New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Thought I knew something?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Thought I knew something?

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 17:19
j.chappell View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: March/20/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 17
I thoght that I knew something about optics till I started to read some of these posts, now I am not too sure of myself.
 
I am interested to know how you guys, and maybe gals, rate the big makers right now.
 
Say...Leupold, Bushnell, Burris, Nikon, Zeiss, Sightron.
 
I am interested in scopes of the middle of the road price range say $550 and under. I am not looking for a particular model review more of a "Optics Line Review".
 
Something like a rating of:
 
Leupold VX-3
Nikon Monarch
Bushnell 3200 and 4200
Burris Fullfield II and Signature
Zeiss Conquest
Sightron SII
 
Any rating of the above would be appreciated. I am more interested in optical quality than i am tracking.
 
Oh, by the way I have placed 2 scopes up for sale xx xxx xxxxx xxxx xx xxx xxx xx xxxxxxxxx xx xx xxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxx,
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
 
Thanks.
 
J.


Edited by Chris Farris - March/22/2009 at 21:02
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 18:11
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14324
Best optically in that lineup in my opinion is Zeiss Conquest series, by a very slight margin.  Close behind, I think the 4200, Monarch and VX-3 are pretty comparable to each other, with the 4200 being perhaps the best value for $ spent.  I would also put the Trijicon Accupoint series in the same class as the 4200 optically, but I like its unique reticles so much, I place it in the same class as the Conquest from a value standpoint.  I must say I haven't used the new VX-3 yet, so I can't confirm how significant the reported optical and mechanical improvements over the VX-III are.  I am classifying it based on my experience with VX-III and the fact it's supposed to be superior to VX-III.  It may very well be as good or better than the Conquest; I don't know.  I've never used any Sightron scopes, so I cannot comment on them.  I've never been that impressed with most Burris scopes from an optical standpoint, and I've owned scopes from the Signature, Fullfield, and Short Mag series.  Some of the Signature Selects I've used seemed to be perhaps in the same class as the 4200, Monarch, VX-3 optically, maybe a tad below... to my eyes.

As for the scopes you have for sale, we have a "For Sale" section, and they should be posted there.


Edited by RifleDude - March/22/2009 at 18:12
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 18:28
billyburl2 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2009
Location: Cottonwood, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 3874
To each their own, but IMHO when it comes to a rifle scope, I.E. , the aiming device of the weapon, tracking is much more important than optical clarity. If the weapon cannot put a round where it is aimed, the scope is nothing more than a inefficient monocular.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 18:41
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479
Originally posted by billyburl2 billyburl2 wrote:

To each their own, but IMHO when it comes to a rifle scope, I.E. , the aiming device of the weapon, tracking is much more important than optical clarity. If the weapon cannot put a round where it is aimed, the scope is nothing more than a inefficient monocular.
 
Very true, but if ya can't see it, ya can't.....well, you know the rest. Wink
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 18:57
RONK View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: April/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3199
 Tracking vs optical performance.  The thing is, you don't need to settle for one or the other of those two important qualities. With an upper-medium and higher-priced scope, you must expect and demand both.
 With a cheap scope, you seldom get both, and often get neither.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 19:21
lucytuma View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: November/25/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 5389
Ronk has summed it up in a nutshell, though I feel all the scopes in the original post are more then capable and reliable.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 19:25
Optiman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: March/20/2009
Location: MD
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Leupold #1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 19:25
j.chappell View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: March/20/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Originally posted by billyburl2 billyburl2 wrote:

To each their own, but IMHO when it comes to a rifle scope, I.E. , the aiming device of the weapon, tracking is much more important than optical clarity. If the weapon cannot put a round where it is aimed, the scope is nothing more than a inefficient monocular.
 
Well what I meant was that I don’t mind if instead of 1/4" or 1/2" at 100 yards it is more 3/16" or 3/8".

 

And really tracking has nothing to do with where the reticle is aimed. If your rifle won’t hit where it is aimed then your scope has more than tracking problems.

