For people that spend 5 minutes behind a $1000 scope and then a $3000 scope, you won't really notice as big of a difference as someone who spends hours and hours behind a scope. Sure, you will notice it is clearer, but not the other qualities. Color, brightness, edge to edge, eye relief, eye box, eye strain, contrast, chromatic aberration (or lack there of), resolution, depth of field, parallax, "pop". Same as binoculars. Same reasons guys who spend hundreds of hours a year behind them spend $1500-2500+ for Swaros/Zeiss/Leica/Meopta vs. $100-300 Bushnells.
I recently got a newly built .280AI from a friend to quickly work up a load before he heads to Mexico for a Coues hunt. His Tikka has such a low Picatinny rail, none of my scopes would clear his barrel with the objective. The ONLY scope I had that cleared is a $700 SWFA SS 3-15×42 from one of my 10/22s. So I used it to work up a load and go verify at long range. While most people would think the SWFA SS is a great scope, and I agree for the price, it is awesome, compared to all my others, it is far from "Alpha" glass. Is it good enough for 95% of people? Absolutely. But once you get a taste of the great stuff, hard to go back to the good stuff, let alone the OK or "meh" stuff.
I honestly believe, anyone that says their $700-1000 optic is as clear as a true Alpha level scope, have either: never really spent time behind one, are justifying their purchase, or are not being honest with themselves. But, I don't think Alpha glass is for everyone. Lots of other things take priority. Some guys just have a different situation.
I spend 5-6+ hours a week behind a riflescope. And I can DEFINITELY see a big difference in glass. Let alone tracking, reliability, RTZ, turrets, features, etc.
