Big $$$ Scopes....whats the story.?

[.45colt]

Having lived a sheltered life I have only been exposed to the usual stuff. Weaver, Burris and the less expensive Leupold . one old Redfield 1x4 was a big surprise that came on a gun I bought used. Looking around the internet I see Swarvoski ,Ziess ,Kahles, just to name a few. the prices of some of these just seem crazy. Are they really that much better?
Thanks Guys.Jim

[Alan in Vermont]

IMO, probably not.

There is a certain mindset that believes more $$ somehow equates with superior goods, sometimes linked to an ego driven attitude something like, "Look how much money I can spend".

[tman]

I'd like to see a consumer test series with the scope models you mentioned. To me a weaver or redfield is about what I can afford. But, those scopes work well for me.

[Pete44ru]

.

Some higher priced scopes, most (not all) from Europe, have features not available from any other scopes.

About 30-odd years ago (when I had a LOT of disposable income), I had a Schmidt & Bender 1x-4x 24mm Flashdot scope ($1200 then, $2700 now), which had a much heavier reticle combined with a (then new) red dot at the junction of the reticle's crosswires.

After I retired, having sold a whole bunch of guns & scopes to fund my early retirement (by paying off all my outstanding debts), I lucked onto one of their "weekly special" sale's ($725, sale-priced @ $399) at www.swfa.com for an American-made Trijicon Accupoint Safari 1.75-4x scope with an adjustable (brightness) red dot that used NO batteries - which allowed hunting with the reticle unlit, until the illuminated reticle was needed (pre-dawn, sunset/twilight, dark/shaded areas like black cedar swamps, etc).
I still use that scope today, on my .250-3000 Ruger Model 77 boltgun.




When the very inexpensive Japanese scopes were first introduced, the optics were awful - but are "state-of-the-art" today; which lends them to a wider variety of uses, at relatively decent prices.

[Blaine]

Get a beater/ugly Leupold, send it to the factory. You will get back a like new scope...Free.

[rbertalotto]

Well....I always though the technology to grind very high quality lenses had peaked with the advent of computer controlled grinding equipment. I've had a few $1000 Leupolds that did look as good as a $400 Weaver T36.......A Few expensive Burris thrown in for fun.....Then one day I looked through a friends new Nightforce....Big mistake! Everything else looks like looking through the bottom of a half used Vaseline jar! I could not believe how at 36X, same power as the Leupolds and the Weaver, I could read writing on the targets at 200 yards and easily see bullet holes at 500 yards. Amazing piece of glass!

I recently bought a Swarovski for my hunting rifle.....Amazing clarity especially at dawn and dusk

Is it worth $2000 for this performance....Maybe not. It's your dime.........

But the mechanics of the Nightforce are also amazing. It is the only scope I've ever owned where I totally trust the turrets to bring me back to EXACTLY the POI that I was dialed in previously. No Leupold, Weaver, Burris, Etc, Etc, Etc could ever accomplish this. Close...But no cigar!

[FWiedner]

For my more pedestrian use, I might buy a higher-end low cost, or a low-end moderate cost scope but I can't justify a high-end scope. Simply much too costly for the hunting that I do. That said, I've never tested a piece of equipment that costs more than I'm willing to spend.

I think that I made a similar observation about glass quality versus cost some time ago and one of our local members replied that the high dollar glass used in military applications was far superior to lower cost and more practical scopes used for game hunting, and if I'd ever used any of them, I would immediately recognize the difference. I don't find that hard to believe.

I do admit to having spent thousands of dollars on a thermal-imaging scope that I use for night-time hog hunting. This purchase was made after years of hunting in total darkness, using spot-lights, colored feeder-lights, and various low-end night-vision scopes. I wanted to eliminate the problem of being unable to target hogs because I could not see them in the dark. Problem solved.

So there it is.

Maybe it's just a question of what you want your optic to do.

[TedH]

There's a lot of "depends" as to whether or not it's worth the price difference. If you are an average eastern deer hunter you will get along with a lower line Leupold just as well as you will a Schmidt & Bender. If you are shooting long range competition, or serious work with a sniper rifle, then absolutely the higher priced scopes are worth the extra cost (Nightforce). The clarity in the glass and repeatability in the adjustments are a big step up in the really good scopes.

[cshold]

Optics, you get what you pay for.

[AJMD429]

I've looked through scopes costing $50 to $2,500, and pretty much each time you double the price, there IS a noticeable improvement in resolution or other 'quality' that even a nimrod like me can notice.

That being said, If my gun will shoot 1 MOA with a perfect hold from a rest, and my hunting is going to be done from a deerstand without a rest, where 5 MOA is more realistic, having glass that can discern a shrew from a baby field mouse at 300 yards is in the kinda-not-necessary category.

But generally you do get what you pay for.

Sometimes used-stuff or sale-priced items just before a new model/upgrade is introduced, can be exceptions.

[guntar]

Jim,

The answer to your question of whether those European scopes are worth it or not is an unequivocal ........, MAYBE. Like most of the responders on this item have said, it really depends on what your needs are.