 

J.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 19:26
j.chappell View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: March/20/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Originally posted by RONK RONK wrote:

 Tracking vs optical performance.  The thing is, you don't need to settle for one or the other of those two important qualities. With an upper-medium and higher-priced scope, you must expect and demand both.
 With a cheap scope, you seldom get both, and often get neither.
 
I realize this but what you ecpect and what you get is not always the case.
 
J.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 19:37
j.chappell View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: March/20/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Best optically in that lineup in my opinion is Zeiss Conquest series, by a very slight margin.  Close behind, I think the 4200, Monarch and VX-3 are pretty comparable to each other, with the 4200 being perhaps the best value for $ spent.  I would also put the Trijicon Accupoint series in the same class as the 4200 optically, but I like its unique reticles so much, I place it in the same class as the Conquest from a value standpoint.  I must say I haven't used the new VX-3 yet, so I can't confirm how significant the reported optical and mechanical improvements over the VX-III are.  I am classifying it based on my experience with VX-III and the fact it's supposed to be superior to VX-III.  It may very well be as good or better than the Conquest; I don't know.  I've never used any Sightron scopes, so I cannot comment on them.  I've never been that impressed with most Burris scopes from an optical standpoint, and I've owned scopes from the Signature, Fullfield, and Short Mag series.  Some of the Signature Selects I've used seemed to be perhaps in the same class as the 4200, Monarch, VX-3 optically, maybe a tad below... to my eyes.

As for the scopes you have for sale, we have a "For Sale" section, and they should be posted there.
 
Thanks for the information. I always thought that Leupold looked fine till I bought a Burris Fullfield II and I'll tell you my Vari-X III's, VX-III's, Vari-X II's, and VX-II's all trail them in all respects. I know a lot will call me crazy but I own Burris, Leupold, Weaver, Swarovski, Redfield, and even an old Bushnell Banner and I am serious when I say the Burris scopes I have are that much better than the Leupolds in all conditions and respects. I seem to be alone in my thinking but I bought my Burris scopes at the same time from the same dealer and the serial numbers are even close, maybe I just got a good few, I dont know. I can tell you this I have a hard time buying Leupold anymore due to the fact that my Burris scopes make them look bad.
 
Sorry about posting the links, I didnt think it was that out of line but I appologize for any infraction.
 
J.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 20:32
hunter12345 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: November/21/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 470
I know back when I was new to hunting and shooting back in the 1980's Leupold was heavily pushed at the local gun shop.So I bought the Vari XII-Vari XIII.My problem was both Leupolds were not the best in gathering light.So I bought the Redfield Ultimate Illuminator which was indeed a better scope for low light hunting.Todays scopes are much improved.My list of scopes that you have listed are a tie for the Zeiss Conquest and the Sightron S2 Big Sky as best scopes.My next pick is the 4200,Nikon Monarch,Burris Signature,3200,Burris FFII I haven't tried the new VX3 but the one I looked through was comparable to the VX7.I own of all these scopes except the Leupold VX3 and all are good scopes.The Sightron S2 Big Sky is my favorite scope.I owned many Leupold scopes over the years but to be honest with you I think there over priced.Leupold has stiff competition from Nikon, Bushnell and Sightron.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 20:41
RONK View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: April/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3199
Originally posted by j.chappell j.chappell wrote:

Originally posted by RONK RONK wrote:

 Tracking vs optical performance.  The thing is, you don't need to settle for one or the other of those two important qualities. With an upper-medium and higher-priced scope, you must expect and demand both.
 With a cheap scope, you seldom get both, and often get neither.
 
I realize this but what you ecpect and what you get is not always the case.
 
J.
 When I spend $500 plus, and it doesn't track, it WILL be returned. Repeatedly if necessary.
 Fortunately, I've never had that problem on anything over $200.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/22/2009 at 20:59
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 7765

I removed your links, please read and abide by the rules that Rifledude has pointed out.

