davewilson
Well-Known Member
could we send her out to US Optics to drive a nail through her head?
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Clearest Glass---POLL---
- Thread starter bryceh12321
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Just to throw another option into the mix, the Kahles optics are extremely good too.
If you happen to find a Kahles scope the fills your niche, the glass is extremely good and you can find them fairly reasonably priced these days due to distributorship issues within the U.S. I have had several and found the glass to be on par with the Swaros, and darn close to the S&Bs that I have owned.
My overall preference is the Premier Reticles Heritage but that is one notch up at a two notch price difference. There does come a point of diminishing returns on optics costs.
If you happen to find a Kahles scope the fills your niche, the glass is extremely good and you can find them fairly reasonably priced these days due to distributorship issues within the U.S. I have had several and found the glass to be on par with the Swaros, and darn close to the S&Bs that I have owned.
My overall preference is the Premier Reticles Heritage but that is one notch up at a two notch price difference. There does come a point of diminishing returns on optics costs.
LouBoyd
Well-Known Member
The test I like to do on a riflescope is near sunset (with the sun about 5 degrees above the horizon) look below the sun at a hillside which is not being directly illuminated by the sun. Internal refelctions are what kills contrast in any scope (rifle scopes, spotting scopes, and binoculars, and that is an acid test. THe percent of light lost going though a scope is only really important if it's scattered inside the scope and comes out of the eyepiece so it washes out the imaage you're trying to see.
But in a riflescope the MOST important characteristics in my opinion are that it will hold zero during rough treatment, like being dropped. and that the knobs track orthoganally, linearly, and accurately. in the units they're marked in. I don't look for a picture window view. I want a decent field of view free of chromatic and spherical aberatiion. I want it not to fog up internally.
Most of my scopes are Leupold, a few Burris (pistol mostly), a few Bushnell (mostly on ARs), one IOR, a couple of Weaver, and even a couple of really junky Chinese scope (Leapers and BSA). none have what I would call bad optics, but what makes me pay $1000+ for a Leupold over a $100 BSA is it's mechanical properties and ruggedness, not it's optics.
My favorite "long range" scope? The Leupold Mark 4 16x40 mil-dot. Why? It's rugged. Relatively light weight, has excellent eye relief, and a huge elevation adjustment range (140 MOA). I use a laser rangefinder, not mil-dot for ranging but the mil-dots are handy for quick wind and range "holdoffs " without cranking the target knobs with a simple lookup card. My favorite "best buy" scope is the Bushnell 10x40 mil-dot for most of the same reasons. It's under $200 while the Leupold is over $1000.
In my opinion one should always match the rife AND the scope to the task at hand witout reguard to price. More expensive is not always better. I'm not above putting a $4000 Litton scope on a $400 CZ 22LR or a $250 Leupold on a my $5000 Pauza carbine if they do the job best.
But in a riflescope the MOST important characteristics in my opinion are that it will hold zero during rough treatment, like being dropped. and that the knobs track orthoganally, linearly, and accurately. in the units they're marked in. I don't look for a picture window view. I want a decent field of view free of chromatic and spherical aberatiion. I want it not to fog up internally.
Most of my scopes are Leupold, a few Burris (pistol mostly), a few Bushnell (mostly on ARs), one IOR, a couple of Weaver, and even a couple of really junky Chinese scope (Leapers and BSA). none have what I would call bad optics, but what makes me pay $1000+ for a Leupold over a $100 BSA is it's mechanical properties and ruggedness, not it's optics.
My favorite "long range" scope? The Leupold Mark 4 16x40 mil-dot. Why? It's rugged. Relatively light weight, has excellent eye relief, and a huge elevation adjustment range (140 MOA). I use a laser rangefinder, not mil-dot for ranging but the mil-dots are handy for quick wind and range "holdoffs " without cranking the target knobs with a simple lookup card. My favorite "best buy" scope is the Bushnell 10x40 mil-dot for most of the same reasons. It's under $200 while the Leupold is over $1000.
In my opinion one should always match the rife AND the scope to the task at hand witout reguard to price. More expensive is not always better. I'm not above putting a $4000 Litton scope on a $400 CZ 22LR or a $250 Leupold on a my $5000 Pauza carbine if they do the job best.
Last edited:
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
Yep, a good scope is alot more than clear(and it happens I don't care for any of the 'clearest' scopes available).
A good scope in my view provides all needed -combined with a good gun, as part of a successful field 'system'. There actually aren't alot of scopes that can do it.
This one's great glass,, that one's crosshair subtends just right,, another adjusts perfect but is nearly a pound too heavy.
If Ya know what I mean..
A good scope in my view provides all needed -combined with a good gun, as part of a successful field 'system'. There actually aren't alot of scopes that can do it.
This one's great glass,, that one's crosshair subtends just right,, another adjusts perfect but is nearly a pound too heavy.
If Ya know what I mean..