Many European scopes are, as you would expect, made to suit European hunting conditions. Unlike the United States, many European countries have no quitting time for hunting due to darkness. In the U.S., we are usually restricted to one half-hour before sunrise and one half-hour after sunset. In Europe it is predicated solely on your ability to see, even if it is at midnight by moonlight. This causes an extreme demand for maximum light transmission, with attendant larger scope tubes and ocular lenses. With few exceptions, notably feral hog and predator hunting in some jurisdictions, there just isn't as much demand in the States. Most decent quality scopes can handle the half-hour before sunrise and after sunset requirement on a normal day. If you hunt under a lot of overcast conditions they may or may not be sufficient for your requirements.

Another fact attribute of the very expensive European scopes is more precise and repeatable adjustments. Again, this is a response to the European market. The hassle or the outright illegality of owning more than a few firearms is a fact of life for most, if not all Europeans. In order to counter these restrictions, most Europeans demand maximum versatility from their firearms. Things like switch-barrel rifles, and loads for multiple purposes are common. This in turn causes great demand for the accuracy of the adjustments to facilitate this versatility. Many of us in the U.S. just buy a rifle for a particular purpose, say whitetail hunting, find a good load, sight the scope in with that load, and just check it periodically. If that is your situation, paying a lot for that level of sophistication in adjustments probably is not a wise investment. On the other hand, if you are doing a lot of competitive or tactical shooting, it may be an essential part of what you need.

The final characteristic that is usually present in these high-priced scope is clarity of focus. Again, this is something that you have to be realistic about. If you are hunting roe deer under the typical European medal system, you better be absolutely sure of exactly the size of the antlers on your target animal. A few fractions of an inch in horn length, or an extra point or two, can literally cost you thousands of dollars because you shot a lower-level gold medal animal, rather than the high-level silver medal animal you contracted for. In the U.S. this is seldom a big issue. Generally, we are just trying to determine if the animal is big enough to suit us. If it turns out to be bigger, great. Again, if you are shooting in a competition this may be much more important to you.

The last comment I would make is this: Very few of us may actually need one of these scopes (their sophistication may be well beyond the point of diminishing returns for our needs). We just want one. In the same way, most of us just NEED basic transportation..... but there are still an awful lot of Suburbans, Corvettes, and BMW's out there. Isn't it great!!!!

[jdad]

My personal experience.

For general hunting and target work any of the Weavers, Leupold, etc are perfect. Serious target or competitive shooting, especially long range, expensive glass does make a difference.

[buckeyeshooter]

I give this an unqualified.....YES. A Leupold is a great scope and a Ziess is better.

[marlinman93]

My personal opinion is scopes fall into three categories. Cheap junk, mid priced scopes, and the extremely high priced scopes. Nobody should buy the cheap junk, no matter what you're putting them on. I bought a cheap $55 Simmons scope years ago to use on a .22 plinker. I got to the range and unscrewing the adjustment cap resulted in the whole turret exiting the scope. I took it back, and got my money back.
The medium priced scopes can be a very good investment of money vs. quality. It depends on the maker, and how much you spend in this medium range.
The extremely high priced scopes are not without their merits, but the question becomes whether they're worth the extra quality and expense for the average shooter or hunter. In most cases I wont buy them, as I can't justify the small gains over medium priced scopes, for the huge price difference.

[BigSky56]

my scopes run in the 2-300$ range weaver, burris & lyman. a 6x is bad berry on predators out to 400. If I have a nightime problem to solve I use a illum reticule aimpoint with a 3x multiplier if needed. High $ and high X scopes are not needed unless you are target shooting way out there. I eat elk every year and shoot a pile of varmints so they work for me. danny

[.45colt]

Thanks for All the input Guys. .

[tman]

Very informative thread.

[BAGTIC]

The best is the enemy of the good enough. Exactly how much does one NEED. In my old age I have been removing the scopes and replacing them with peeps. Can I shoot as accurately with peeps? No but as long as I use good judgment as to what is "In Range". they meet my needs. They are handier and, to me, more sporting. Increasingly hunting has gotten to the point where the 'sport' is disappearing. All that seems to matter is the "execution". Almost like fishing with dynamite.

[tman]

The best is the enemy of the good enough. Exactly how much does one NEED. In my old age I have been removing the scopes and replacing them with peeps. Can I shoot as accurately with peeps? No but as long as I use good judgment as to what is "In Range". they meet my needs. They are handier and, to me, more sporting. Increasingly hunting has gotten to the point where the 'sport' is disappearing. All that seems to matter is the "execution". Almost like fishing with dynamite.

Sad, but true. Hunting is no longer about harvesting food and enjoyment, it's about "THAT THROPHY OF A LIFE TIME"

[Ray Newman]

“I recently bought a Swarovski for my hunting rifle.....Amazing clarity especially at dawn and dusk”
--robertalotto
BINGO!

“I've looked through scopes costing $50 to $2,500, and pretty much each time you double the price, there IS a noticeable improvement in resolution or other 'quality' that even a nimrod like me can notice.”
--AJMD429
Another BINGO!

“For general hunting and target work any of the Weavers, Leupold, etc are perfect. Serious target or competitive shooting, especially long range, expensive glass does make a difference.’
--jdad
Yet another BINGO!