You had to read them and agree to them when you singed up.
 

1.  Keep it clean.  If you have to ask your self whether or not it's clean.........don't post it.  This includes images too, no blood, guts, nudity, etc.  Only respectful "Hero Shots" of harvested game can be posted.  Pictures of bloody game, game hanging or game in the bed of pick-up truck are not respectable.

2.  No personal attacks.  If you think someone is an idiot, (chances are) everyone else does too.  No need to post it.

3.  Do not advertise our competition.  We work hard to gain the respect and support of our customers.  We also offer a 110% Low Price Guarantee.

4.  No religious discussions or politics unless it relates to guns, optics, and or shooting.

5.  PM stands for Private Message.  Do not publicly share PM's without the consent of the sender.

6.  The Optics Talk forum is not to be used as a customer service tool for SWFA customers.  Tracking numbers, Order Status, Credit Card issues, etc. need to be directed to our Customer Service Professionals at 972-617-7056 from 8 a.m -5 p.m CDT or via e-mail at swfa@swfa.com.
 
7.  For Sale ads are to be placed in Member's Trading Post area only.  Read the For Sale Rules prior to selling.
 
-------------------------------------------------
 
For Sale Forum Rules
 
 

This category allows posts only by Optics Apprentice level members (50+ posts) and above. The reason for the posting restriction is that we wanted to avoid the potential problem of people coming in solely for the purpose of selling something, never to return or contribute anything else to the community. This is a service to our members and we don't want to dilute it (or pollute it) with "hit-and-run" posts.
 
If you're a "Optics Grasshopper" member, you can still browse the posts. And if a member has made his email address public, you can email or PM him to ask about the post. Then once you hit Optics Apprentice member status yourself, you'll automatically have posting privileges in this category. 
 
We appreciate your understanding and cooperation.
 
Rules

 

1.  No wanted to buy ads (WTB).

 

2.  Firearms sales have to be done in accordance with state and or federal laws.  FFL to FFL or face to face in states that allow that method.  Check with ATF if you are not sure of the laws in your state. ATF web site

 

3.  No NFA Arms or Parts. http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/index.htm

 

4.  Links to eBay, GunBroker or any other auction sites are allowed.

 

5.  The For Sale Forum is for use by Private individuals, no dealers please.  If you are selling more than one of the same item, then you are a dealer.

 

6.  All items listed for sale MUST include a price.

 

7.  No stepping on someone's post by saying something that decreases their probability of selling their item.

 

8.  All sales and purchases are at the risks of the individuals involved.  The Optics Talk FORUM and or SWFA, Inc. are not responsible/liable for any sales that go uncompensated. We are also not responsible/liable for any item advertised for sale in this area, and the integrity of that product's representation.

 
9.  Keep for sale post in the for sale forums, do not spam other forums pointing to your ad.


Edited by Chris Farris - March/22/2009 at 21:03
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/23/2009 at 09:57
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14324
Originally posted by j.chappell j.chappell wrote:

Thanks for the information. I always thought that Leupold looked fine till I bought a Burris Fullfield II and I'll tell you my Vari-X III's, VX-III's, Vari-X II's, and VX-II's all trail them in all respects. I know a lot will call me crazy but I own Burris, Leupold, Weaver, Swarovski, Redfield, and even an old Bushnell Banner and I am serious when I say the Burris scopes I have are that much better than the Leupolds in all conditions and respects.
 
Then, it seems you've answered your own question.  I would run out and buy a Burris scope then and never look back.  I do agree that Burris is better optically than much of the previous Leupold "Vari-X" generations, whether II or III, but I don't agree when comparing to "VX" stuff, but that's me.  I've done quite a bit of varmint shooting in difficult mirage conditions using VX-III scopes back to back with Burris Signature Selects and found the exact opposite as you.  I also agree that current Burris scopes are better than older Weavers and Redfield.  I find the comparison to Swarovski curious, but if to your eyes Burris is better, it's certainly a much less expensive way to go compared to Swaro and current "VX" Leupolds and that's what I'd buy.  You should feel fortunate that your eyes tell you that Burris is superior, as that will be much easier on your wallet.  I wish it worked that way for me.  Good luck with your decision!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/23/2009 at 10:01
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4625
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

You should feel fortunate that your eyes tell you that Burris is superior, as that will be much easier on your wallet.


