of legal shooting time here in OK and I don't remember ever breaking one. Having said that, the low light performance of the top of the line Leupolds is not even close to being in the same league as the top of the line Swarovski, or Zeiss scopes. Not. Even. Close.

I once bragged here on OT about a VX3 low light performance vs. a Swaro based on a quick look around with each scope. I was challenged to prove it. A local dealer was willing to let me do a more extensive side- side comparison at night and the Zeiss and Swaro were resolving details where the Leupold was blacked out, or showed a murky view of something unidentifiable.
This test was in darkness, hours after legal light, with available light provided from nearby city lights illuminating an overcast sky... maybe like a quartering moon on a clear night. The test was really beyond what most of us would expect from our optics performance, but showed the true capabilities of each scope.
What would this mean in real world applications, in legal light? The Alpha glass scopes will give a hunter an edge. A friend and I watched a 14 pt buck step out into the wheat field about 180 yds away, with about 5 minutes left to shoot. I was counting tines with a Swaro and he could tell it was a buck with his Monarch. It was his turn to take one, so...
There is a reason that the Alpha scopes can sell at multiples of lesser scopes, not that it will always pay off for you.



-------------
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 10:40
On custom dials for elevation: their value is directly correlated to 2 very specific factors:
1.   The accuracy of the initial data set
2.   That data not changing in any way.

I have run Kenton knobs on a few scopes, but quickly realized the limitations. As my turrets were custom printed with my data, they were dead nuts - till the weather changed, or the elevation, or till I wanted a different bullet/powder combination, then it was another turret for that.

In contrast, a mil or MOA reticle that gives no feet or yardage or meter values is immensely more usable.  Once I know range to target, I have data (on a card or in my phone) that tells me drop in mils or MOA.  My drop can compensate for weather, elevation, and any changes to weapon or ammo, everything simply gets plugged in and an answer comes out (obviously, the answer isn't known to be accurate till it is tested under actual conditions.)  Granted, this means I go to the field with a Kestrel and a phone or range card, but I don't twist turrets any more (much) and I can make much faster shots when necessary.

Stop thinking in terms of inches in drop, start thinking in terms of mil or MOA adjustment on target, and the precision shooting world gets much bigger real quick.


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 10:50
Originally posted by Alan Robertson Alan Robertson wrote:

I've owned Leupold scopes in past and liked them just fine. The Leupolds I've owned would take me to the end of legal shooting time here in OK and I don't remember ever breaking one. 


For the vast majority of hunters, this rings very true.  They carry the rifle very little, they shoot the rifle very little, and they take care when handling.  When/if you move beyond that paradigm, Leupold's value, as a general rule, rests in how great is there customer service and how quickly they return your scope WHEN it fails.

I have pushed to failure a few Leupolds and have observed several more die in service.  Everything fails, but my experience (and experienced vary) is that Leupolds fail more often than do other makes.  Granted, rifles I use get bumped and dropped and drug through brush and over rocks, and that is not where Leupold scopes thrive.  Where they thrive is on rifles that are shot seldom, are handled with care, and are called upon to function in relatively nice conditions.

I never doubt an owner who says they have never been disappointed in a Leupold scope; however, I immediately know how they treat their gear.  Some environments and circumstances dictate that gear must be handled roughly, and those who operate in that world seldom carry a Leupold (by choice, at least.)  Admittedly, I am addressing tactical scopes more than traditional hunting scopes, but I see less of a distinction between the 2 with each passing year.

Opinions vary, and I graciously seek differing points of view and experiences; but I don't carry Leupold due to my experiences and first-hand observations of others' experiences.


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 10:55
Me not being anywhere as knowledgeable as the last two posts here. It seems to me no two eyes are the same? Not everyone hunts in low light? Not everyone hunts from a stand and/or a fixed point? Eye relief is a relative thing? Price matters to some? And so on.

Just a guess.



Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 11:12
No 2 eyes are the same (not even the 2 in the same head), not every hunter hunts in low light, not everyone hunts from fixed positions, eye relief is not relative, price matters to most (if not all); AND there are great scopes that are also inexpensive, one does not have to handle a scope roughly for the scope to fail, and every mechanical device can fail - and, over a long enough timeline, WILL fail.

All good guesses, osprey.


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 11:28
Makes sense, I babied the conquest I have and it did fail after a few years. And if I recall it said on the box constant eye relief not, to my eye its variable which doesn't bother me to some it may.

Another thing, weight/profile I can see were it matters a ton depending on the type of hunting.


Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 14:22

I went by Cabela's and looked through the Leupold again alongside a Vortex HS-LR 44m scope.  The Leupold was much clearer even at 18x vs the Vortex at 16x.  At lower powers they were similar enough to not be of consequence.  What annoyed me is that the eyebox on the Vortex was much, much more forgiving.  I would choose the Vortex over the Leupold if it weren't for the lack of clarity at higher power.  For a target scope, I'd spend most time at high power.  For that matter, I've not dialed my 14x Leupold lower than 14x, ever.  Of course, I've been hunting very open areas.

I looked through a Zeiss Conquest HD5 3-15x42 and the glass is much brighter than the Leupold.  Of course, I expected that to be the case.  I'll need to research that one a bit more.  It looks like you can get a free Kenton custom turret with the purchase of that scope through December 31.

The warranty of the Leupold and Vortex has an impact on my decision which is a shame. 



Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 14:24
I did notice a bit of distortion at the edges of the Conquest that I didn't notice on the other two.  It's possible the clarity isn't there on the others to actually notice it.


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 16:44
I don't think I would have any problem buying a Leupold. The vx 3 line is really attractive because of the CDS and shaving of unneeded weight along with very reasonable price. I do have few acquaintances that have nothing but good things to say about Leupolds and their warranty, just acquaintances though.

But, at the same time I am like you a little hesitant. Not many here are overly fond of them some I would take with grain of salt like Star Wars guy seems to be a hack.

The only scope I have had any problem with is my conquest which I will be getting back in February but, I have not owned many scopes at all. I like the conquest so it's worth it to me to pay for the repair and shipping it's only $211 and some change.

Leupold might be the right future scope for me and the type of hunting I do out west here. I have no need for a low light and/or illuminated scope. I mainly spot and stalk open river breaks on public ground, lots of mileage. So an overly durable scope is unnecessary, light weight low profile is much more important. CDS is Taylor made for out here because guessing yardage is a no-go in this type of terrain.

Just some observations I picked up from this sight.


Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 16:48

Originally posted by osprey osprey wrote:

Leupold might be the right future scope for me and the type of hunting I do out west here. I have no need for a low light and/or illuminated scope. I mainly spot and stalk open river breaks on public ground, lots of mileage. So an overly durable scope is unnecessary, light weight low profile is much more important. CDS is Taylor made for out here because guessing yardage is a no-go in this type of terrain.

This is very close to my usage as well although I'd add antelope hunting to the mix which is a lot of time in the truck glassing.  The rifle sits in the truck getting bounced around and constantly moved.  Weight and low light capability mean nothing but clear optics at high magnification can mean a lot.



Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 17:08
I have taken up antelope hunting recently, love it. So, I don't think bouncing around in a truck is an durability issue on most any scope, I was talking about dragging over rocks and such, like rancid said.

What I have done with antelope is what a archery guy showed me a couple years ago. Is I hike around till I see a group, as I get closer I have bright white baseball cap I put on as I walk towards them getting closer. Their curiosity gets the best of them and they come running for a look see, in range.

I had worked well for me. Go figure.


Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 18:21
Originally posted by osprey osprey wrote:

What I have done with antelope is what a archery guy showed me a couple years ago. Is I hike around till I see a group, as I get closer I have bright white baseball cap I put on as I walk towards them getting closer. Their curiosity gets the best of them and they come running for a look see, in range.

Go out sage grouse hunting with a dog and the antelope will come right up to you trying to figure out what you are.  It's amazing how close we get to them every year with a dog.


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 18:45
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

Originally posted by Alan Robertson Alan Robertson wrote:

I've owned Leupold scopes in past and liked them just fine. The Leupolds I've owned would take me to the end of legal shooting time here in OK and I don't remember ever breaking one. 



For the vast majority of hunters, this rings very true.  They carry the rifle very little, they shoot the rifle very little, and they take care when handling.  When/if you move beyond that paradigm, Leupold's value, as a general rule, rests in how great is there customer service and how quickly they return your scope WHEN it fails.

I have pushed to failure a few Leupolds and have observed several more die in service.  Everything fails, but my experience (and experienced vary) is that Leupolds fail more often than do other makes.  Granted, rifles I use get bumped and dropped and drug through brush and over rocks, and that is not where Leupold scopes thrive.  Where they thrive is on rifles that are shot seldom, are handled with care, and are called upon to function in relatively nice conditions.

I never doubt an owner who says they have never been disappointed in a Leupold scope; however, I immediately know how they treat their gear.  Some environments and circumstances dictate that gear must be handled roughly, and those who operate in that world seldom carry a Leupold (by choice, at least.)  Admittedly, I am addressing tactical scopes more than traditional hunting scopes, but I see less of a distinction between the 2 with each passing year.

Opinions vary, and I graciously seek differing points of view and experiences; but I don't carry Leupold due to my experiences and first-hand observations of others' experiences.


