ORIGINAL: StrutnBPS
A scope capturing light has nothing to do with money. VapoDog, they just don't get it do they?
Using my"Trashco", I can stay in the woods a lot later than my best friend who has a Lepoud. Proven time and time again. PERIOD. I shot a buck two years ago when a guy hunting near me was already opening the door to his truck. He was amazedthat I was still in the stand and could SEE.If you want a scope that captures and holds light, hell throw a 56mm on there. I hunt very thick places that get dark a lot faster, so I use a 50mm. Its not hard, bigger hole equals more light. The darker it gets, the lower power you need to have your scope on.
I tell you what. Give Bill Jordan and some of the other celeb hunters a Trashco to sport around on tv with a $1,000,000 marketing budget. And we will see how many Trashco's get put on hunter's rifles next season. Having a Business degree, trust me, I know all of the marketing scemes.
I am not putting down any other scope. I am simply saying that you can pay $150-$200 for a scope that will work just as good and last just as long as the $800 or $1,500 ones.
Is a Lexus better than a Toyota? Is an Infiniti better than a Nissan? Is a Acura better than a Honda?
THEY ARE ALL MADE BY THE SAME COMPANIES!!!!!!!!!! MARKETING MARKETING MARKETING!!!!!!!!!! Can someone say MARKETING!!!!!!!!
Everybody has thier right for opinion, but some of this stuff is just too much. My job in life is to test optics. I have been in fiber and classical optics for 10 years. We as a company do not buy lenses, thin film filters for a higher price just because of the name. We will buy on the bases of QA and a little on relationship with the supplier.I can assure you, you pay thru the nose for transparency, back reflection and how close they can match the index of refraction with the air. And the price goes up exponentially. ForBR of -35db, you might pay 5 dollars afiber end. But for BR of less than -60dB, you pay 55 dollars for a component.
I can assure you that all tascos I have owned or looked at was horrible pieces of junk. But I am sure there are good ones out there. First test they have failed that I have yet to see Leupold fail. The box test. How many of you have done this I wonder?
Second was horrible parralax. No excuse for this, but for every scope I see under 100 dollars, it amazes me. And the cheap bushnells and simmons with AO are the worse. How many have ever tested this out.
Resolution. There's a great article in last months american rifleman that explains this pretty well. They even give you a sample sheet from the USAF. Not only is this type of sheet excellent for resolving resolution, assuming lense shapes are neglable, and BR is less than -60dB, but also will show lense quality.