How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

[Swamphunter]

OK...you guys did a great job of recommending scops that I am now interested in. I am pushing my limit up to around $350-400 at max. What I am curious about is just how big a difference is there in these more expensive scops that you all recommended to me, as compared to my Bushnell 3x9?? Am I going to notice a difference?? I don't imagine the deer will notice the difference as I kill them efficently with my Bushnell. What is the benefit from going with a more expensive scope? Clarity??

Thanks

Swampy

[Texan_Til_I_Die]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

The biggest visible difference I see is the ability to shoot accurately in low light conditions. Assuming it's legal in your area, a high end scope may extend your practical hunting times by an additional 10 - 15 minutes in both the mornings and evenings.

[WaCoyote]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

Brightness for sure. I got a simmons 3X9 on a package Savage about 14 years ago. (before I new better). It worked fine and did what it was supposed to. Then I bought a Bushnell Elite 3200 and let me tell you, it's like night and day! Literally! Now I've since become enamored with Burris. These are so much better than that simmons it's rediculous.

This is not a dig on the simmons. That scope was being sold for $39.00 so it wasn't exactly there flagship scope.

[johnf]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

Here's my 2 cents. Most scopes under $150 are great for daylight hunging under 150 yards. If you are getting to your stand after first light and leaving before sunset and not shooting any further than that, then get you a simmons 8pt for $49 and call it a day.

Here is the difference that I see with my 8pt (which is on my ML) and my Nikon Pro staffs. Passed 75 yards I can see a lot more clearly with the Nikon. It's hard to explain, but it's like the difference between tv and hd tv. It's just better. At 150 yards with the simmons, I can still see my target, but with the nikon, the dot is more clear in the middle, and I can easily see the rings. Why should this matter? If you have a deer at 200 yards and you may wander whether he's a shooter or not with the simmons, with the nikon you'll know.

The biggest difference like Texan said is the ability to see in low light. You would be amazed at the difference. The clarity difference is magnified tremendously when the sun is just comming up or going down. I could literally shoot 150+ yards (if legal) with a full moon. That's with $150 worth of scope.

IMO, the more you spend, the less difference you will see. The next step up like you are talking about will get you more bells and whistles. My pro-staff will not accept a sun shield, I think the monarh, which is the next step up does. Then you have things like hand adjustments, and different coatings to add to clearity.

The most I think I would ever spend on a scope would be in the $400 range, and that would be right after I won the lottery. If you look at clarity and light magnification the difference between a $400 scope and a $1300 scope is not that much compared with the difference between the $50 cheepo and the $150 Pro-Staff or the $199 Leupold.

If you've been using an el cheepo scope and are going to get something in the $350-$400 range I think you will be amazed at the difference and won't be disapointed. If you want a good quality scope without all the bells and whistles, take a look at the Nikon Pro-Staf. At $150 each you can put quality glass on 3 guns.

[tped]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

I agree with what has already been mentioned - the difference is in the clarity and low light brightness. In the $350-$400 range you are looking at Nikon Monarch - Leupold vx2/vx3 - Burris Signature - Bushnell Elite and possibly the Zeiss Conquest. All are great scopes and far better quality of glass and durability than the standard Bushnell - Simmons - Tasco group. It will be difficlut to tell in the store but if you are buying from a shop that will let you take them outside in natural light - you should be able to see some clarity-brightness-sharpness differences even among the better line scopes.

[bowana]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

I own Leupold LPS ($1200 scopes) Swarovski ($1600 scopes) Leica Binos ($2200) and EL series Swarovski's, Nikon's and Bushnell elite 4200 series. Glass quality means everything. If you can't see it, you can't shoot it. Buy a cheap rifle and top it with a good scope. Boys, I have owned them all and I have to say that Leupold has the best scope/value combination. The band director needs to direct the choir elsewhere. High dollar optics ARE WORTH BUYING. Spend what you can afford. I will argue this point until we are all dead! I once saw a 140 class buck through my Swarovski El's, but could not see it through my scope. Its now on my wall! Why? because I saw it!! Most trophy deer move at first or last light. Be prepared. Hunt hard and carry the biggest stick you can! I will take top optics as my equipment any day!! Most Hunting Guides out west will tell you the same thing. Hunting in the mountains out west is how I became aquainted with good optics. I know its tough for some of your budgets, but save up for that 650-1150 Zeiss, Leupold, Nikon, etc. scope. You won't regret it!

