For a simple 200-300 yard deer rifle, I have been buying elite 4200's. I have two of em. Both demo's and both under 300. I hate the bushnells' warranty. Its really up to them.

But I also just bought a VXII 3-9X40 new for $250 and every bit as good as elite 3200's. But you have the warranty of Leupold.

I put a 3200 on my 460S&W and I realize not too many scopes can handle that abuse. I went thru a weaver before that. So the scope slipped. I tried 3 different rings. and the maximas holds the best. But due to the scratch marks on the scope housing, bushnell will not fix under warranty.

So my 460 now wears a Fixed 4X loop. And when the recticle takes a dump, they will fix it.

"But due to the scratch marks on the scope housing, bushnell will not fix under warranty."

Sounds like you now own 26 scopes.


So, buy demo's at half price but insist on the full warranty.

I like the concept.

Thanks !!!

3200's are not demos. Just my 4200's are demos from cameralandny. Very clear optics. They are on a 7mm-08 long range rifle, and a 308 win. I don't expect them to take a dump.

But anything I put on my 460S&W, or 454, I don't expect them to make it past 1500 rounds. I hope the fixed power makes it a tad more resilent.

For that money I'd look at Burris and Nikon.

I've had two VX-I's to be exact. The second one I bought from a friend after it failed him and he was fed up with it and just wanted it gone. I got it super cheap, got it fixed and resold it. I never even mounted it. That being said the optics were pretty crappy in it too.

If you have good luck with Leupolds, then by all means use them. Not saying you shouldn't, I'm just saying my opinion is that there are better scopes out there for the money. That's not to say that Leupolds are bad, because the higher end ones aren't and they have a hell of a warranty. However, you can still get a lot better scope for the money from several other manufacturers and I'm a fan of getting the most for my money.

As for the cheaper scopes, I think you and I have a pretty similar opinion. I've not had them fail, but I'm not a huge fan of them either. In the comparisons I've written where I've compared the VX-I to the cheaper Simmons and Tasco's it's simply to show how bad the Leupold really is. Not that the Simmons or Tasco is very good. They certainly aren't a great choice.

As for buying the VX-I, you are right, it is my fault. I just try to steer others clear of making the same mistake. Soo many people just tell guys to buy Leupold. They don't specify that they really mean the VX-II and above. So lots of new guys to the shooting world go out and buy a Leupold as their friends have recommended, not knowing what to get, and get stuck with crap. I want this to happen as little as possible, as we need all the new shooters and hunters we can get in this world.

As for the posi lock, I'm not understanding why it's so bad. Instead of having the spring hold the reticle where you set it, it just use a solid piece? I've never used one of the Burris scopes with this, so maybe I'm missing what's wrong with it. Doesn't seem like that bad of an idea to me though from reading about it on paper. If your Burris didn't track correctly, I'd certainly send it back or sell it. However, there are lots out there that do track correctly.

As for owning 25 scopes, I don't own 25 scopes, or anywhere near that. Nor do I own or ever plan to own anywhere near 25 guns. I have respect for a nice gun collection which many guys have, however, for me I personally like to have guns to use either at the range, or hunting. If I can't use them, I don't see a point in having them and I certainly can't use 25 guns at once. I don't really see the point in owning more than 1 or 2 centerfire rifles, maybe a .22, a good shotgun, and a handgun. However, that's just my view on it and I know a lot of guy's opinions differ, and I can certainly respect that. For me I don't see the need to own more than a couple of guns since that's what I use.

What Leupold's are you using that are "target scopes"? IMO and this is just my opinion so take it with a grain of salt if you wish, is that the Mark 4 is really the only good target scope Leupold has. Once you get into the price range on many of the Mark 4 scopes, you are starting to get close to Nightforce territory, and lets face it, the Leupolds are no where even remotely close to Nightforces in quality, or features. Schmidt and Bender and USO are also way out in a separate league from Leupold's Mark 4, however, they aren't in the same price range either so that's not a fair comparison. The Nightforce's are just a lot more scope, for not much more money when it comes to the Mark 4's.

When you are down in the VX-III line, if you are trying to use one of those for a target scope, you can get a SWFA SS either in variable power or fixed power, and they also are out of Leupolds league imo. If you are just looking for a hunting scope, and not a target scope, the Vortex Vipers seem to be very comparable to the VX-III's at similar prices to the VX-II. Heck when on sale like now, they are even comparable price wise to the VX-I. They also have as good or better warranty than the Leupolds, so customer support is a moot point too.

