Nikon vs. Leupold
 

I'm looking at scopes for my T/C Omega .50

I have a VariX II on my .270 and love it, mainly because its the first scope I've had that has not had to be re-adjusted every couple years and this gun really takes a beating all year long.

I had heard it said the new VX line of scopes are of a lessor quality than the older VariX series. Any thoughts on this?

Was looking at the Nikon line of scopes. My biggest priority is to find a scope that will stay on target. I dont want to throw down any more than I have to for this scope.

Are the Nikon Pro Staff or Buckmaster series scopes likely to take the punishment of a magnium blackpowder load?

As far as clarity, Even the cheap Tasco's I've used had always proved to be adequate for the type of terrian I chase white tails.

Thanks,

Mike

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

I had a Buckmaster and was not very happy with it. The eye relief was very critical on the one I had. Most folks have had good luck with them so maybe I just got a poor one. The Pro-Staff is a no bells and whistles scope that is dependable and tough. I don't think you could go wrong with that one. The price is not bad either. I have a Simmons Aetec that I have never had to touch after I got it Zeroed. Its on a 30-06.

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

SM the new VX II is actually optically the same as the old Vari x III by way of same fully coated lens. The design to my understanding is much the same a 3 piece tube with same eye relief and click adjustments. The way I understand it all VX models have received some improvements optically, however whether those improvements are noticable I guess depends on an individuals perspective. I certainly think the VX II is the best of their offerings right now, but would opt for the likes of a Bushnell Elite 3200 and save some cake. It is a great little scope and even with a bit shorter eye relief shouldn't cause you much concern on top of a smoke pole. Mine inline use to wear a 4200 and even with stout loads never came close to the brow.

I am sure Nikons may be good, but one realllly bad experience with a Monarch leaves me suspect of their offerings for my usage still.

Try to do some comparisons for yourself and pick the best one. I use the Leupold 2 piece rings and bases (Double dovetails now) on all my scoped rifles...I think this is an important part many over look when selecting a new scope. Do yourself a favor and buy good bases and rings as well!

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the old VariX scopes a 1-peice tube?

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

I have a Leupold I and III and i think they are one piece tubes also, I also have the Nikon Prostaff 2x7 mounted on a .358 and all three seem to be holding the zero, work well and are nice and bright, The Prostaff and the Leupold I are pretty close in price, no clicks on the Leupold I though. The Vari X III is just sweet, everything turns and clicks smooth, it has a feeling the other two dont have, but to be honest..they all do their job fine, go to the store and play with them, see how they look to your eye, check out the warranty, remebering that a good scope is an investment, it can go from gun to gun, and make your choice, good luck and have fun doing it.....Craig

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

SM My opinion, there are no Nikon's that compare to the Leupold clarity and quality. I have owned Leupold's and 1 PH Swarovski. I dumped the Swarovski, The top LPS Leupold will outperform the Austrian import with a warranty second to none. Many shooters purchase the high priced imports to impress the guys at the range. As far as performance, you can't do better then Leupold.
Good Hunting...;)

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

I have a VX1 2-7 x 33 sitting on my .50 Omega. I am very impressed with this gun and scope combo. I enjoy the extra eye relief and I know the Leupold carries a great warranty in the unlikely event that I will ever need it. Check ebay, there are some good prices there, especially during the off season.

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

I have 2 Leupold Vari XII's and also 2 Nikon Buckmaster scopes. In a side by side comparison there isn't all that much difference in my opinion.The Nikon is a bit longer and a bit bulkier, but optics seem relatively equal.

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

I'm very partial to Nikon scopes. VERY good optics and the mechanism is true and reliable. My 22-250 has a Monarch UCC 6.5-20x44AO on it that is clearer at 20x than my Bushnell Trophy at 3x. I've sized up many Leupolds, and while they are good scopes to be sure, I just don't think they are worth what they get for them. The Monarch UCC easily compares with the Vari-X III's and is much cheaper. However, I don't think that you could go wrong with either brand. I just think that Nikon definately has the edge on optic design and lens coating techniques (95%+ light transmission on the UCC scopes!), probably because of their extensive research and experience in the camera and scientific optics field.

My Sako 75 7mm STW will also wear a Monarch UCC 3.5-10x50...I can't wait to get that rifle, either! :D

IMO, you're going to get more for your money with the Nikon, but if you really like the Leupold or are dead set on "buying American," then I doubt you'll be unhappy with a mid- to top- end Leupold.

Mike

RE: Nikon vs. Leupold
 

SM the Vari X III is a 1 piece tube however the new VX III is not (3 as well like all VX Models). The LPS is however still a 1 piece.

I believe the Vari X I & II's were 3 piece for quite some time, though not 100 % sure, never owned either.