Thanks for the comments, seems reasonable.
The only thing would I add is someone could hunt a lot in other words carry the rifle a lot in adverse conditions and still not need a tank of a scope. As spot and stalk hunter in big sky country, that being slow careful movement, deliberate actions, a compact lightweight scope can only augment western wide open hunting, seems to be just the ticket.


Posted By: Alan Robertson
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 18:53
Originally posted by parshal parshal wrote:

Originally posted by osprey osprey wrote:

What I have done with antelope is what a archery guy showed me a couple years ago. Is I hike around till I see a group, as I get closer I have bright white baseball cap I put on as I walk towards them getting closer. Their curiosity gets the best of them and they come running for a look see, in range.

Go out sage grouse hunting with a dog and the antelope will come right up to you trying to figure out what you are.  It's amazing how close we get to them every year with a dog.
Have you tried bringin' a boombox playin': Tiny Tim- "Tiptoe through the Tulips"?


-------------
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"


Posted By: 3_tens
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 19:53
Alan. How are you going to get the gun to your shoulder without dropping the boom box. Loco    I prefer to go in the field lighter than that. Come to think of it.  I have never owned a boom box.
Humor over, now back on topic.  Big Grin


-------------
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.


Posted By: Son of Ed
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 20:29
I better give back all those antelope and deer we shot with Weaver scopes......    Whatever

-------------
Visit the Ed Show


Posted By: Kickboxer
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 20:34
Originally posted by Son of Ed Son of Ed wrote:

I better give back all those antelope and deer we shot with Weaver scopes......    Whatever

I've never shot ANYTHING with a scope… how do you get those???  


-------------
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living


Posted By: JGRaider
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 21:07
I've had numerous scopes up to $1200 on my rifles over the past 41 years of big game hunting.  I've also had the luxury to guide over 100 hunters, most of whom hunt all over the world, since 2000.  I'm lucky in that I get to see lots and lots of different glass, ask them lots of questions, and test them out somewhat.  In short, probably 60-65% of these hunters show up with some sort of Leupold scope mounted on their rifles.  FWIW 60-70% of these hunters use Swarovski binos. 

I'm obviously very interested in the durability of their gear, and not one single hunter has ever had a Leupold scope go mechanically tits up.  A couple of them did break due to being crashed on the rocks, but that's it.  Keep in mind these are big game hunters, not tactical, perpetual turret twister types.  The only scope I've ever had fail, which happened during a mule deer hunt, was a SwaroA.  I'm not a diehard turret twister either, but do find the CDS dial from Leupy to be great fun, and reliable so far (only 200-300 rounds via CDS so far though). 

Based on my experience, I do not believe the average big game hunter will ever wear out a Leupold, Conquest, Elite 4200, Meopta, etc.  I also do not consider glass quality to be the #1 consideration when I buy a scope.  I believe durability, CS, quality of reticle, eye relief/eyebox usability, and ease of mounting to be equally or more important because most any $200+ scope will get you well past legal shooting light nowadays. 

If Leupold's FX3, VX3, or VX6 doesn't float your boat, I'd personally take a long hard look at the Meopta Meopro 3.5-10x44 w/illiminated reticle.  Meopta makes some fantastic stuff. 


Posted By: Alan Robertson
Date Posted: December/10/2014 at 23:28
The first Leupold I owned was a fixed power pistol scope which I mounted in the barrel- mounted rear sight housing on an old Mauser, in '78 or'79. It was what is now known as a "scout" config. That was my only centerfire rifle for around 10 years and it went where I went and both the rifle and scope were considerably skint up by the time I traded up for a rifle with a VX-III and that one again for another rifle with a VX-III. That old scout rifle was kind of like a good luck charm because every deer I took with it was before lunch. I'd go wander around in the woods a bit with the sunrise and jump one and fill a tag. The last Leupold I owned was about 8 years ago and I never mounted it. It was still new in box when I sold it at a loss to a friend, because he just had to have it and I just couldn't warm up to it, having already made other trades for something noticeably better.
Speaking of "anything can break", I need to run out to El Reno and have Gene Sears ship a Swarovski back to SONA for me, now that season's over. They'll fix 'er back good as new and I'll get a chance to see what powder Gene might have in stock and stop by his range on my way back and sight in this spare replacement... SONA will have my scope back in a few weeks, but I can't stand to have that rifle blinded and unusable.

Leupold used to make a scope with a German #1 post and if I ever see one used for sale, I'll have to get it.



-------------
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"


Posted By: Obi Wan Kenobi
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 01:49

Originally posted by Alan Robertson Alan Robertson wrote:

I've owned Leupold scopes in past and liked them just fine. The Leupolds I've owned would take me to the end of legal shooting time here in OK and I don't remember ever breaking one. Having said that, the low light performance of the top of the line Leupolds is not even close to being in the same league as the top of the line Swarovski, or Zeiss scopes. Not. Even. Close.