Many other scopes in the VX-I's price range like the Burris Fullfield II, Vortex Diamondback, etc are comparable to the VX-II from Leupold, yet Leupold puts the VX-I out in that price range. Who knows what they were thinking.

But yet you don't own or plan to own most of the scopes mentioned in this whole reply????

But you freely give out your opinion on it, based off a VX1?????



but yet you have no experience with these, and just didn reading on them.

Ok, so name me the ones that are better for the money that you have owned and the features that made them better?

Ok, so your saying they track correctly because you actually test them out to long range?


Whats your point? Its a hobby and we have fun. You don't like doing alot of shooting. Thats your business.


I have had several 6.5-20X50 target Vari-X III. Have you ever owned one or just read about them?

Ok, how? I actually have laser gear to test these things. Nightforce has not sold 2% of what leupold has. How many have you owned and what features were better?


How many scopes does vortex sell? Why are they so better? How many have you owned?

big country,
you are a optical engineer,is there anyway you can show what the actual light transmission is on these scopes?such as the leupold,bushnell nikon and vortex?im just curious.i read where the burris is 95% and the vx2 is only 88%.this is where i think alot of folks are wondering,we all know every company for anything kind of fibs on their products.im not trying to stir the pot i feel the customers should be informed by facts on what they are buying.

I can measure and do measure on occasion. We coat lenses for free space optics and other goverment applications. So the expertise is a tad different.

But I have yet to see any of these scopes meet the specs they claim at 850nm. Maybe its my setup. My limit is little out of visual light due to our equipment.

The 30mm black diamond I had, was very clear. But the most important thing to me when buying a scope is not just being clear.

In the last 5 years, all scope mfg, has done a fantastic job nailing down recipies for coatings. I do have equipment for back reflection, and most scopes I tested has almost zero back reflection. But there's more to it than one wavelength. One has to understand how the human eye recieves light, and what light the brain understands in wavelength at various times of day.

When I buy a long range scope, it needs to track true. black diamond did not. Second, I need copious amount of MOA adjustment. Leupold and Ziess rule here. Lastly, I need copious amounts of eye relief. This is wehre leupold, and ziess rule.

The burris signature series I owned was aweful with eye relief. Nikon is so so. It doesn't matter for my 204 and 223 but very important for my 7mmSTW, or RUM's.

Vortex imo is a gimmick with excellent marketing. They litterly own less than 2% of the market. They do have excellent marketing campaign and have signed up many good people to push them.

the way i decide on a scope is what looks clear and crisp to my eye,ive spent years in the gunners seat in various tanks looking through long range scopes but i just find what works for my eyes and go with them.you are very correct on what the eye and brain percieves as good.my problem as i get older is parallax,i also agree about optics companies telling us what we want to hear.to me the vx3 is great but cant afford them,my vortex works very well for me but thats me.i really like bushnell but am a stickler for a good warrenty and have had some bad luck.i still use an old chiefscope v and works good for me.thanks for the info.

I am not a tactical sniper and never plan to be. I am a hunter, and bascially most on here are. Its very dangerous IMO to be glassing around with your scope. Which many folks try to do. Nothing sucks more than looking up and seeing somebody scopeing you with a gun in your direction. Quick way for me to march up a hill and start a fight with the offending party.

Hense the reason, I suggest people buys decent binocs.

By the way, parallax is part of a scope design. Has nothing do do with old or new eyes. Parallax is the recticles relative movement respect to the target with head/eye placement on the scope.

I think you are referring to a thing called, resolution. Which is directly a product of objective lense.

nothing like finding out someone has bullet launcher pointed your way,kinda just makes me mad too.i never could use the old stereo type range finders,just way too much parallax for my eyes.the old military optics really sucked bad but with todays technology its alot more precise and not so much hope and pray.you ever look through the big navy ship binos?what i wouldnt give for some to use as a spotting scope but then they weigh close to 150 lbs

I am not you are understanding what parallax is. But its all good.

Top 5?

Schmitt and Bender (if you want to re-finance your home,I don't)
Zeiss
Leuopld VX-III
?
?
...:D

Best IMHO no particular order...:cool15:

Schmdit & Bender
Zeiss/Hensoldt
US Optics
Swarovski
Nightforce
Leupold Mk IV

Fixing to pull the trigger on a US Optics SN-3 T PAL 3.2x17 for a new build.