[AJ]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

There are a few desirable traits with scopes:

Hold zero - The gun should shoot to the same place (within the limitations of the accuracy of the gun and shooter) every time. It should put the bullets in the same spot next week and next month unless the gun was used as a club. Shooting to the same spot throughout the magnification range. You can get the first part with high, medium, and low dollar scopes. I have had some scopes move the POI slightly with the magnification range changes. I have had one high $ scope with a gold ring move all over the place as the power was changed.

Repeatability - This is a great trait to have but not as necessary as long as the POI does not move once it is set. I have had only a couple scopes pass this test.

Clarity - This can be how sharp of an image you see through the lens. Some cheaper scopes can get fuzzy images at the edges of the field of view.

Brightness - How much light goes through the lenses to meet your eye. Important at low light conditions. I have had medium and high $ scopes with the ability to allow me to see well past legal shooting times, even in clear skies. One of the brightest scopes I had was an el cheapo Bushnell Sportview, but it would not hold zero on anything larger than a 22 lr.

Optical Resolution - This is sort of like clarity but it goes beyond the standard views. My 10x Swarovski will allow me to see details at distance that I can not see with my 15x Nikon Titanium. I was a fan of high magnification scopes until I looked through some of the high end scopes. WOW! Now, for shooting deer at 75 yards a couple hours after sunrise, it does not mean a lot of difference. Most any Tasco 4x will do the job. If you are looking at a deer at 400 yard and want to know how big the rack is, it matters.

[johnf]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

[ QUOTE ]

The band director needs to direct the choir elsewhere High dollar optics ARE WORTH BUYING

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe I ever said it wasn't worth it bowana. All you have to do is check the stats on scopes to know that what I said was true. The more you spend the better equiptment you get, but the differece in scopes become less and less as the price goes up.

Before you insult someone, perhaps you should read their post over and over untill you understand it.

I really respect people like AJ who obviously know more than I do. But rather than being condisending, he just puts the right info out there for folks to decifer for themselves.

[Doc]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

I have a related question. You are standing in the middle of a well-lit store, (maybe a Gander Mountain or something) You are looking through a whole bunch of their scopes. Is there any realistic thing that you can learn about these scopes by doing this?

Also, when you are reading through various articles on scope selection, and they start throwing terms at you that you are only slightly familiar with, how do you relate these values to something that is meaningful to hunting conditions. In other words, a lot of the terminology, you may understand that lower numbers are better or vice-versa, but how do you go about evaluating such things to see if the extra dollars for each incremental improvement in specs is going to be something that will make the appropriate difference in performance.

The same kind of thing applies when someone is recommending a scope or any piece of equipment for that matter. They all have something that impressed them about a particular piece of equipment, but how do you know that the particular specs that impress them will actually be worth the extra money for you. I'm sure that just like anything else there are some rather expensive features that in some cases can not even be appreciated by the naked eye. In other words, when do you know when someone is recommending that money be spent for differences that you will never be able to truly appreciate?

This is probably one of those cases where belonging to a large shooting club where you might have a chance at actually looking through many different makes and models under different shooting conditions and asking very specific questions might be very useful in making the most practical choices.

Doc

[WaCoyote]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

[ousoonerfan22]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

As mentioned above the higher grade of optics are going to allow you a better chance of making a shot or recognizing a buck from a doe in low light situations.

The mention of holding zero while changing magnifications is very important.I've often wondered about this with some scopes I have used but honestly I've never checked to see if they're holding zero while turning them up or down.

I'm 45 and my sight is going bad but I can still see the difference in the bright and very clear scopes like the zeiss conquest compared to the lower end scopes.

