RaySendero

tim,

You may be asking toooo much from one rifle and one scope!!!

My rifle for both long shots hunting and targets has a 8x32x40AO scope with a mildot rectile and target turrets. I use it on 8 for hunting and crank up the power for targets. I have had to pass on a few real close shots at deer.

It is good for about 600 yards on targets - It won't go to 1000 yds due to limited range of vertical adjustment. I could get a mount that would allow the scope to adjust to 1000, but then could not re-zero to 200 for hunting.

I recommend you consider 2 rifles to cover this spectrum.

OpticsCamp

Also a good point.

Sheridan

More guns is always better !!!

Gm54-120

A near total lack of Kandar scope reviews should be a hint about the quality. The pricing should be another.

I would expect to spend far more if my normal shots were 500 yards and beyond. Good glass is not cheap and a 56mm objective wont improve a cheap scope.

LoneWati

I use a Burris ballistic plex in the Fullfield II 4.5 to 14 . Not expensive but works great for me. Easy to pick up the animal and picks up light well. My last crosshair is at 600 and where my post goes from thin to heavy is at 720 yds. I shoot more then the average hunter and you have to. You need to know what range all of your crosshairs are at once you are set at 100. I am 2.3 inches high at 100 and use the main crosshair for shots @ 100-300 yds. Holding dead on. Sometimes I could use a little more Magnification, but anything over 20 power is tough to pick up animals when they move and then stop again.

homers brother

JMO - A Horus reticle makes the most sense on a spotting scope and only when the shooter is assisted by a competent spotter. Trying to call shots precisely with one when you're behind the rifle is fraught with problems, the most notable of which is a tendency most people have to change their sight picture under recoil, which the rifle also plays a part in. TOF isn't often long enough for a shooter to reset and make a good call on their own. I've used H reticles (32 and 36?) on Leupold Mk4 spotters.

Not to say that I don't like them (I do), but there are other tools I'd rather have on a rifle or in my kit which make more sense if I weren't planning on having someone running a spotter for me (i.e hunting).

OpticsCamp

Good info! The Horus reticles certainly have their place, but I've found that people who are solely hunters just don't want all that "stuff" in their sight picture.

Mojotex

My advice is to buy the best that you can afford. As for specs ..... because you stated that you plan to limit your shots to more or less 400 yards and shoot target out to 1000, you are asking a ton of one scope. But .... I'd say a quality variable in something like a 4-12x50mm would be about as good a "one scope" set up as I can think of. However, if you are plannig to hunt more than shoot 1000 yards, I think a something like a 1.6-6x40 mm or 3-9x40 mm would be plenty adequate. As for maker .... I am a top end scope guy. Been stung before by the "cheap" end of the scope world and will not ever go there again. If you can afford scopes such as the Swarovski Z3 line or similar, you will not regret spending the $$$$. If you are on a $500 +/- budget, a Ziess Conquest, quality Leupold or a Vortex in that price range are great choices. Less tham $500 or so, look at the Bushnell Elite line.

Sheridan

Surely these power levels must be a typo (4-2x50mm) ??

Mojotex

Yep ... typo . Meant 4-12x50 mm.

I have fat fingers and besides , I was the guy in high school typing class that spent the first several minutes immediately after the "Go" command on speed test days unsticking a wad of keys ..... yep, I am that old too.