I'll likely start off the Texas deer season in a few days with a Sako .264 mounted with a Leupold 3-9 Vari-X II that will be going into its 39th season. The scope has never been off of the gun, and best I can recount it, the gun has had around two thousand rounds through it and has been hunted from the Mexican border through TX, NM, CO, and WY. It has taken elk, muley, antelope, whitetail, hogs, barbado, coyotes, and just about anything else that wandered the mountains or plains. If there have been any significant optical improvements in 39 years, they have had no effect on the leathality of this rig.

Simply peering through a scope in the flourecent lights of a store doesn't really tell you much. Clear, crisp optics are cheap and easy to make these days, and there's no excuse for anybody's scope to be less than stellar, optically (90% of the complaints about "clarity" are related to improper focus).

The problem is that a scope is a sighting instrument, not just a telescope. As such, there are requirements for size, weight, eye relief, lateral eye placement, reticule quality, reticule adjustment, parallax adjustment, field of view, watertightness, mechanical integrity, optical resolution, and finally, finish and appearance. Many of these qualities require trade-offs and compromises due to the laws of physics.

There are many excellent scopes on the market today. There are few makes, however, that have gotten it "right" in combining the optical and mechanical qualities important in a riflescope in a package that is compact, attractive, and reliable. Leupold has consistantly (and for many years) made a first rate optical rifle sight that makes the right compromises to give you eye relief, compactness, low weight, and dependable performance. Most of the other makers are still trying, but haven't quite gotten there.

Insofar as value, the market says it all: The price that a used Leupold commands is a much larger percentage of its new selling price than any other make. The market may not be perfect, but it's hard to argue against.

In the meantime, if you prefer another make of scope, please go ahead and buy it. Otherwise, Leupold prices would rise alarmingly without significant competition. Thanks, guys, for shooting with various Brand X's so that I can afford to keep adding to my Leupold collection!

Someone posted that Leupold may be upgrading their fixed 4X so you might want to check that out. The present 4X is not the equal of some scopes made decades before it in terms of what you can see thru it.



Leupold is an excellent company. Thier scopes are well made, look good, function well and have good optics. I have a bunch of them and like them. There are other brands with better optics however like Zeiss.



I had the occasion to call Weaver and Leupold as I was looking for a scope with unusual dimensions to fit an old rifle. The first call went to Weaver as it seemed that it was an easy fit. You see their website did not list many dimensions of the scope. The person who answered said it was the Simmons co. After some waiting I got someone at what could have been Weaver. After asking simple questions that are not at the site or catalog such as the eyepiece diameter, the length of the objective etc. I was told she would have to call back. I did get called the next day.



Then I called Leupold. I got some lady who had all the information at her fingertips. As fast as I asked the questions I got immediate replies. She also offered custom work and options. I thanked her and complimented her and Leupold for such a professional effort.



I have called Zeiss also in the past and got a real gun guy there. They are a little more rigid however. When I suggested that Zeiss might sell more smaller Conquests I was told that riflescopes are a tiny part of Zeiss. That they were more interested in some sophisticated medical device and that it was a foundation anyway and not a corporation!



Sorry for this being so long. In summary I bought another Leupold. If a Zeiss would have fit that's my first choice.