New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Test of two new scopes
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Test of two new scopes

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2 3 6>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 11:53
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785

This is the second monthly article written for OpticsTalk.com by John Barsness. His own website is riflesandfrecipes.com, where his books and those of his wife, Eileen Clarke, can be ordered, along with various other shooting/hunting items.

 

 

TESTING RIFLE SCOPES

 

            When I get a new rifle scope it gets run through a series of tests to see if it lives up to its advertising. Most of these can be done by anyone at home, with a little patience and equipment, but they do reveal things about scopes that many shooters never find discover. Recently I tested two new scopes, a Sightron 3-9x40 SII Big Sky and a Leupold 3.5-10x40 VX-3.

            The first thing I with any new scope is mount it on a rifle. This not only reveals potential mounting problems (believe it or not, more than one manufacturer has introduced scopes that didn’t have a long enough tube to fir in the rings of a standard Ruger 77 rifle, one of the most popular rifles made) but with the help of a collimator, allows some basic tests of run-out and adjustments.

            “Run-out” is any change in the reticle’s position at different magnifications. This can’t happen with a 1st focal plane reticle, but most scopes are 2nd focal plane. Any noticeable shift on the collimator screen is rare these days, but still occasionally shows up.

            I check the adjustments by centering the reticle on the collimator’s screen, then move the adjustments 16 clicks to the right, 16 clicks up, 16 clicks left, and 16 clicks down. The number of clicks isn’t really important, except that there need to be enough to find any problems; I’ve just been doing 16 so long that it’s second nature.

            I watch through the scope as it’s adjusted, to see if each click results in reticle movement, or if movement is different than it’s supposed to be. Also, the collimator’s grid helps me see if horizontal movement is just horizontal, and not partly vertical. In the end the reticle should be right where it started out, in the center of the grid.

            Next I make some brightness/resolution tests. These start in evening just as the sun goes down, and at first are the kind of casual tests many of us make between different scopes. Can we see and aim at various objects, both near and far? Is the reticle visible as long as the target is visible? Is the view sharp enough to prevent eyestrain?

            But as the light grows dimmer I start aiming at an optical chart of my own design. About any optical chart will do, or even the front page of a newspaper, but this specific chart is a series of black and what lines that start out 1” thick and get thinner toward the bottom of the chart, ending up 1/8” thick. How far down the chart I can differentiate black and white lines indicates both the brightness and resolution of the scope.

            One thing I do, however, that many casual shooters don’t is set the magnification the same for various scopes of a certain class—and I only compare scopes with others in a certain class. Both magnification and objective diameter make a difference in how well we can see with a scope, so it doesn’t make sense to compare a 1-4x20 with a 3-10x40.

            With scopes in the 3-9x40 class I generally set the magnification at 6x, in order to have an exit pupil of about 7mm. After all, I am comparing the optical qualities of the scope, not whether one has a larger exit pupil than another. Also, while the optical system can change a little at 3x and 9x, I’ve generally found that a quality image at 6x also results in a quality image at 3x or 9x as well. During these tests I also fiddle with the magnification and focus slightly, since what’s marked 6x isn’t exactly the same on all scopes, and fooling with the focus can make a real difference.

            Also, each rifle is placed on a steady rest inside a darkened room. Comparing a hand-held scope with a mounted scope is futile, due to wiggles. The darkened room prevents side-light from interfering with the view.

            Eventually even the optical chart becomes too dim to see in natural light. At that point I turn on a 100-watt light bulb outside the room to illuminate the target.

            After those tests I actually shoot the rifle. Sometimes the rifle is a hard-kicker, in order to test the recoil worthiness of some scopes, at least a .300 magnum and maybe even a .416. Sometimes the scope is obviously not meant for a true big game rifle, in which case I test it on a varmint or deer rifle. In any case, the basic accuracy of the rifle must be already well-known, because one common problem is a scope that won’t hold zero. This often results in groups opening up, or shifting, or “two-grouping.”

            I also test the adj

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 12:12
BillyWayne View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: February/27/2009
Location: New Hampster
Status: Offline
Points: 408
Thanks John.  I really appreciate your opinions and reviews. 
I was going through my old Nosler reloading manual for some loads on the 6.5x55 and I noticed it was you that did the review.  Since you like the 6.5 swede I trust everything you say.  Smile 
I might have to check out the VX3 now.  My uncle is a big Leupold fan.  He hates the fact that I have Bushnell Elite scopes.  How would you compare the new VX3 to a 4200?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 12:14
hunter12345 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: November/21/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 470

I'm finding it hard to believe that the VXII beat the Sightron S2 Big Sky.It seem's your using a 3-9x40 Big Sky ? I thought they only made a 3-9x42 S2 Big Sky.I used to have Leupold VXIII on my hunting rifles and replaced them with the Big Sky for the better quality of optics.I believe Koshkin knows who the real winner would be if a Sightron S2 Big Sky was up against a Leupold VXII.  