I once bragged here on OT about a VX3 low light performance vs. a Swaro based on a quick look around with each scope. I was challenged to prove it. A local dealer was willing to let me do a more extensive side- side comparison at night and the Zeiss and Swaro were resolving details where the Leupold was blacked out, or showed a murky view of something unidentifiable.
This test was in darkness, hours after legal light, with available light provided from nearby city lights illuminating an overcast sky... maybe like a quartering moon on a clear night. The test was really beyond what most of us would expect from our optics performance, but showed the true capabilities of each scope.
What would this mean in real world applications, in legal light? The Alpha glass scopes will give a hunter an edge. A friend and I watched a 14 pt buck step out into the wheat field about 180 yds away, with about 5 minutes left to shoot. I was counting tines with a Swaro and he could tell it was a buck with his Monarch. It was his turn to take one, so...
There is a reason that the Alpha scopes can sell at multiples of lesser scopes, not that it will always pay off for you.



Great write up my friend, NOT EVEN CLOSE and the prices are nearly the same. That's what gets me hot. NOT EVEN CLOSE and Leupold tries to sell you on every gimmick except what the scope's main purpose is suppose to be. Seeing and making clean shots on animals in the last legal shooting minutes available.



Posted By: Obi Wan Kenobi
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 01:54
Originally posted by parshal parshal wrote:

Originally posted by Obi Wan Kenobi Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

Of that group you mentioned...

I'm open to any and all scopes.  I'm not set on those particular ones.

Thanks for the replies.


All scopes are not made equal, even the ones in the same class for the same amount of money. If you are going to spend 500-1,500$ on a rifle scope get the very best glass for your money, don't fall for gimmicks. The last few minutes of legal shooting light are precious and that's what you are paying for. Leupold is NO WHERE near Zeiss or Swarovski. And like I said, I love what Zeiss has done with their technology. They've made it affordable for almost everyone.  



Posted By: Obi Wan Kenobi
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 02:55

Originally posted by osprey osprey wrote:

No doubt, I can't imagine this brand of scope being useless junk with everything they make. Sure every brand has their lemons and models that are not all that great.
But according to Star Wars guy that this particular brand can not be successfully hunted with is reaching to say the least.

His advice to the op and anyone else reading is not at all helpful.

Not sure why you think someone's advice is not helpful. If you take hunting as serious as I do, I'm trying to help you avoid the wasted money and the frustration I've had. I have been fortunate enough to shoot 3 deer of a life time. Every deer you see on this wall I shot with a Zeiss Kahles or Swaro. The deer to the far right scores 135 inches 11 point. I hunted him for 2 seasons with a Leupold Vari X III scope and could barely make him out when he entered fields at dusk. He was shot the first time I saw him November 2007 on a miserable overcast afternoon right at dark with a Kahles I bought from SWFA. The deer to the far left was shot at dawn with a Z5 walking through a swamp heading back to bed down.

http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591537 - http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591537

I've been lucky enough to shoot 3 bucks of a life time in 26 years of hunting. The buck on the right was shot at dawn on a logging road in Saskatchewan he scores 177 inches shot with the same Z5. The buck in the middle my favorite would have broken the holy grail of 200 inches but his tines on the back are broken off from fighting. He scores 194 inches shot with a Zeiss I bought from here. He was shot at twilight in a corn field about 6 minutes left while it was snowing. The double drop on the left was shot on a friends farm in the mid west working a scrape line right at day break at 160 yards before he was about to step in the woods, he stayed right on the edge of the woods until the sun was up enough and it was just legal to shoot before he left. I can ASSURE YOU SIR. If I had been using a Leupold none of these deer would be on my wall. They'd still be living or fallen to some bow hunters I know. BTW my brother in law 2 weeks ago just shot a 200 pound 8 point clean typical with a 21 inch spread, with a Zeiss HD on is Browning 30-06 after trading his Leupold. The deer was shot 45 minutes past sunset crossing a logging road in the woods at 75 yards. My bro in law said he had no problems seeing him when he stepped out broad side. But go ahead and ignore my advice. Go on out and by yourself a Leupold, all I can say to you is good luck and I hope you are hunting unpressured private ranches during mid day and early afternoon like David Morris & Gary Swartz Tecomate ranch on their TV show. Where we hunt big wild free roaming deer are rarely seen at that time & they don't act like the deer you see on tv.

http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591538 - http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591538




