quote:

Originally posted by Aussie Powder Burner:
Warrior
The Leupold VX7 are to be deleted. They are to be replaced with VX6 which will be 6 multiplier scopes with variable ranges similar to Swarovski Z6.
Pricing and optical quality will be interesting.
I don't think the VX7 competed in optics / sales to the euro scopes discussed here.
My opinion on optics pricing is that each time you double the price you get approx 5% better poor light performance.
As with any high performance instrument as the price increases and volume decreases the measured advantage is never linear but a diminishing return for the $ spend.
I agree totally with the "good enough and best analogy". The reson I have a lot of Leupolds is because like many here I have a lot of rifles..

Cost is indeed a negative for the better scopes. As I have gotten older the better optics in the Euro's realy begins to pay-off

quote:

Originally posted by Arild Iversen:
First of all, a 30 mm tube does not give any more "light gathering" than a 1".
The 30 mm has more room for adjustment and is a bit stiffer, that´s all.

Absolutely true, except for the “STIFNESS” because most of those scopes have two-piece tubes!

The exit pupil is the doorway to gathering light! The human eye cannot utilize more light than a 5mm exit pupil can produce. Of course the coating and lens quality does make the finer points of clarity available to that human eye. The light gathering has absolutely nothing to do with the diameter of the tube in a scope, or the size of the objective lens that is required to produce the 5mm exit pupil. About 40mm is optimum size for that purpose. The exit pupil has to do with the size of the optic lens inside the scope where the image is flipped from up side down to right side up, and the size of that circular image on the center lens at that point is where the amount of available light is generated!

I think we are getting off into something that doesn't exist. Nobody here is telling anyone not to buy the most expensive scope he wants, and can afford, but lets not get away from the facts here. 5% gain in clarity, and light, plus even 50% higher cost, (which is a very optimistic assumption) in the cost of manufacture of the high end scope doesn't justify a 300% higher cost to the customer.

Like someone above said I use a lot of different scopes on my rifles, because I have over 50 scoped rifles, and there is no way I could afford to use one of the very high dollar scopes on all of them, even if I thought they were worth the price, which I simply do not!

If I place $3K scopes on all my scoped rifles I would have $150,000 tied up in glass. $150K will buy a lot of hunting. Even three rifles scoped with $3K scopes would almost pay for a seven day buffalo hunt!

Of course I guess if you have to ask the price of a Green colored scope with a little eagle on the side, you can't afford one, but I don't care if I was a multi-millionaire, I would not pay $3K for a rifle scope when I can spend under $500 for one that will do anything I need to place shots on game, and put the other $2500 on a trophy fee, or pay for a roundtrip airline ticket to Africa. A Leupold Veri-X III will do it for me! Others may do as it pleases them!

quote:

Originally posted by Eland Slayer:
I'm posting this here because I know many of you who hunt Africa frequently have a lot of knowledge regarding these brands.

I have used and sold most scopes over the years. For a Safari rifle or close range rifle of any kind, I prefer the Trijicon 1x4x24 with post/triangle in amber. For medium caliber double rifles, I prefer the Leupold 3x9x33 Ultralight with LR reticle. My favorite scopes, period, are the Burris Xtreme Tactical; they are unbeatable for clarity, aimability, and quick adjustment. They just don't look right on a classic hunting rifle. On bolt guns, I prefer a Leupold or Burris LRS, also like Schmidt & Bender and Doctor. I've also seen some Swaroskis I like as well. Dollar for dollar, the Leupold & Burris' are the best.

Mike

Leupold for me and you DON'T have to go to the high dollar scopes to get the performance...Leupold builds the expensive one to get a share of the high dollar market...the
Vari-X III is all yu need...and they work...all the time or Leupold fixes them!!

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:


I think we are getting off into something that doesn't exist. Nobody here is telling anyone not to buy the most expensive scope he wants, and can afford, but lets not get away from the facts here. 5% gain in clarity, and light, plus even 50% higher cost, (which is a very optimistic assumption) in the cost of manufacture of the high end scope doesn't justify a 300% higher cost to the customer.

It may not justify the cost of the scope to you. I shot a deer at last legal shooting light this year. By the time I got to it to gut it I couldn't see back to my stand. I did shoot it a ways out, but not that far. I had to fiddle around to get comfortable to shoot. In that very poor light I was shooting a deer on a hay field, and wanted it DRT because reference marks to try to find a blood trail were about non existent. The S & B I used was enough to allow me to be absolutely certain of what I was doing. Last year I passsed on a couple of comparable but closer shots using a Zeiss Conquest which I consider superior to any of the Leupys I have used or compared to the Conquests. I passed because I was just not completely certain, and that was in a little better light.