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 12:14
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4613
Wow, John, that doesn't say much for the Sightron line. I'm glad now I went with a Nightforce, since that scope fit the rings on the Direct Mount like a glove.

Jon
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:17
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
Thanks John. I was actually thinking of trying a Sightron Big Sky after hearing all the praise and I think I'll pass knowing what I already have to be very good.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:19
rifle looney View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: November/21/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2553
Originally posted by hunter12345 hunter12345 wrote:

I'm finding it hard to believe that the VXII beat the Sightron S2 Big Sky.It seem's your using a 3-9x40 Big Sky ? I thought they only made a 3-9x42 S2 Big Sky.I used to have Leupold VXIII on my hunting rifles and replaced them with the Big Sky for the better quality of optics.I believe Koshkin knows who the real winner would be if a Sightron S2 Big Sky was up against a Leupold VXII.  


Dude, this was through Johns testing and what he concluded each individual will have different views he's just stating what he came up with .....I think your last comment was a little rude as well......Shocked


Edited by rifle looney - March/03/2009 at 14:20
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:21
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
Originally posted by rifle looney rifle looney wrote:

Originally posted by hunter12345 hunter12345 wrote:

I'm finding it hard to believe that the VXII beat the Sightron S2 Big Sky.It seem's your using a 3-9x40 Big Sky ? I thought they only made a 3-9x42 S2 Big Sky.I used to have Leupold VXIII on my hunting rifles and replaced them with the Big Sky for the better quality of optics.I believe Koshkin knows who the real winner would be if a Sightron S2 Big Sky was up against a Leupold VXII.  


Dude, this was through Johns testing and what he concluded each individual will have different views he just stating what he came up with .....I think your last comment was a little rude as well......Shocked

i agree i dont read any where in that post that  jb wrote that says dont buy a sightron. he gave his review, and its just one man's view if you dont agree with it fine.


Edited by pyro6999 - March/03/2009 at 14:43
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 14:46
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
hunter12345,
 
You can blame my typing for the error on the objective size. It was a 3-9x42,
 
As several people have already pointed out, I merely reported the results of my tests. Ilya reports his.
 
Individual eyesight not only differs, but individual scopes can as well. In my test the difference between the optics was quite obvious.
 
JB
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:14
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7694
John, thanx for the report.

This is the Z6 you spoke of earlier?  And the VX-3 had comparable brightness to the Z6?

Leupold must have upgraded the glass - or your Vx-3 has great glass, or your Z6 doesn't.  For the price difference, I'd expect the Z6 to be brighter.


And let us all remember that scopes, like women, are measured differently by all eyes.  Except for Kate Beckinsale: if you don't think she's hotter than 2 rats humping in a wool sock, youa re an idiot.  Or something.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:17
swtucker View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: September/03/2008
Location: Low Moor
Status: Offline
Points: 1430
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

John, thanx for the report.

This is the Z6 you spoke of earlier?  And the VX-3 had comparable brightness to the Z6?

Leupold must have upgraded the glass - or your Vx-3 has great glass, or your Z6 doesn't.  For the price difference, I'd expect the Z6 to be brighter.


And let us all remember that scopes, like women, are measured differently by all eyes.  Except for Kate Beckinsale: if you don't think she's hotter than 2 rats humping in a wool sock, youa re an idiot.  Or something.
 
Roll on Floor Laughing   That's the funniest saying I've heard in a long time!  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:21
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
     Shocked     TWO WHATS HUMPING A WHAT!  Hit the(COLD) showers RC!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:28
Idaho Scot View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/16/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 125
Thanks for the info John. 
 
I must admit I am surprised to hear about Sightron's issues with runout and adjustment problems.  Of all the things they based their company on it has been reliability from the beginning.  Very interesting.
 
To me optics and resolution, brightness etc. are very objective due to all the variables and each individuals eyes! But reliability, adjustment, runout, etc. is'nt so much.  Let's hope that you maybe experience the Barness curse, isn't that what you called it in a previous thread! Smile
 
I have only had experience with a Sightron II but has very happy with it.  I have a friend that owns 5 or 6.  I will have to find out his thoughts on this.
 