Posted By: Kickboxer
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 06:30
Obi Wan, those deer are ALL magnificent.  Must have been some great hunting memories constructed getting those...
I agree with your comments.  I own a few cheap scopes, a few inexpensive scopes, a few moderately priced scopes and a some "alpha" scopes.  The alphas kick in at about the "85-90 percent" of my requirements.  In most cases, 90% is OK… but there are cases where it is not.  If one encounters bucks like the ones in your picture at a point in time where the 90%er fails… the opportunity remains only that… or one takes a "WAG" shot with, many times, failure.  
I spend a lot of time looking through my scopes at varying times of day under varying conditions.  My wife sometimes just shakes her head because I have a rifle and scope out just looking at things.  I know the limitations of all of them, know when they can/can't be used.  Sometimes, I don't intend to, and won't, shoot at the "last possible minute".  I don't really hunt trophies, though have taken a few really nice deer, so on days where I know I'm not "there" until the last possible minute it is OK to take a scope that only meets 90% of what I really want.  If I've invested time, effort and money in getting to a hunt, I'll take the best I've got because you generally don't get "do overs" (nor do I want to "do over"…).   
I enjoyed your comments and the photos.  Just awesome deer (those are trophies I would like to have).  


-------------
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living


Posted By: JGRaider
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 08:50
OWK, those are some fantastic bucks, indeed bucks of several lifetimes.  I hear what you're saying about scopes, and this is nothing personal towards you, but I couldn't disagree more about the differences in "alpha" glass and Leupold, especially the VX3, VX6, and FX3 (substitue with Conquest, Elite, Meopta and you'd have the same result though).  I own or have owned scopes such as SwaroA, S&B, and many others. 

The handicap I have here is that I cannot remember how to post pics, BUT, my friends and I have taken 11 "bucks of a lifetime" (muley bucks, all but 2 from the same ranch unguided) since 2008.  They include:
Friend: 196" )VX3
Friend: 190" Vari XIIc
Big Al:  201", 190", 191", 201", 185" (all with VX3)
Myself 190", 190", 194", 212".  (all but one with VX3)

I won't even get into the numerous whitetails between 150"-167" (that's big for us!) taken with VX3's.

I'm not tooting my own horn, but I've hunted in most every conceivable condition regarding light, or the lack thereof in the last 41 yrs.  As I also mentioned, I've seen most every high end hunting scope made...Diavari's, S&B's. Z5, Z6....seen 'em all and they are fantastic, as you say, but the duplex reticles suck IMO..... thin wired way too thin.  

Every VX3/VX6/FX3 I've personally owned or used will easily get you past legal shooting light, at least where I go.   




Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 09:55
Originally posted by Obi Wan Kenobi Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

Originally posted by osprey osprey wrote:

No doubt, I can't imagine this brand of scope being useless junk with everything they make. Sure every brand has their lemons and models that are not all that great.
But according to Star Wars guy that this particular brand can not be successfully hunted with is reaching to say the least.

His advice to the op and anyone else reading is not at all helpful.

Not sure why you think someone's advice is not helpful. If you take hunting as serious as I do, I'm trying to help you avoid the wasted money and the frustration I've had. I have been fortunate enough to shoot 3 deer of a life time. Every deer you see on this wall I shot with a Zeiss Kahles or Swaro. The deer to the far right scores 135 inches 11 point. I hunted him for 2 seasons with a Leupold Vari X III scope and could barely make him out when he entered fields at dusk. He was shot the first time I saw him November 2007 on a miserable overcast afternoon right at dark with a Kahles I bought from SWFA. The deer to the far left was shot at dawn with a Z5 walking through a swamp heading back to bed down.

http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591537 - http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591537

I've been lucky enough to shoot 3 bucks of a life time in 26 years of hunting. The buck on the right was shot at dawn on a logging road in Saskatchewan he scores 177 inches shot with the same Z5. The buck in the middle my favorite would have broken the holy grail of 200 inches but his tines on the back are broken off from fighting. He scores 194 inches shot with a Zeiss I bought from here. He was shot at twilight in a corn field about 6 minutes left while it was snowing. The double drop on the left was shot on a friends farm in the mid west working a scrape line right at day break at 160 yards before he was about to step in the woods, he stayed right on the edge of the woods until the sun was up enough and it was just legal to shoot before he left. I can ASSURE YOU SIR. If I had been using a Leupold none of these deer would be on my wall. They'd still be living or fallen to some bow hunters I know. BTW my brother in law 2 weeks ago just shot a 200 pound 8 point clean typical with a 21 inch spread, with a Zeiss HD on is Browning 30-06 after trading his Leupold. The deer was shot 45 minutes past sunset crossing a logging road in the woods at 75 yards. My bro in law said he had no problems seeing him when he stepped out broad side. But go ahead and ignore my advice. Go on out and by yourself a Leupold, all I can say to you is good luck and I hope you are hunting unpressured private ranches during mid day and early afternoon like David Morris & Gary Swartz Tecomate ranch on their TV show. Where we hunt big wild free roaming deer are rarely seen at that time & they don't act like the deer you see on tv.