We should all be so lucky. Big Smile
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/23/2009 at 12:07
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24220
I thought I knew something...but, when I started typing this it all faded away........Stare
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/23/2009 at 16:04
j.chappell View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: March/20/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Originally posted by j.chappell j.chappell wrote:

Thanks for the information. I always thought that Leupold looked fine till I bought a Burris Fullfield II and I'll tell you my Vari-X III's, VX-III's, Vari-X II's, and VX-II's all trail them in all respects. I know a lot will call me crazy but I own Burris, Leupold, Weaver, Swarovski, Redfield, and even an old Bushnell Banner and I am serious when I say the Burris scopes I have are that much better than the Leupolds in all conditions and respects.
 
Then, it seems you've answered your own question.  I would run out and buy a Burris scope then and never look back.  I do agree that Burris is better optically than much of the previous Leupold "Vari-X" generations, whether II or III, but I don't agree when comparing to "VX" stuff, but that's me.  I've done quite a bit of varmint shooting in difficult mirage conditions using VX-III scopes back to back with Burris Signature Selects and found the exact opposite as you.  I also agree that current Burris scopes are better than older Weavers and Redfield.  I find the comparison to Swarovski curious, but if to your eyes Burris is better, it's certainly a much less expensive way to go compared to Swaro and current "VX" Leupolds and that's what I'd buy.  You should feel fortunate that your eyes tell you that Burris is superior, as that will be much easier on your wallet.  I wish it worked that way for me.  Good luck with your decision!
 

No actually I have never seen a VX-3 to compare it to anything that I have and I never stated anything about Burris being better than my Swarovski's. I did state that they are clearer than my Leupolds.

 

I have been at the range before with one of my Weatherbys equipped with a Swarovski and the guy next to me shooting his "deer rifle" topped with a Simmons tried to tell me that he couldn’t see a difference in the 2 scopes. Well I find it very hard to believe that he couldn’t tell a difference but if that’s what he saw then that’s what he saw.

 

I am just going to say that optics opinions are like any other. Some guys have a favorite and simply will not admit that something else may be better. I use to think that Leupold was king; well I have come down from that podium long ago and now like what I like from a performance stand point and not a name.

 

I looked at a few Nikons today (Buckmasters) and compared them side by side with the same model of VX-II and they made the Leupold look bad. I really never wanted to buy a Nikon due to where they are made and I do not like the reticles or looks of many but when they outperform Leupold by so much its hard not to take a serious look at them.

 

I really wish that I worked for a company capable of performing an unbiased review of rifle scopes. I would test like models for all of the key features both optically and mechanically and make the review public with no bias for all to see. The human eye and mind can cause an array of varying reports.

 

J. 

 
 
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Thought I knew something?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
SWFA's current auctions, something for everyone Chris Farris Firearms 104
What ya think? Son of Ed Rifle Scopes 12
I Know We Are Generous But Come On Chris Farris Tactical Scopes 33
Anybody know about the Sightron 2.5-17.5x huff143 Rifle Scopes 2
Who knows V-Max vs Blitzkings?? 8shots Reloading & Ballistics 7
Help!Need to know if my scope would work on a rife V8Mechanic Rifle Scopes 6
Reverse thinking-fixed power scope? Abitnutz Rifle Scopes 4
Something must be wrong with me! n4ue Rifle Scopes 9
Am I missing something? tx_magnum Rifle Scopes 4
bushnell 6500 or something else michiganman Rifle Scopes 2


This page was generated in 0.406 seconds.