Thanks for sharing!
 
Scot E.
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:30
Idaho Scot View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/16/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 125

Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

John, thanx for the report.

This is the Z6 you spoke of earlier?  And the VX-3 had comparable brightness to the Z6?

Leupold must have upgraded the glass - or your Vx-3 has great glass, or your Z6 doesn't.  For the price difference, I'd expect the Z6 to be brighter.


And let us all remember that scopes, like women, are measured differently by all eyes.  Except for Kate Beckinsale: if you don't think she's hotter than 2 rats humping in a wool sock, youa re an idiot.  Or something.

 

Kate who?  Not sure I know who you are talking about!  Big Grin hehe  Just playin with ya!

 

Scot E.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:40
hunter12345 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: November/21/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 470
In no way was I being rude, it's a matter of opinion.I own many types of scope including the Leupolds and the Sightron in which John tested.I believe there was a typo error,anyone who owns a Sightron Big Sky and Leupold VXII know that the Sightron is a better scope.I happen to think that Leupold is over priced and that many companies like Nikon, Bushnell & Sightron have taken away from Leupold with there line of scopes which have better optics and value.If you believe that a Leupold VX-II is better, than thats your opinion.My opinion on the VX-II compares to a Nikon Prostaff.Excellent    
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:52
rifle looney View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: November/21/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2553
What I was referring too was your statement saying Koskin knows the real winner!... And you say anyone who owns both knows the sightron is better guess what .....not me....again opinions fair enough.  Wink


Edited by rifle looney - March/03/2009 at 15:54
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 15:53
lucytuma View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: November/25/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 5389
I haven't spent any time with a VXII lately, but I have compared the vxIII with the new VX-3 and came to the same conclusion as Mr. Barsness, there is a visual improvement that doesn't take long to detect.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 16:03
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Rancid,
 
The VX-3 and the Z6 tested very similarly for brightness and resolution. Now, my test does not test brightness to the tiniest degree, but I couldn't see any noticeable difference between the two scopes. They were tested by alternately, and both mounted on rifles that were rested steadily. I also fiddled with the magnification slightly, and the focus.
 
I would also like to point out that the DEVA tests printed in my book, OPTICS FOR HUNTER, had some very interesting numbers. DEVA is a quasi-governmental German organization that tests lots of products as scientifically as possible. In 1993 they tested a bunch of rifle scopes for various properties, inclduring brightness. One of the tests was for light transmission, done on a "spektral photo meter," which measured overall light transmission down to less than 1%.
 
They tested two basic classes of scopes, small hunting variables and medium-sized hunting variables. In each class Zeiss came in first, but Leupold tied them in one class, and came in a close second in another--and this was back when Leupold has just introduced Multicoat 4 in the Vari-X III's, the coating that is now used in VX-II's. Leupold beat out both Swarovski and Schmidt & Bender in light transmission in both scope classes. Here are the numbers:
 
Zeiss 1.25-4x24:              Daylight  94.5%       Twilight  92.9%
Leupold 1.5-15x20:          Daylight  91.6%       Twilgiht  91.1%
Swarovski 1.5-4.5x20:     Daylight 91.0%         Twilight  87.7%
S&B 1.25-4x20:                Daylight 88.9%         Twilight  85.9%
 
Zeiss 2.5-10x48:               Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Leupold 3.5-10x50:           Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Swarovski 3-12x56:          Daylight 91%           Twilight 87%
S&B 3-12 (obj. unlisted)    Daylight 89%           Twilight 87%
 
Now, these tests are over 15 years old, but even in 1993 the notion that German (or Austrian) optics somehow possesed a magic advantage over everything else was not indicated by GERMAN tests made on GERMAN equipment. Ever since then I have always ben very skeptical of any claims of such-and-such a scope being vastly "brighter" than another, especially when the evidence is a shooter who just paid over $1000 for his very first Euro-scope.
 
Yes, the science of optics was pretty much developed in Germany. I have visited the towns and the factories. So were rifles. But that doesn't mean that in the modern world there are certain magical secrets, protected by European elves, that no other industrial nation can ever possess. In fact a lot of Germans trained in optics emigrated to the U.S., the origin of such names as Bausch & Lomb and Leupold.
 
