I've owned every major brand of scope except zeis and Khales. You do get what you pay for. I think it is true that above the $300-$400 range, you might hit a point where the dollars spent are less justified. Most scopes in the $300-$400 range provide more than enough light to shoot beyond legal shooting hours. Most of them have accurate movement/adjustment, do not fog up and will hold a zero throughout the variable adjustment range. Scopes in this price range are also far less likely to require warranty work in my experience. So yes, they are adequate. Does this mean that it is a waste to spend more? Obviously the answer is personal to the purchaser and takes into account the ability to pay. I do believe too many people pay more than they have to becaue they insist on buying new or are unwilling to shop around. I won't pay retail for optics. I've purchased more than a dozen used VariX III for less than $300 and have never had to return one. I've also found deals on swarovski scopes that make them comparable to new leupolds and which allow me to justify the additional expenditure. I do have strong feelings about the cost benefit of binoculars--IMO, the high end ones are worth every penny. This is particularly so if your hunting methods entail many hours of glassing.