That said, I think you should spend more on your scope than on your rifle.
I am at the point where I spend as much on my scopeas I do my rifle.
A 400-500 dollar scope (Zeiss Conquest, Leupold VX3, Sightron S3, Burris Signature series, Bushnell Elite 4200) is noticeably better than a 200 dollar scope.
Yes they are and anyone who thinks differently either hasn't usedthem in the field in order to compare; has eyesight too poor to notice; or has a serious case of denial going on.
A 1300 Dollar Zeiss Diavari is a better scope than the Zeiss Conquest. But the Quality of image to price ratio gets less.
Agreed, this is what I meant about a point of diminishing return. To me the real world advantagesof a 1300 dollar Diavari compared to a 500 dollar Conquest are fairly insignificant.
All I can say is that my scopes gather plenty of light for all legal shooting hours.
Glad to hear it. Maybe you hunt in fairly open country were light isn't as much as an issue as it is for some. Maybe legal shooting time ends earlier where you hunt. Can't speak for you. But, in the deep woods here I can see to shoot
far longer with a Zeiss Conquest than with any scope in the 100 to 200 dollar range.