Been offered some deals on pentax scopes ,understand they are made by Burris any body got any advice

I have never owned a Pentax scope but have looked through some of them. The Lightseeker series seemed OK but not exceptional and the gameseeker is inferior to other makes of scopes as far as clarity of sight picture. I would pick up a Lightseeker if priced right at somewhat of a bargain. I hunted with a guy last year that has a Gameseeker on a 7mmRemMag and the scope seems to hold zero very well but again not good to look through.

i got one or two - they're certainly not of the optical of swaro, but they hold OK & i can see a PD just fine through them

My Gameseeker is OK on my rimfire, but I don't think I'd put one on a serious big game rifle. Even my Nikon Pro-Staff scopes are better.

I've never had a Lightseeker, so I can't comment to that one, but I assume they are better quality.

A friend has a Pentax on a .458. I can't recommend them.

buliwyf wrote:

quote:

A friend has a Pentax on a .458. I can't recommend them

What Pentax??? And why?

There are a number of different models out there, from the entry-level GameSeeker to the LightSeekers, which compare very favorably to the Nikon Monarchs and Burris Signatures in terms of resolving power, edge-to-edge clarity, light transmission and image definition/contrast.

I just put a Pentax Whitetails Unlimited 3-9x50 on a .308 WCF yesterday and am impressed with the optics as well. THe image resolution at dark was excellent and ranks with scopes costing a good bit more.

The Pentax Pioneers, the equivalent of the Burris FFIIs, are good, solid, no-frills scopes at an affordable price.

The GameSeekers are OK and for the cost are as good as you will find in the $100 price range. They have the "cheap" look to them, however, and the resolution around the edges will give you a headache if you spend much bench time looking through them. For a utility grade item, though, they'd do fine as the internals are pretty ruggedly built.

1.5 -5 Pentax. POS. You just put a POS on your .308. Won't hold agjustments at all and has very limited eye relief.

Really? Optics are my life, so I think I have the ability to separate the wheat from the chaffe.

And I base my assessments on a number of performance factors in critical areas.

They're not necessarily my favorite optics, but I've had several Pentax scopes over the years and have had ZERO problems with them.

What procedures do you use to test your optics since you came up with such a persuasive and telling conclusion of "You just put a POS on your .308. "Won't hold agjustments at all and has very limited eye relief?"

Hmmm...I just checked my latest Pentax and measured the eye relief (for me) at 3.05 to 3.75 inches. Pentax lists optimum eye relief at 3.1 to 3.8, so this falls pretty close to what I measured -- and those numbers are better than a number of popular scopes out there.

What Pentax scopes have YOU owned and used extensively to come up with such conclusions?

I use a Pentax Pioneer 4.5-14 on my 300WSM and holds zero just fine. I can't afford the higher price optics and have found that Pentax are pretty good for the price.

My only complaint is the AO is hard to turn and the variable zoom moves the entire eyepiece instead of a ring like most scopes.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
Really? Optics are my life, so I think I have the ability to separate the wheat from the chaffe.

And I base my assessments on a number of performance factors in critical areas.

They're not necessarily my favorite optics, but I've had several Pentax scopes over the years and have had ZERO problems with them.

What procedures do you use to test your optics since you came up with such a persuasive and telling conclusion of "You just put a POS on your .308. "Won't hold agjustments at all and has very limited eye relief?"

Hmmm...I just checked my latest Pentax and measured the eye relief (for me) at 3.05 to 3.75 inches. Pentax lists optimum eye relief at 3.1 to 3.8, so this falls pretty close to what I measured -- and those numbers are better than a number of popular scopes out there.

What Pentax scopes have YOU owned and used extensively to come up with such conclusions?

Thank you Bobby. You do know what the real skinny is!

Bobby,

Would you kindly comment on the following.

It seems that the value of a scope (or any optic) relies on the quality and durability of its construction, not just the quality of the glass.

I've owned 1 BSA scope and found it to be optically satisfactory for my uses (on a 22lr plinking rifle), but mechanically, it just seems cheaply constructed.

There are (as I recall) only a handful of lens grinders, so perhaps 5 or 6 brands may have identical pieces of glass in them (coatings and QC may also play a differentiating role). It is the ability to MOUNT and MOVE the optic within the scope tube that truly contributes to price differences.

I sold camera equipment in the early 70's (yes... decades of technological improvements since then!!). And recalled that the optics of Nikon, Pentax, Canon and Olympus were all comparable (discerning photog's claimed to be able to distinguish printed photos by camera taken... used bull-food!!!). Leica and Hasselblad ground their own - and yes, you could see a difference there.