Now, maybe if had been looking at Kate Beckinsdale instead of an optics chart, then the test might have turned out differently. But in this case it didn't.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 16:04
big boar View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/26/2009
Location: ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 77
Rancid Coolaid, very funny, sounds like something from Redneck comedy Tour.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 16:18
big boar View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/26/2009
Location: ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 77
Mr Barsness, thanks for your input, I have your optics book and REALLY recommend it. I refer to it every time I'm looking at getting a new scope or binoc, big help. This site helps a lot, nice to get other opinions. BB
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 17:18
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7694
Originally posted by John Barsness John Barsness wrote:

Rancid,
 
The VX-3 and the Z6 tested very similarly for brightness and resolution. Now, my test does not test brightness to the tiniest degree, but I couldn't see any noticeable difference between the two scopes. They were tested by alternately, and both mounted on rifles that were rested steadily. I also fiddled with the magnification slightly, and the focus.
 
I would also like to point out that the DEVA tests printed in my book, OPTICS FOR HUNTER, had some very interesting numbers. DEVA is a quasi-governmental German organization that tests lots of products as scientifically as possible. In 1993 they tested a bunch of rifle scopes for various properties, inclduring brightness. One of the tests was for light transmission, done on a "spektral photo meter," which measured overall light transmission down to less than 1%.
 
They tested two basic classes of scopes, small hunting variables and medium-sized hunting variables. In each class Zeiss came in first, but Leupold tied them in one class, and came in a close second in another--and this was back when Leupold has just introduced Multicoat 4 in the Vari-X III's, the coating that is now used in VX-II's. Leupold beat out both Swarovski and Schmidt & Bender in light transmission in both scope classes. Here are the numbers:
 
Zeiss 1.25-4x24:              Daylight  94.5%       Twilight  92.9%
Leupold 1.5-15x20:          Daylight  91.6%       Twilgiht  91.1%
Swarovski 1.5-4.5x20:     Daylight 91.0%         Twilight  87.7%
S&B 1.25-4x20:                Daylight 88.9%         Twilight  85.9%
 
Zeiss 2.5-10x48:               Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Leupold 3.5-10x50:           Daylight 94%           Twilight 92%
Swarovski 3-12x56:          Daylight 91%           Twilight 87%
S&B 3-12 (obj. unlisted)    Daylight 89%           Twilight 87%
 
Now, these tests are over 15 years old, but even in 1993 the notion that German (or Austrian) optics somehow possesed a magic advantage over everything else was not indicated by GERMAN tests made on GERMAN equipment. Ever since then I have always ben very skeptical of any claims of such-and-such a scope being vastly "brighter" than another, especially when the evidence is a shooter who just paid over $1000 for his very first Euro-scope.
 
Yes, the science of optics was pretty much developed in Germany. I have visited the towns and the factories. So were rifles. But that doesn't mean that in the modern world there are certain magical secrets, protected by European elves, that no other industrial nation can ever possess. In fact a lot of Germans trained in optics emigrated to the U.S., the origin of such names as Bausch & Lomb and Leupold.
 
Now, maybe if had been looking at Kate Beckinsdale instead of an optics chart, then the test might have turned out differently. But in this case it didn't.



From 15 years ago, I would believe it.  there was a time when Leupold made the best stuff; and in my opinion, it was that golden era that Leupold now surfs on.

I would also agree that Zeiss probably would have won it then (and probably now too) but I'd bet a current test with similar criteria and benchmarks would yield very different results.

Finally, one scope is not ever representative of the entire line or even of that model.  There is variation within a product line, sometimes for good, sometimes not.


John, you know far more than me regarding optics, as does ILya; however, I have had optics in the field, I've had optics on the battlefield, and I know what my eyes like and what they don't.  An absolute test is a great thing, but - and I'll bet you agree with this - it doesn't me sqaut to me if I don't trust the optic and if I don't like the way the optic works or looks in the real world.  I am all about statistically valid testing and outcomes, but I don't put too much stock in them.  I've owned $400 rifles that could shoot 1/3MOA out to 500 yards, and that is a rarity indeed, but it happens, and it happens with optics too.  Sometimes the stars align for and align against.


Again, I appreciate your input and your expertise.  I'm just a dumb red-neck stumbling through life trying not to hurt myself too badly or do something too stupid.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 18:48
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
And I thank you for your input, and agree on many points.
 
One problem I ran into, however, when publishing the DEVA tests in the first place was that many shooters refused to believe it even then. They were included in the book at the insistence of my publisher, and even though Leupold had been producing Multicoat 4 scopes for close to a decade by the time the book was published in 1999, there was the same sort of reaction to any such tests that is still encountered.
 