http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591538 - http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=1660JoOUc&i=11591538







First of all as Christopher Walken would say your tone is all wrong.
I only hunt on public land also, no food plots, no corn fields, no tree stands, no blinds, no road hunting, no calling/rattling or using of scents/baiting.
So no need for a low light and/or illuminated reticle scope. FYI I have been looking a few different brands all have been compact/lightweight I really like the z3 but, not the best for dialing. CDS is attractive because of multiple dials for more than just one rifle.
I am sure for your type of hunting your advice is just fine but, the OPs hunting etc. is at least much more similar to what I hunt like.
Those are some very fine trophys, much better than I have ever shot. Much larger than anything around my neck of the woods. That being said I like the journey as much as the result is some cases more so.

Again your know it all car salesmen tone is all wrong. Thanks


Posted By: Alan Robertson
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 10:05
JG sez: "duplex reticles suck IMO..... thin wired way too thin."
---------------------
Others share your sentiment. That problem is overcome by First Focal Plane scopes, as dialing up the magnification a little bit when the light gets low, thickens the reticle.

Leupold might do well to offer more models with their "heavy duplex" reticle.
All mfgs. would, too, but they are in the business of selling scopes, so we are besieged by all manner of ranging reticles to please the uninitiated buyers of today. What the world needs is a great selection of reticles for fast target acquisition. Even models with the venerable German #4 are getting scarce and has been modified with thinner outer posts, spaced further apart and that's a shame.

The world could get by just fine with only 4 reticles: a very fine cross hair for target scopes (maybe w/ center dot,) German #1 post for hunting scopes, a MilDot (or improved version like SWFA's MilQuad) for tactical and long range efforts and finally, a quick CQB lit dot/post or something.


-------------
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"


Posted By: JGRaider
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 10:27
Alan, to be fair, I said that the duplex reticles found in the Euro scopes I've owned or used, are way too thin, much too thin for my liking.  The duplex reticle in the VX3 is fine for low light IMO, and the duplex reticle in the VX6 is fantastic, the best duplex reticle on the planet for big game hunting, once again IMO. 

I've been in and out my buddy's store lately, messing around with the Meopta 3.5-10x44 w/ ill dot (red 4 c?) and I like it mucho as well.  


Figured out the photo thing....my stuff



Big Al's stuff:



Friend from a couple of weeks ago....51" of amazing mass, 30" wide greatest outside spread



Friend's massive buck last year, near 50" mass.



Posted By: Alan Robertson
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 10:32
osprey sez: "...your know it all car salesmen tone is all wrong. Thanks"
-------------------------
Hey c'mon, now...

Sure, he's a salesman,  but he sells sex toys, not cars and who could fault him for that?


-------------
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 10:47
Ha!
Ya, he must like his toys.
Star wars guy reminds me of several 1st and 2nd Lieutenants. Straight out of their own little world and not realizing no one else can fit in such a cramped space. Go figure.

May the force be with him.





Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 11:02
I don't like a "too thin" duplex either, and I don't understand why so many mfgs put super thin duplex reticles in their capped turret hunting scopes. Ideally, I want a thin crosshair in the very center surrounded by fairly thick posts. That provides the best of both worlds - precision aiming with visibility in low light. I also prefer the posts to extend pretty close toward the center, so when the light gets low enough that I lose the fine crosshairs, I'm still able to find center on a critter's vitals by bracketing between the ends of the thick posts.

My favorite duplex design was the one Bushnell once offered as their "Fire Fly" design, as I thought it was a good mix between bold enough posts and thin enough center, with a tapered post section in between. Inexplicably, they ditched that excellent design in favor of their super thin plex in the Elite 6500 series. My second favorite duplex was the Zeiss Z-Plex they offered in the previous generation Conquest series, or at least the one in my fixed 4X is close to perfect to my way of thinking.

For other reticles similar to a plex, I'm a big fan of the various German #4 & 4A reticles, as they tend to have thicker posts than most standard plexes.

The absolute boldest, most visible reticle for low light use is the German #1, but few scopes offer it, and for someone who's used to plex reticles, it may not be your cup of tea.

Really good low light performance and "clean" optics makes up for a thin reticle somewhat, but still, I prefer my reticles to have fairly thick posts. If the scope is optically excellent, I'm good with a "thick enough" reticle.

The above observations don't apply as it pertains to illuminated reticles, of course, where a thin reticle is fine.

I've not had any issues with low light visibility with VX-3 and better Leupolds, although I do prefer Zeiss/Swaro/Leica/Kahles/S&B scopes for low light performance. That being said, if the light is low enough that I can't discern an animal through a VX-3, I'm probably skirting the fringes of legal shooting hours for deer here in TX anyway. I've been impressed with the latest generation of VX-3 scopes, which I would place roughly on par with the old Zeiss Conquest series in terms of optical performance. For feral hogs, varmints, and predators, where I can legally hunt at night, I do prefer the aforementioned "alpha" scopes for the slight edge they provide in very low light, but from what I've seen of the Leupold VX6, I suspect it might fare well in that scenario as well.