Can a shot justify the kind of money S & B commands? Maybe not one deer. But... being able to make a shot that IMO I would have passed on with anything less and being able to place that shot perfectly and not have a hard tracking job does add a lot of value. I think I will continue to use the scope for a lot of years. I doubt I will ever want for more glass. That has a value. Just knowing I have the option of that rifle and scope and that it will be the best I can do adds value.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
If I place $3K scopes on all my scoped rifles I would have $150,000 tied up in glass. $150K will buy a lot of hunting. Even three rifles scoped with $3K scopes would almost pay for a seven day buffalo hunt!

I have long believed that the high cost of the Euro scopes fits the Euro market because most of their shooters are only allowed a very limited number of rifles.

Here in the US on the other hand we tend to have more than "a rifle or two". Because of this we then to use what works without worrying about chasing the "perfect scope".

Your style of hunting may also have a impact on your decision making with regard to this subject. If you are not mobile then a heavy scope and rifle may be to your advantage. Most heavy set ups are easier to hold steady. If you are mobile and climbing, you are probably going to look at a lighter rig. IMO; a 14-15 oz scope seems about the breaking point for me. Any heavier and I would not like to carry it on what I will refer to as a mountain rifle.

EZ

quote:

Here in the US on the other hand we tend to have more than "a rifle or two". Because of this we then to use what works without worrying about chasing the "perfect scope".

This certainly makes a difference when one owns plenty rifles. Here in SA we are limited to 3 rifles and 1 handgun, unless one registers as a dedicated hunter or collector. Even putting 3 $1500 scopes is too much for our average hunter.

Here in SA the majority of hunters that I have contact with buy either Lynx or Leupold. The best after sales service go to Lynx; they have their own workshop here and can change reticles to what you prefer. Their service is quick and good and that counts a lot, they do not have to send a scope overseas for service and repairs.

And that is the same story for Leupold in the States.

Warrior

quote:

Originally posted by 470EDDY:
Leupold for me and you DON'T have to go to the high dollar scopes to get the performance...Leupold builds the expensive one to get a share of the high dollar market...the
Vari-X III is all yu need...and they work...all the time or Leupold fixes them!!

YES!! Who cares about the high-end Eurotrash anyway??

If you spend enough time rolling around in the dirt with guns getting smashed around by clients (and staff!! ) ... you will find that the regular Leupold scopes hold together better than most Euro scopes over time - especially variable scopes.

Give me a VX-3 anyday over a 'high-end' deal...

quote:

Originally posted by Code4:
I'm no Syncophant and will speak my mind.

Code4, good on you, bro.

quote:

Originally posted by Eland Slayer:
To be a little more specific.....
The reason I'm asking the question is because I'm looking at putting together a new "go to" rifle within the next year or two. Whatever scope I choose MUST have a minimum of a 30mm tube and 50mm objective because I do a lot of hunting in low-light conditions (dawn and dusk)..

I don´t know if it is stupidity, ignorance, lack of experience or a devilish urge to stir the pot, but some of the answers to this question get this old man shaking his head in wonder.

If he asked for what to use on a DG rifle, or for mainly day light hunting, or for rolling around in the dirt with, or which to choose if usefullness/price was a big issue, or if weight and utter ruggedness counts a lot; I could understand.
But not if one carefully read what Eland Slayer says above.

I don´t claime to have the answer to his question, but based on my own experience I would go for a Zeiss Victory Diavari 2,5-10x50.
It has Lotu Tec coating, is fairly light and has 3,5 " eye relief.
It has FFP reticles, but I find this feature not an hindrance neighter at close or long shots.
It is not true as some say that the reticle will block the view of your target/game as you crank up the magnification. The reticle size will always be constant to the size of your target.

I have this scope on my lightweight Kimber Montana in 308 Win.
This is my small game / lesser deer / steep hill rifle and the combo work wonders, at least for me.

There will of course be other scopes that can fulfill Eland Slayers need just as good, but this is a good option.

quote:

Originally posted by Arild Iversen:
I don´t know if it is stupidity, ignorance, lack of experience or a devilish urge to stir the pot, but some of the answers to this question get this old man shaking his head in wonder.

You're not the only one.