One thing I have consistently seen in optics is that many people absolutely believe that price is an THE indicator of quality. Right now I know people who believe Nightforce optics HAVE to tbe much better than anything that costs less, when the lenses are made in the same factory in Japan that makes Bushnell Elites and the glass for many other scopes. In fact, some people don't want to believe that Nightforce glass isn't made in Germany.
 
I am not arguing with your conclusions. I just try to report what I find. I don't think Leupold makes the absolute best scopes in the world. There are too many factors that go into "best" to make that sort of judgment. But I do try to test every scope I get thoroughly, and try to test the same company's scopes over and over again, year to year. For instance, right now I am getting in a new Zeiss Conquest 3-9x, a new Burris Fullfield II 3-9x, and a Nightforce 5.5-20x (which I bought with my own money, not just as loaner). I'll be reporting on them too, from time to time--and I have been testing and using Conquests and Fullfield II's for years now. In fact, Burris offered me one of the 30mm Tactical FFII's to test when I requested the latest version. I was tempted, but after thinking about requested the same old 3-9x model that has been around for a while now, since results from that will be more directly comparable to the older scopes.
 
As I have also pointed out before, I don't depend only on my tests. I also talk to retailers for feedback on how their customers like certain scopes, and how many come back for repairs--and what failed. This is more than a sample of one.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 18:55
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18338
Originally posted by John Barsness John Barsness wrote:

And I thank you for your input, and agree on many points.
 
One problem I ran into, however, when publishing the DEVA tests in the first place was that many shooters refused to believe it even then. They were included in the book at the insistence of my publisher, and even though Leupold had been producing Multicoat 4 scopes for close to a decade by the time the book was published in 1999, there was the same sort of reaction to any such tests that is still encountered.
 
One thing I have consistently seen in optics is that many people absolutely believe that price is an THE indicator of quality. Right now I know people who believe Nightforce optics HAVE to tbe much better than anything that costs less, when the lenses are made in the same factory in Japan that makes Bushnell Elites and the glass for many other scopes. In fact, some people don't want to believe that Nightforce glass isn't made in Germany.
 
I am not arguing with your conclusions. I just try to report what I find. I don't think Leupold makes the absolute best scopes in the world. There are too many factors that go into "best" to make that sort of judgment. But I do try to test every scope I get thoroughly, and try to test the same company's scopes over and over again, year to year. For instance, right now I am getting in a new Zeiss Conquest 3-9x, a new Burris Fullfield II 3-9x, and a Nightforce 5.5-20x (which I bought with my own money, not just as loaner). I'll be reporting on them too, from time to time--and I have been testing and using Conquests and Fullfield II's for years now. In fact, Burris offered me one of the 30mm Tactical FFII's to test when I requested the latest version. I was tempted, but after thinking about requested the same old 3-9x model that has been around for a while now, since results from that will be more directly comparable to the older scopes.
 
As I have also pointed out before, I don't depend only on my tests. I also talk to retailers for feedback on how their customers like certain scopes, and how many come back for repairs--and what failed. This is more than a sample of one.
Taz will test Burris for you...


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 19:12
big boar View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/26/2009
Location: ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 77
Mr Barsness, just because a factory makes lenses for a number of different companies, does this mean that all of the lenses are of the same QUALITY? Would a scope manufacturer not dictate to the lense supplier what standards of quality are to be met and also test to make sure the lenses met the quality paid for? 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 19:24
BobinNH View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: February/14/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 18
Any tests like the above that are not 15 years old?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/03/2009 at 19:26
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
Yes, but not in english.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2 3 6>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Test of two new scopes"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
two scopes / two eyes / too funny Rich Coyle Rifle Scopes 63
New member new scope questions P&Y Rifle Scopes 9
two new scopes, quick review ccoker Rifle Scopes 5
Need advice and new scope wolverine3759 Rifle Scopes 3
Multiple Rifle Scope tests from Europe..REAL TESTS SAKO75 Rifle Scopes 6
Looking for New Scope for AR15 CycloneMan Rifle Scopes 6
Leatherwood Uni-Dial scope test Bob the nailer Member's Tests and Reviews 8
How to test a scope? Vladimir1m Rifle Scopes 13
Tests to compare scopes in low light dr_deerhunter Rifle Scopes 7
New rifle (again), need new scope (again) bugsNbows Rifle Scopes 10


This page was generated in 0.375 seconds.