-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: Alan Robertson
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 11:53
Thin duplex reticles on Euro FFP glass get thick right quick, when dialing up the power. There's a reason they are thin at low magnification. Thin reticles on 2nd FP glass stays too thin.

I've not been interested enough to look through a VX6, but if they are a step up, then it's about time.
Leupold must have caught on that people had reason not to be so proud of their gold ring, anymore.
Still, they remain in business, while others with less compromising views of quality, like B&L, are long gone. Everything in optics design is a series of trade- offs.




-------------
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 12:49
^^^^Right, a decent reticle in a FFP scope gets plenty thick enough to see very well in low light when you dial in some magnification. I was referring to SFP, which is more common nowadays in the US market, even with a lot of the newer generation 30mm Euro scopes and/or those with high zoom ratios.


-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: Kickboxer
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 13:24
Originally posted by Alan Robertson Alan Robertson wrote:

Thin duplex reticles on Euro FFP glass get thick right quick, when dialing up the power. There's a reason they are thin at low magnification. Thin reticles on 2nd FP glass stays too thin.

I've not been interested enough to look through a VX6, but if they are a step up, then it's about time.
Leupold must have caught on that people had reason not to be so proud of their gold ring, anymore.
Still, they remain in business, while others with less compromising views of quality, like B&L, are long gone. Everything in optics design is a series of trade- offs.



Alan, I'm not a big Leupold fan, but the VX6 is definitely worth a look...


-------------
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 13:27
Great looking animals, Gents. 

-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 13:29
Originally posted by Alan Robertson Alan Robertson wrote:

Thin duplex reticles on Euro FFP glass get thick right quick, when dialing up the power. There's a reason they are thin at low magnification. Thin reticles on 2nd FP glass stays too thin.

I've not been interested enough to look through a VX6, but if they are a step up, then it's about time.
Leupold must have caught on that people had reason not to be so proud of their gold ring, anymore.
Still, they remain in business, while others with less compromising views of quality, like B&L, are long gone. Everything in optics design is a series of trade- offs.



Leupold's recent designs are very good optically.  On the hunting side, both VX-R and VX-6 are excellent in their respective price ranges.

VX-6 also has constant eye relief.

As far as reticles go, I am not a huge fan of duplex reticles of any sort, but I liek the #4 and #1 quite a bit for low light use.

Overall, I think Meopta's #4 and illuminated #4 reticles are the best low light reticles available right now, although there are quite a few nicely visible reticles out there.

ILya


-------------
http://www.darklordofoptics.com - www.darklordofoptics.com
https://rumble.com/c/DLO - Rumble Video Channel


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 13:53
Good to hear some sensible but, critical observation/firsthand commentary of products. Instead of absolute blind brand bashing.

Where star wars guy lost the shred of credibility he had left is, were he implied that just because he could not see his trophy's good enough to get the kill shot with the lowly leupold brand. That no one could seal the deal in his place, that arrogance needs its place of all its own in the know it all hall of fame. Lordy

God bless him, just the same.



Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 14:26

So, I'm still a bit torn with some of this stuff.  I'm glad there are lots of options out there, though.

I made a few trips to Cabela's yesterday and looked through different scopes.  The ones that came closest to my wants/desires were:

Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44
Zeiss Conquest HD5 3-15x42
Leupold VX-6 4-18x44
Vortex Viper HS-LR 4-16x44

The Swaro was the brightest and lightest although I do not care for the ballistic elevation turret dial.  I'd want to replace that with the Outdoorsman custom dial.  The Zeiss was second in clarity with a little blurriness around the edges but that doesn't matter all too much to me.  It just seemed bulky with the larger target turrets.  The Leupold was right up there in clarity and brightness as the other two although a bit darker on higher power than the other two.  I like the dials better and the free CDS elevation dial is nice.  The Vortex was the darkest of the bunch but I expected that given it costs less than half that of the Leupold.  At the highest power it was almost blurry in comparison but very usable.  The Leupold was much clearer at 18x vs the 16x of the Viper.  If I weren't comparing the optics side by side I'd say the Leupold was plenty clear and the Viper was "clear enough".  I own a number of current Swaro optics and can say that with plenty of experience.  I don't care for the tall turrets on the Viper but the price is right and it seems it would make a decent starter target scope.