Worst in no particular order.:confused0024:

Anything that comes in a blister pack including but not limited to....
Simmons
Barska
NC Star
etc.

I'm sorry here but you people do not know what you are talking about.

Parallax is the difference between where you are looking and where the actual bullet is pointed towards. Parallax also affects optical instruments such as binoculars, microscopes, and twin-lens reflex cameras that view objects from slightly different angles. Many animals, including humans, have two eyes with overlapping visual fields to use parallax to gain depth perception; this process is known as stereopsis.
A simple everyday example of parallax can be seen in the dashboard of motor vehicles that use a "needle" type speedometer gauge (when the needle is mounted in front of its dial scale in a way that leaves a noticeable spacing between them). When viewed from directly in front, the speed may show 60 (i.e. the needle appears against the '60' mark on the dial behind); but when viewed from the passenger seat (i.e. from an oblique angle) the needle can appear against a slightly lower or higher mark (depending on whether it is viewed from the left or from the right), because of the combined effect of the spacing and the angle of view.

As the eyes of humans and other animals are in different positions on the head, they present different views simultaneously. This is the basis of stereopsis, the process by which the brain exploits the parallax due to the different views from the eye to gain depth perception and estimate distances to objects

A very poor scope was most of the first Tasco scopes that were made in the late 70's - early 80's.

Another was the Bushnell Buck Horn.

Another is the Leupold Rifleman.

Most of those cheap scopes that does everything from light your cigarette to range find that are sold in catalogs such as Hunters Warehouse is total crap also.

Don't forget the old Cats Eyes scope either! BSA - crap!

5 Best Hunting scope mfg.

Schmidt & Bender
Zeiss
Leica
Swarovski/Khales
Nightforce

Best bank for the buck
Nikon
Meopta
Minox

I'm happy with 1 deer rifle under a S&B, others would rather have 6 deer rifles with mediocre optics.

Different strokes for different folks.............

Wow, thats pretty cool, a direct cut and paste from wikipedia. Your so smart.:busted:

ROTFLMAO..thanks BC, too funny.

Best 5
S&B
Swarovski
Zeiss
Premier
Nightforce

Worst 5
Tasco
BSA
Simmons
Low end Bushnells
Leupold Rifleman

I won't bad mouth any manufacturer, but when it comes to the top of the line, my choices from top down are: Schmidt & Bender, Unertl, Night Force, Zeiss Hensholt, Lupold LPS.

Wow you guys really put things into a different perspective. I remember growing up and hunting with my dad everyone would say Bushnell is the scope to buy. They always said you could spend more money on a scope but you'd never get a better scope. They would say dont get the $50 tascos and simmons, its worth spending 50-100% more to get the $69.99 - $100 Bushnells. Heck the gun that got me my 'handle' (270 Rem 7600) had a ~20yr old Bushnell Sportview. The thing had no knob to turn and was harder then heck to rotate after all those years but never fogged up and I could pretty much nail a pop can at 300 yards. That gun was so dang accurate when I bought my own rifle for the first time I went out and bought the exact same gun as dads, only 20 years newer (270 rem 7600) and topped it with a Banner, and dad thought I spent to much on a bigger 40mm banner vs his smaller sportview lol!

I think I'd give up hunting and buy my meat from the store for the price of one of those fancy scopes... But I realize times have changed and standards have gone by the wayside now eveything is made a cheap as possible... so compared to a cheap scope 20 years ago maybe the bottom line for a decent one is a couple/few hundred now.

:groupwave:

