$150 scope VS. $800 scope
11-11-2010, 02:44 AM
#21
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Seagrove N.C. USA
Posts: 7,281
Here is my take on it, just recently bought a new Simmons Prosport, 3-9x50 for my .22, trying to save a little money, retails for $109, and it was a mistake. I had a $250 Bushnell on my last .22 and the difference is very obvious. The Bushnell was so good I could actually see the small .22 hits in the paper where this Simmons has just a slight distortion in the lenses at any setting and magnification, enough that the hits on even the DirtyBird targets are blurry. So I saved maybe a hundred or a hundred fifty, but I've got a scope that's got lousy clarity, it was hard to sight in and at 50 yards there is a slight distortion at every setting--so I'm setting money aside for a better scope and it won't be a Simmons---
Bushnell bough out both Simmons, and Tasco.
Call the tech phone number in the paper work.
I looks like the factory focus setting is wrong.
It could be a factory defect, so ask them to fix, or replace the scope.
JMHO
10-20-2012, 06:59 AM
#24
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,926
No way for agreement
Especially on a forum.
Thank goodness they still sell $100 and less scopes. And not every hunters has good or better eye sight. And not every hunter has big bill folds and great big credit card balances.
I have an inexpensive Bushnell "telescope" that I've used for decades at the rifle ranges. Never shot at dawn or late in the day, so I never needed one that cost $800, that sees better at dawn and dusk.
Some scopes see better in the dark, which for intended purposes, is before or after legal shooting purposes.
Of course, more expensive scopes have advantages. In shadows, they pick out the racks better. And they can make a shooting difference.
But hunters can still shoot with inexpensive scopes, and that can make a hunting difference for some hunters.
Thank goodness they still sell $100 and less scopes. And not every hunters has good or better eye sight. And not every hunter has big bill folds and great big credit card balances.
I have an inexpensive Bushnell "telescope" that I've used for decades at the rifle ranges. Never shot at dawn or late in the day, so I never needed one that cost $800, that sees better at dawn and dusk.
Some scopes see better in the dark, which for intended purposes, is before or after legal shooting purposes.
Of course, more expensive scopes have advantages. In shadows, they pick out the racks better. And they can make a shooting difference.
But hunters can still shoot with inexpensive scopes, and that can make a hunting difference for some hunters.
10-27-2012, 07:22 AM
#25
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,902
If you don't ask a lot from your optics, a cheap scope will do the job. If you are demanding of your optics (shooting in HIGH light, low light, precision shooting, LONG range shooting, dialing in dope, etc etc), then the spread becomes important.
More expensive scopes will generally have better: Clarity, resolution, eye relief, adjustment range, adjustment truth, durability, parallax truth, fog prevention, etc (know I'm forgetting a few, but you get the point).
For example, the difference in a Nikon Prostaff, Buckmasters, and Monarch, in my personal experience, is in their truth across mag adjustment and light transmission. In low light, it is almost impossible to get a prostaff or buckmasters to NOT have a fuzzy halo around the rim at the top mag settings (sometimes in high light for the prostaff), whereas the Monarch does much better.
It doesn't make sense putting a $40 saddle on a $5 horse, but you also don't put a $100 saddle on a $40,000 horse (not exaggerating for those that aren't familiar with performance horses). Sure, if you're not asking much out of your horse, that $100 used salebarn saddle will be fine, buf if you're demanding much out of your riding, i.e. sorting and doctoring cattle for 12hrs or more each day, that saddle will cripple you and your horse both.
I generally spend about the same on my rifle and scope. If I just want a fun rifle to go play with, I buy a $200-300 rifle and a $200 scope and go have a good time. If I want something that I can do some serious hunting with, I'll likely have $700-1000 in the rifle and the same in the scope. Over the bench or off the mat, I can easily have $1500-2000 in the scope, and $2500-4000 in the rifle (or more, depending on how long I stay stubborn with a rifle I need to pitch).
More expensive scopes will generally have better: Clarity, resolution, eye relief, adjustment range, adjustment truth, durability, parallax truth, fog prevention, etc (know I'm forgetting a few, but you get the point).
For example, the difference in a Nikon Prostaff, Buckmasters, and Monarch, in my personal experience, is in their truth across mag adjustment and light transmission. In low light, it is almost impossible to get a prostaff or buckmasters to NOT have a fuzzy halo around the rim at the top mag settings (sometimes in high light for the prostaff), whereas the Monarch does much better.
It doesn't make sense putting a $40 saddle on a $5 horse, but you also don't put a $100 saddle on a $40,000 horse (not exaggerating for those that aren't familiar with performance horses). Sure, if you're not asking much out of your horse, that $100 used salebarn saddle will be fine, buf if you're demanding much out of your riding, i.e. sorting and doctoring cattle for 12hrs or more each day, that saddle will cripple you and your horse both.