I decided to buy a Viper HS-T 4-16x44 with MOA reticle due to the price to feature value.  I'll try it on the .264 and then throw it on the 6mm Creedmoor when it's finished in a week or two.  If I decide it's not good enough it's easy enough to sell and I don't have too much invested in it.  Note, the MOA reticle HS-T is on backorder most everywhere and not due for another couple months according to Vortex so I had to search to find one online.

I'm leaning toward the VX-6 for the .264 but I'm going to wait and see if I might find one on sale or a demo unit.  I'll play around with the Viper a bit before committing to the better optic.  I'd rather have the clearest, brightest optic on my hunting rifle rather than the target although spending more time behind the target rifle might beg for the clearer optic.  Another thing, having both optics on 30mm low rings would allow me to move them between the two rifles easily enough.



Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 14:32
I like (my so far limited experience) vortex scopes.

Sound very well though out. Keep us informed on your findings.


Posted By: parshal
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 14:44
Originally posted by osprey osprey wrote:

I like (my so far limited experience) vortex scopes.

If I really like it I may opt for the HS-LR to use on the .264.  Having only a .5 MOA click elevation dial is just fine for a hunting rifle, in my opinion.   However, once I shoot the HS-T I'll have a much more experienced opinion.


Posted By: 8shots
Date Posted: December/12/2014 at 01:06

My 2 cents worth...

I have a Leupold VX3 3,5-10 , first on my 30-06 and now moved to my 300H&H.

This rifle has been up and down rocky mountains, back and front of trucks etc. In other words banged around a bit. The rifle strap broke once and the rifle fell backwards, the scope taking the hit. This scope has seen about 20 years of hard service.

It still shoots straight and holds it Zero, you cannot ask many a buck, because they are dead.

On my target rifle I run a Leupold 8-25 VX3. I had the turrets changed to tactical turrets. This scope stays dead nuts. I have dialed this thing up and down, left and right many many times. It dials exactly 3 clicks per MOA all day long, as the saying in this forum goes. This scope has seen about 8 years of hard service.

I have looked at many a Nightforce scope during shooting gatherings. Other then for the name Nightforce, I would not swop my scope. I will certainly not haul out $3000 for a Nightforce versus $1200 for a Leupold. The glass in my Leupold is in my opinion better then (clearer) then the Nightforce scopes I looked through.

Maybe I am lucky and got the two best scopes Leupold ever made.



Posted By: suprane
Date Posted: December/12/2014 at 08:34
Just a new member and I do not have all the vast experiences at hunting No. American animals shared here. More of a bird hunter. But I've shot some and owned a few scopes. One Swarovski 3-18, two Zeiss Conquest, one an HD5 5-25, and too many to count Leupolds, Weavers, and others. What about the Nightforce NXS series, under $1500, just saw three demos from Europtic for under $1300.00 less than 14 magnification ( 2-10 ) but compact. I have a chance to buy a Leupold 4.5-14 Mark 4 tactical for a good cost NIB, but like you am weighing that against the Nightforce or a Trijicon. All under 13", not too heavy and good glass I hope. After reading all these post I am feeling like I should never have owned a Leupold and should run from the one being offered, 8shots has steadied the "nerves" LOL. Well just two cents, but no definite suggestion. BTW very much enjoyed the whole discussion, a lot of info to increase the mind. ( BTW the Conquest HD5 5-25 and the Leupold Mark 4 may be for sale ( it's too good of price to pass up even to resell )if anyone is interested. Leupold has M1 turrets )

-------------
A5Camo


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/12/2014 at 10:03
^^^^
It is best to take the brand bashing with a grain of salt. It serves no purpose.
Star Wars guy chimed in and side tracked the whole thread with blind criticism, with a very bad case of the know it alls and, maybe a bit of little man syndrome.

Like he knows what's best for every person on this forum? With all of his stereo typing. He should have his own reality show, all that takes is A huge ego.

God bless him, all the same



Posted By: suprane
Date Posted: December/12/2014 at 10:16
Probably need to apologize to forum moderators. Just read " for sale " rules and see where you cannot talk about selling things on general discussion forums. My bad. Parshal we're blessed with all these choices in this country. Good to be an American.

-------------
A5Camo


Posted By: osprey
Date Posted: December/12/2014 at 20:02
I went to a sporting goods store this afternoon. I checked several of the scopes that have been discussed on this thread all the way till evening. There was only one that I could say there is a noticeable difference, not much, but noticeable the z3.
The rest were a mishmash of picking the specifics that tickle your fancy.
Of course, they all have their strengths and weaknesses. I am almost certain all of those strengths and weaknesses of any one scope WILL very from one consumer to the next. With price, availability and warranty trumping any one of the strengths and/or weaknesses, in that order.

Star Wars guy, not one of these scopes are going to make or break your, mine or anyone else's hunt, that's on the whoever, dealing with countless other idiosyncrasies. Thats why they call it hunting instead of shooting.




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net