On the better scopes that I have had trouble with would be the Burris Signature with the possi-loc that they no longer make. All the BSA type Russian trash has failed with Simmons and the cheap Pentax all failing but, one Simmons out of six is still hanging on. Counter Sniper and Dark ops optics are a total shams about the same as Osprey that stay together but, the glass is very cheap.
Nightforce
Valdada
Vortex
Trijicon
Sightron SIII
Leupold Mark 4
Burris MTAC & Signature
Bushnell Elite Tactical or Super Slam
Nikon Monarch Side focus
Hawke Sidewinder
Millet
Mueller
Having be coming tired of the trash cheap "Mad in China" scopes I have been seeking to find the better made of the "Mde in China". I have a good Millet and a very good for the price Mueler. So, when I got chance to see a good Hawke Scope when looking through one at the range, it was a Sidewinder Tactical 8.5-25X42 and it was clearly better then the Mueller or the Millet that I have, near the quality of any of my Burris! So, I decided to buy a Hawke scope for a coyote rig and dew to the fact that it was $100 off from the Wal-mart price - being a demo, I decided to go for it.
I got this scope from SCOPESTOP.COM and I decided comparing it to the Mueller 8.5-25x50. The Hawke reticle I choose for the 8-32X56 Sidewinder was the SR12 after checking out the software I got from the Hawke website. The scope came used not as a "As New" demo as stated. It had ring marks from being mounted and light scuff marks from being handled but, that is the chance I took in buying from the internet.
Well the Mueller I got a couple years ago seems to be super clear for Chinese made and Hawke claims to be Europe engineered with ***anese glass but, the scope is made in China. I used bugs, grass, reflective surface, high contrast in all three direction in relation to the sun. The Mueller seems much clearer but, once I put the sun shade on the Hawke it got closer to the Mueller in sharpness and once the sun was setting both scopes were about just as sharp (Testing both at 25 power). It seem that the 56mm objective lens on the Hawke pulls in so much light it makes it hard to see how clear the glass can be. I then tested the scope @ 200 yards with the ISO 12233 optics chart on 8X14 legal letter size premium paper printed @ 1200X1200 DPI. Once again the Mueller seemed clearer @ 25 power then the Hawke @ 25 power but, I could see the same amount of lines of resolution from both scopes. The resolution did not get any better and maybe a tad worse when the Hawke went to 32 power. Edge Sharpness is not as good as the Mueller. The one inch wagon wheel at that distance was noticeable but, it seemed to only have four legs with a dot in the middle @ 200 yards for both scopes and with the Hawke at 32 power it just zoomed in with only the same detail being apparent. Without a doubt the color seems washed out in the Hawke and is vivid in the Mueller. I would say this Hawke scope is inferior to the Millet 4-16X50 once past the same magnification of 16 power. I have seen better MIllet glass then the one I have and I have seen worse. Millet has been all over the scale on quality glass in my opinion. It seems I am getting the idea that this is normal when dealing with scopes made in China. On the Hawke scope this is claimed to be ***anese glass, it surely does not live up to this in the scope I bought.
For a much better Glass but, at $850 I would have gone with the Sightron SIII Long Range 8-32x56 Scope with Side Focus as I have the Sightron SIIISS10-50X60 LRMD and it is mind blowing crystal clear. I would say it is the same or better then any of my Burris scopes or Leopold and much better then my Nikon glass.
I do not think every Mueller is as good as mine and I would guess most Hawke scopes are as good and could be better then my friends was at the range. I would imagine my Hawke is the lower of what they put out and is good for Chinese but, if someone is going to buy, China, I would think it would be to get something that is close to or very near to the same product for a great savings in money. I do have Burris, Leopold, Nikon but, can not afford to have these on every rig so, I do have one Millet, Mueller, Sightron and now a Hawke looking to see if money can be saved and still get quality sharp glass with a repeatable scope. I feel I got lucky with the Mueller, the Millet is worth what I paid for it and like I said, the Sightron is amazing! The Hawke I have still needs to be tested at the range for the, “box test” and repeatability and I will do those tests. At this point I did not save any money on this scope and I do not think I got what I paid for at this time. Being fair, I have seen much better when it comes to Hawke scopes.

The Bushnell Elite 6500's use the same glass as Nightforce but are about half the weight, I perfer the Bushnell over the Nightforce on a HUNTING rifle where I like to keep weight down but on a benchrest rifle where weight is a non issue the Nightforce is the scope. I have a Elite 6500 4.5x30x it is a great all arround hunting scope, and about $600 cheaper and just as clear as a Nightforce. Unless you are jumping out of planes or planning on driving nails with your scope a Nightforce is not needed on a hunting rifle. JMO.

1. Leica
2. Schmidt & Bender
3. Swarovski
4. Zeiss
5. Nightforce
My top 5 but I have had good luck with Leupold and Nikon in the past.

You have no idea what you are talking about. It has the same glass as the 4200, which is in no way shape or form anywhere similar to Nightforce glass. That said, I agree with a Nightforce not being needed on the average hunting rifle.

@cooper: I wonder about your order, have you used each of these scopes already?

I am glad you think I dont know what I am talking about. Yes the 6500 and the 4200 have the same glass, also the same glass that Nightforce uses. They both use ***anese glass from the same manufactor.