I generally spend about the same on my rifle and scope. If I just want a fun rifle to go play with, I buy a $200-300 rifle and a $200 scope and go have a good time. If I want something that I can do some serious hunting with, I'll likely have $700-1000 in the rifle and the same in the scope. Over the bench or off the mat, I can easily have $1500-2000 in the scope, and $2500-4000 in the rifle (or more, depending on how long I stay stubborn with a rifle I need to pitch).
10-28-2012, 09:11 AM
#26
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,186
Here's another $.02. Several responders have already covered the ground that I am going to. So this is probably not much more than an echo at worst and a reinforcement at best. My expereicne is practically identical to Timbercruiser's.
A very long and boring story short, the field performance of hunting optics of any kind is pretty much directly related to the MSRP. The high end stuff that runs around $1000 - $2500 are all superb. They are rugged, crystal clear essentially edge to edge, with phenominal detail catching contrast, and the low light performance is almost perfect. All of these attributes are bonafied advantages in the field. Can everyone drop that kind of coin? Certainly not.
My advice is do your research and spend as much as you can. Decide how much is it worth to your style and frequency of hunting. I hunt a ton. I have hunted in rugged terrain, in swamp bottoms, blowing dust, in 100F, in -30 F, in driving rain, in sleet and snow, etc. I demand high performance and had to save, and save, and save to afford what I use ... which is now top of the line optics.
A buddy of mine pointed out that if I'd forego a soda a day, at the end of a year I'd have about $300-$350 to put in a scope. So do the math .... tf you had intended to spend about a $100, then now you'd have about $400 - $500. You can buy a very good scope in that price range. Save up for 2-3 years and you can more or less afford about anything on the market in hunting scopes. I'm here to tell you that you'll never regret it one iota. i
A very long and boring story short, the field performance of hunting optics of any kind is pretty much directly related to the MSRP. The high end stuff that runs around $1000 - $2500 are all superb. They are rugged, crystal clear essentially edge to edge, with phenominal detail catching contrast, and the low light performance is almost perfect. All of these attributes are bonafied advantages in the field. Can everyone drop that kind of coin? Certainly not.
My advice is do your research and spend as much as you can. Decide how much is it worth to your style and frequency of hunting. I hunt a ton. I have hunted in rugged terrain, in swamp bottoms, blowing dust, in 100F, in -30 F, in driving rain, in sleet and snow, etc. I demand high performance and had to save, and save, and save to afford what I use ... which is now top of the line optics.
A buddy of mine pointed out that if I'd forego a soda a day, at the end of a year I'd have about $300-$350 to put in a scope. So do the math .... tf you had intended to spend about a $100, then now you'd have about $400 - $500. You can buy a very good scope in that price range. Save up for 2-3 years and you can more or less afford about anything on the market in hunting scopes. I'm here to tell you that you'll never regret it one iota. i
10-28-2012, 03:26 PM
#27
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 5,130
"I generally spend about the same on my rifle and scope." Nomercy
+1
Sometime more if the rifle is under $700.
You see, I put the same scope on all my boltguns, so I get the same "sight picture" no matter which gun I'm shooting.
I use Burris Signature Select 4X -16X 44MM with Ballistic Plex Illuminated Reticle
Now that I think about it, my AR wears the same scope also.
I've tried to dumb down this idea of hitting what I'm aimming at, adjusting for parallax, adjusting the power, and compensating for drop to it's lowest common denominator; so that I can make those shot even if there is a very small window of opportunity.
+1
Sometime more if the rifle is under $700.
You see, I put the same scope on all my boltguns, so I get the same "sight picture" no matter which gun I'm shooting.
I use Burris Signature Select 4X -16X 44MM with Ballistic Plex Illuminated Reticle
Now that I think about it, my AR wears the same scope also.
I've tried to dumb down this idea of hitting what I'm aimming at, adjusting for parallax, adjusting the power, and compensating for drop to it's lowest common denominator; so that I can make those shot even if there is a very small window of opportunity.
Last edited by Sheridan; 10-28-2012 at 04:27 PM.
10-28-2012, 10:53 PM
#28
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: PA
Posts: 1,778
11-05-2012, 11:49 PM
#29
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,926
Some things are out of my market
Have seen progressive increases in scope capabilities but there is a limit to the budget.
First, I would never put a $300 or more scope on a 30-30, a short range rifle. But then I go by my eyes and my budget.
I do my eye test; not your eye test. I only shoot what I see. And no one else can know if any shooter is affected by a tinge of night blindness, that would affect the shooting at dawn or dusk or into the shadows of mid-day.
Every year I do a late day test on my scopes. It's strictly a seeing project with no shooting. If the scopes and my eyes pass the test, I keep the scopes and don't worry about an $800 scope.
First, I would never put a $300 or more scope on a 30-30, a short range rifle. But then I go by my eyes and my budget.
I do my eye test; not your eye test. I only shoot what I see. And no one else can know if any shooter is affected by a tinge of night blindness, that would affect the shooting at dawn or dusk or into the shadows of mid-day.
Every year I do a late day test on my scopes. It's strictly a seeing project with no shooting. If the scopes and my eyes pass the test, I keep the scopes and don't worry about an $800 scope.