Hi,

I´m looking at buying two new scopes, one 3-12x56 and one 3-8x42 both with illuminated reticles. I´ve heard that Meopta have good optics. Anyone here try them?

Crewe,

I have a Meopta 7x50mm and a 4x32mm and I have been very pleased with them. The 4x32mm was on a 9.3x62mm and was not troubled in the slightest by the recoil and the eye relief seemed better than what Meopta were actually quoting...

As to the down side, IMHO they are not quite as bright as my Swaro and S&B scopes, and perhaps more markedly, they don't handle flare so well in difficult lighting conditions..They also seem to be a little boxy/bulky in their build compared to the top three Europescopes as well...

All in all I think the are excellent value for money and the difference in performance is really me nit picking..

Regards,

Pete

Pete: Thanks for the feedback. From what I hear you pay a lot for brandnames when you buy Swaros et al. I have a Kahles on my 9.3 that I really like, it´s a compact 2-6x42 with an illuminated dot, the rest of my scopes are Leupolds. My retailer says that clarity and light transmission are better on Meopta than on Leupold.

I´ll stick with Leupold for the .375 and the .416 -no need for lowlight consideration.

Meoptas are great scopes, especially for the money. A dirty little secret is they make the lenses for most European makers.

I have 2 Meopta scopes...both are superb.

They are a great value for the price.

Garrett

I bought two Meopta Artemis scopes last year, both 3-9 x 42. I noticed that the low light image is not the same for both, in terms of resolution of a print target at 225m. I put one on a rifle (22 Hornet/Martini) and have started using it for hunting hares. I had been using a rebuilt El Paso Weaver 3-9x40 but light transmission was not good enough. Last time I was out I noticed that the binoculars I was using (20 year old Swarofski 7x42 in very good condition) were about the same in terms of brightness with the Meopta in the near dark.