Need scope suggestions
#12
Thanks guys. The Leupold has fogged up multiple times and doesn't have good low light transmission. My previous Nikon Prostaff was much better than the Leupold and $129 cheaper. I really like the Nikon Monarch 2.5-10x42. Any thoughts on that particular scope?
One thing Leupold does have us a very good manufacturer warranty.
Lifetime Guarante. Save your money and give their warranty a try.
#13
What model of leupold do you have? Fogging inside or outside? If outside ain't the scope or glass fault. If inside it needs to go back to leupold.
As I mentioned I own a monarch its pleasant to look through bright image but not as clear as some others. Mine the power ring is very stiff and difficult to adjust with gloves on. POI tracking hasn't been consistant, might seem minor to most people but when your use to 4 clicks and it moving 1"...bothersome to me. Again jmo its a bit chucky in desgin and looks. Has held zero and works, just not my favorite scope and as such its on a back up now. I prefer the elite 4200 to the monarch. Step better is the zeiss conquest. Check around, ie: doug at cameraland ny had conquest specials under 400 for a 3x9x40 with zplex reticle. They are very good low light scopes, I doubt you'd be unhappy.
You should really do some side by side checking, your eyes/likes may see things differently.
Best of luck
As I mentioned I own a monarch its pleasant to look through bright image but not as clear as some others. Mine the power ring is very stiff and difficult to adjust with gloves on. POI tracking hasn't been consistant, might seem minor to most people but when your use to 4 clicks and it moving 1"...bothersome to me. Again jmo its a bit chucky in desgin and looks. Has held zero and works, just not my favorite scope and as such its on a back up now. I prefer the elite 4200 to the monarch. Step better is the zeiss conquest. Check around, ie: doug at cameraland ny had conquest specials under 400 for a 3x9x40 with zplex reticle. They are very good low light scopes, I doubt you'd be unhappy.
You should really do some side by side checking, your eyes/likes may see things differently.
Best of luck
#14
But you really think those zipperheads hunt much?
I don't know if they are assembled well enough or built to last years,of extreme hnting conditions.I don't know if these scopes will stand the test of time.I truly question this.
Yep they are clearer than Leuplod but every Leupold employee is a hunter regardless of the clarity, they are a tough scope.
They have built a reputation on durability.Sure hunters have used Nikon for the last ten plus years, but as they are the most popular scope on the market now. Im willing to bet they will be pushing them out, to keep up with demand. QC will be going down shortly.I honestly believe they do not make their scopes.I truly believe they are contracted out to the lowest bidder. Yep they probably use the top of the line parts but they are assembled by a bunch of orientals that don't know a thing about hunting.If you don't hunt how do you know how a scope should work?
Last edited by Jeff Ovington; 09-09-2010 at 08:25 PM.
#15
For $500 and under take a serious look at a Meopta meopro in either 3-9X42 or 4-12x50.
The Zeiss conquests are great scopes but they can't compete with the meopro for clarity, brightness and edge to edge crispness.
The Zeiss conquests are great scopes but they can't compete with the meopro for clarity, brightness and edge to edge crispness.
#16
It’s like a “great” athlete, they are only GREAT after they have done it GREAT for years.
Time will tell................................???
I do own their Binos and rangefinder however;
I'm a Burris guy (signature select level) when it comes to rifle scopes.
Sorry to say but;
Leupold (mid-level anyway) for me is like buying the fancy brand name item so you can walk around the mall with their name on the bag.
Yea, I know...........................here it comes !
Time will tell................................???
I do own their Binos and rangefinder however;
I'm a Burris guy (signature select level) when it comes to rifle scopes.
Sorry to say but;
Leupold (mid-level anyway) for me is like buying the fancy brand name item so you can walk around the mall with their name on the bag.
Yea, I know...........................here it comes !
Last edited by Sheridan; 09-09-2010 at 08:39 PM.
#17
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,519
Likes: 0
Thanks guys. The Leupold has fogged up multiple times and doesn't have good low light transmission. My previous Nikon Prostaff was much better than the Leupold and $129 cheaper. I really like the Nikon Monarch 2.5-10x42. Any thoughts on that particular scope?
#18
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,519
Likes: 0
Nikon uses some of the best glass no question.
But you really think those zipperheads hunt much?
I don't know if they are assembled well enough or built to last years,of extreme hnting conditions.I don't know if these scopes will stand the test of time.I truly question this.
Yep they are clearer than Leuplod but every Leupold employee is a hunter regardless of the clarity, they are a tough scope.
They have built a reputation on durability.Sure hunters have used Nikon for the last ten plus years, but as they are the most popular scope on the market now. Im willing to bet they will be pushing them out, to keep up with demand. QC will be going down shortly.I honestly believe they do not make their scopes.I truly believe they are contracted out to the lowest bidder. Yep they probably use the top of the line parts but they are assembled by a bunch of orientals that don't know a thing about hunting.If you don't hunt how do you know how a scope should work?
But you really think those zipperheads hunt much?
I don't know if they are assembled well enough or built to last years,of extreme hnting conditions.I don't know if these scopes will stand the test of time.I truly question this.
Yep they are clearer than Leuplod but every Leupold employee is a hunter regardless of the clarity, they are a tough scope.
They have built a reputation on durability.Sure hunters have used Nikon for the last ten plus years, but as they are the most popular scope on the market now. Im willing to bet they will be pushing them out, to keep up with demand. QC will be going down shortly.I honestly believe they do not make their scopes.I truly believe they are contracted out to the lowest bidder. Yep they probably use the top of the line parts but they are assembled by a bunch of orientals that don't know a thing about hunting.If you don't hunt how do you know how a scope should work?
#19
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,519
Likes: 0
If it's fogging internally, I agree send it back. However, they won't fix the crappy glass that's causing low light transmission issues for him. That's just the glass in the lower end Leupolds for you. I'm assuming he has a lower end one anyway. Once you get into the VX-III line, it's decent, but you can still get a lot better glass from other companies for similar prices though.
#20
Where do you think leupold gets components for their scopes from? Yeah them peeps you referred too. Many scopes are made/assembled/components outsourced overseas now a days..sad but fact. Not arguing your point as leupold being known for CS and hunt ability in any way I agree leaned on them many times. I prefer to lean on others at the present day with what leupolds pumping out these days. Another sad thing as I use to be a gold ring guy just not seeing the value for the investment as I once did. The conquest has been solid for me and I had to use their CS department on a oops..my fault. They replaced it no questions asked and had a new one to me in a timely fashion. Have had some delays with bushnell, burris and nikon though..all took care of the problem just took some time.
Big bulls, thanks for the tip no dealers here to see the meopro would like to peer thru it. Maybe this winter I'll make it south of the 49.
Big bulls, thanks for the tip no dealers here to see the meopro would like to peer thru it. Maybe this winter I'll make it south of the 49.