Show me some proof that they use the same glass as Nightforce does? Because they don't. I won't disagree with you that the 4200's and 6500's are made in ***an as are many other scopes, but that doesn't mean they are all using Nightforce glass.

Nightforce scopes are made here in Orofino Idaho but they do not make there own glass they purchase it from the same company that Bushnell does for the Elite 4200, 6500, and the Elite HDMR. I personally own 2 4200's, a 6500, and a Nightforce, opticaly there is no difference, dont beleive me go to a store that carries both and look at it for yourself.

Back to the original question, I have not used 10 different scopes. I started out with a cheap Simmons, and killed deer with it. After chasing a gut shot buck down to finish him off, then learning the scope was like 8 inches to the right and off on elevation, too, I started looking for quality scopes, bases and rings. I settled on Leupold for all, started with the Vx-II. I got to where I could afford VX-III's, so I started buying them. I tend to slip and fall, let my gun slide too fast out of the stand, and generally abuse them. I have never had a problem with the Leupold setup. Maybe I've just been lucky. I could afford more expensive scopes, and have considered them, but I never know which rifle I will decide to take, and it's expensive enough to put Leupolds on all of them. I've never had to send one back, so I don't know about their customer service.
I've never looked through a really expensive scope, but know a mulie at 450 yards in fading light is plenty clear through a VX-III.

I got in on this too late to add much for sure ... not that I ever add anything of value anyway ?!? These are rated only on my personal, first hand expereince and in decending order. Over the years have had a bunch of scopes. Mostly on rifles I have bought to resale, trade, give away, etc. Currently I own scopes manufactured by Zeiss, Leupold, Swarovski, Bushnell and Weaver.

Five worst - Nikon Monarch, Tasco World Class , any Simmons, any Barska, and worst of all by a land slide .. any BSA. I put Nikon in this pack because of my extreme dissapointment with two "Monarch" models that I had. For the $$$, the peformance was weak.

Five best - Zeiss VM/V, Swarovski Z6, Swarovski Z3, Zeiss Conquest, Kahles.

As far as value .... of the ones I have ... the two best bang for the buck in my olpinion are the Elite 4200 and the Zeiss Conquest.

As far as flat out performance .... the Zeiss VM/V and Swarovski Z6 .... too close to call.

wow,i still have a bushnell chiefscope vi 3-9 on my 06 with 1/6 clicks.it works dang good here for elk,but i do want something a little brighter.guess im waaaay behind

but night force sounds expensive so it must be good.hehehehe

I have a BSA on my .270 WSM and it does its best during daylight hour shooting,I tried it in the early mornings/late evenings and it was very poor and hazy in my opinion...it was on the gun and I pan on replacing it one day.


Years ago I used the Tasco,Redfields and Bushnell Scopes,and as mentioned they weren't the best quality scopes out there.I have been using a old Bushnell Sportsview 3X9X40mm scope on my Remington model 742 30-06 and it has done a good job over the years.

All my new Rifles sport the Leupold Rifleman 3X9X40mm matte black scope using Millet rings...I love the quality of the scope,it is nice and clear in the low-light conditions of the early mornings and late evenings...and I can afford it!

So far they have cost around $225.00 but I have caught them on sale for around $169.99 to $189.00 and even got a few free scope coats at a $24.95 value.

I have the Rifleman Scope on my CZ-USA .204 Rifle,my Browning A-Bolt Hunter .243 bolt-action Rifle and my Savage Model 11 GCNS wood stock,bolt-action 7mm-08.



I'd love to buy one of the higher-end Scopes out there on the Market but I can't justify spending more money on a scope than the Gun/Rifle itself....but thats just me! :D ;)

Top 5
 

it depends what exactly your looking for...

Check these out
Nikon http://amzn.to/InBEYp

Leupold http://amzn.to/Jmxvos

Barska http://amzn.to/IQbgF7

Simmons http://amzn.to/JEdb1l

these scopes, i think are great, but like i said it depends

OP hasn't responded to this post or for that matter posted in years.

best : BSA
worst : Nikko

Best and/or worst for the money is a far better question ?!?


I use Burris at the "Signature Select" level - best IMO for MY money.

I want to tell you guys something, I personally own more scopes than you. I have every scope that has ever been made. I have each scope made on every rifle that is made. That makes me the ultimate authority on which is the best scope! WTF??

Lots of blowhards in this thread.

I like Leupold, Burris and Nikon. Those are the best for reasonable money in my book.