I have a bias toward Leupold, primarily because of their customer service. Perhaps my eyes aren't as discerning as they once were. But I probably would buy Nikon or Pentax if money were a bit tighter (and may become so).

Not sure if this answered many of your questions, but I'm curious as to whether my thoughts on scope construction are valid.

Mike

Yes, durability is a factor in certain circles, but I have seen Leupys go south just as I have BSA and Cabela's Pine Ridge. In fact, the ONLY scope to take on water when my family was wiped out by a flood in 1997 was a 2x EER Leupold.

When you get to the mid-range scopes costing more than a couple hundred bucks, though, I consider them all to be sufficiently durable, though you'll get the occasional exception with ANY brand.

As to customer service, you are paying for that with Leupold when you buy the scope. That's part of the reason they are more expensive than anything comparable (and also cost more than some scopes which are arguably better than the gold-ringed items).

Yes, Leupys are good, solid scopes and will serve you well. My favorite part about them happens to be the consistently-repeatable tracking (I do despise the outdated friction adjustments, however.) But they are far from the final word in today's optics. Unlike past decades, there are ample choices for today's discriminating hunters.

As to Nikon, their CS is nothing to sneeze at, and their warranty is LIFETIME as well. When a Monarch 4-12x40 AO took the brunt of the impact when a 6.5-06 hit the floor during a photo shoot, I packed it up, sent it in and explained clearly what happened -- and that it was my fault. Less than 2 weeks after I sent it in, I had it back -- and if memory serves, 9 total days elapsed.

There was no charge.

By the way, I don't use Nikons or Conquests or Pentax WUs because they cost less than comparable Leupolds. I use them because of how they perform. Some of the differences are minor and not always easily detectable, but they do exist. And to reiterate, other than the cheapie Rifleman series, there is nothing wrong with a Leupold.

Thanks Bobby,

Clearly stated and understood. I am going to consider a Pentax or Nikon for my next scope. I appreciate your comments on both QC and CS.

Mike

I have two of the Whitetails Unlimited model and two other Lightseekers. All in all, I'm very favorably impressed with them.

I also own one Leupold VX-3 and two Nikon Monarchs and a Burris Signature. The Pentax scopes have superior optics to my other scopes, but that may just be the particular models that I own. A visit to Bass Pro Shops or Cabelas, etc. will easily allow you to make head-to-head comparisons.

I've had 2 Pentax scopes and the glass and features are fine. Unfortunately, they both had to go back for repairs (fogging and loose reticle) and one has been back twice. That's not unexpected I guess, as I am rough on scopes. I've had Leupolds and Kahles back to the shop as well as Bushnells and Redfields. The real problem is that it took 4 months to get one of the Pentax scopes back and then it fogged again the next time I took it hunting. The other times I sent scopes back to Pentax it took 4-5 weeks to get them back. That is more time than any of the other brands I've sent back. Leupolds are usually back inside of 10 days.

Guys,

I bought a couple of Pioneers with the BP reticle to put on rifles with relatively light recoil (.270 Win and .264 Win Mag) to release Zeiss Conquests for use on rifles with heavier recoil. The price was definite right!

The scopes seem clear enough to use in the field. I do not have any information on the recoil hardiness of these scopes. I can't imagine the .270 is going to beat up a scope, but am a little concerned about the .264 Win Mag.

Anyone have any information on their recoil handling capability?

Thanks,

I just picked up one of the Pioneer 3-9x40s from from Doug at Camera Land as well. It is the exact same scope as a Burris FFII. As far as recoil durability, I had a Burris FFII 3-9x40 on a .375 H&H for a couple of years and even took it on a moose hunt in Canada a few years ago. I put a bunch of rounds through the .375 and had zero problems with the scope. My hunting buddy has had a FFII on his .375 for years with no problems and he has used it for load development as well as hunting so the scope has seen a lot of rounds. He also has one on his .300 Ultramag and has had no issues. I would say they are pretty hardy when it comes to recoil.

Just returned from the range. Sighted in one of the Pioneers on a relatively light recoil rifle ... a Mark X in .264 Win Mag. Is mounted in Leupold QRW rings on custom bases.

Good visibility ... adjustment increments seem a little large, but definitely useable. I think it'll be OK and will meet the intended purpose ... by no means spectacular but OK. Will allow me to use the Conquest that was on the rifle on another rifle with heavier recoil.