I would love to own a top of the line zeiss or swarovski but I can't afford one so the conquest will be the next scope I buy.

[Texan_Til_I_Die]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

[ QUOTE ]

I have a related question. You are standing in the middle of a well-lit store, (maybe a Gander Mountain or something) You are looking through a whole bunch of their scopes. Is there any realistic thing that you can learn about these scopes by doing this?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is an excellent question. I doubt if the folks at Gander Mountain or Cabelas would let you do it, but at my local gun shop, I always take a scope or binoculars outside and look through them. I've tried looking throught them in a store, but even in the big stores, I just can't get a good feel for what they'll do in the field.

[too_pointer]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

I don't know how you can really know without actually looking through them, heck, with my poor eyes, I'm sure someone with good eyesight will see it differently. That is why I don't think investing a ton of $$ for a high end optics will help me enough to justify it. This is just me though. The main reason I stay with medium priced scopes like Nikons is there more likely to last longer without problems from use than the cheaper ones.

too_

[Jeramie]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

[ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

LMBO! I love that!

[FSU_Seminole]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

[ QUOTE ]

The biggest visible difference I see is the ability to shoot accurately in low light conditions. Assuming it's legal in your area, a high end scope may extend your practical hunting times by an additional 10 - 15 minutes in both the mornings and evenings.

[/ QUOTE ]

Listen to Texas!

Where I hunt we can sit & shoot until 1 hour after dark. If you want a bright clear scope, that isn't heavy, better get the Zeiss Conquest for 400$.

I was a HUGE Leupold man until my girlfriend's brother begged me to buy a Zeiss. I feel like a fool that I didn't listen to him alot earlier.

Leupold is WAY overpriced for the low light performance you can get with a Zeiss at roughly the same price.

[FSU_Seminole]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

[ QUOTE ]

I have a related question. You are standing in the middle of a well-lit store, (maybe a Gander Mountain or something) You are looking through a whole bunch of their scopes. Is there any realistic thing that you can learn about these scopes by doing this?

Also, when you are reading through various articles on scope selection, and they start throwing terms at you that you are only slightly familiar with, how do you relate these values to something that is meaningful to hunting conditions. In other words, a lot of the terminology, you may understand that lower numbers are better or vice-versa, but how do you go about evaluating such things to see if the extra dollars for each incremental improvement in specs is going to be something that will make the appropriate difference in performance.

The same kind of thing applies when someone is recommending a scope or any piece of equipment for that matter. They all have something that impressed them about a particular piece of equipment, but how do you know that the particular specs that impress them will actually be worth the extra money for you. I'm sure that just like anything else there are some rather expensive features that in some cases can not even be appreciated by the naked eye. In other words, when do you know when someone is recommending that money be spent for differences that you will never be able to truly appreciate?

This is probably one of those cases where belonging to a large shooting club where you might have a chance at actually looking through many different makes and models under different shooting conditions and asking very specific questions might be very useful in making the most practical choices.

Doc

[/ QUOTE ]

Got to agree with 99% of what you said Doc. I'm just not a Leupold Var X III fan anymore.

But you are soooooooooo correct. If I had the choice to buy a 1300$ Sako Rifle & a 200$ scope vs a 350$ Savage & a 1,000 Zeiss, I'd take the Savage & Zeiss every time. Optical clarity means so much at dawn & dusk.

I bought my first 270 a few years back & I saved 2 or 3 years before I put great glass on it.

[AJ]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

Look at something that is as far away as possible and look at the detail. If you can look out a window at a fence or other exposed wood grain, it can help a lot when deciding if one scope is better than another. Compare one scope to another its pretty easy to do. Most scopes will work just fine with their brightness. Some are better than others, but most will get you from legal shooting hours to legal shooting hours.

[Guest Andrea]

Re: How big is the difference in quality (scopes)

Well, just thought I'd chime in. We own Bushnells, Leupolds and Swarovski scopes. I've hunted with all 3. In low light, the Leupold and Swarovski scopes were the best. The price is higher, but the quality was better. And that's all I have to say about that.