Leopold...I just dont get ity.

[EXPRESS]

This might start a fire, but I've had it on my mind for years now and want to put it out there...

I have a lot of scopes in my safe, both hunting and tactical. From S&B PMII to NF NXS and Leopold Mk 4, Vortex, Swaro and Zeis, Nikon and (the old) Tascos. About 30 in total. I am debating over a Kahles k624i or Steiner Military for my next purchase. I feel like I can say I have been amoungst enough of them, in the field, long enough to be able to comment.

Amongst all the high end scopes, I just can't see how the Leupolds have a reputation for belonging with them. Of all of them, Leupold have the narrowest FOV, darkest, most critical in eye relief and eye box. Sure the clicks are reperatable, but so are all the Others. Customer service, again, all pretty good.

I thought that maybe since the Lepuolds I had owned weren't from the revered Mark 4 series that I was not getting the full experience. Then I ordered an ER/T M5 6.5-20x50. It's nice. But the surprising thing is that my first Vortex, a HS-T, has nothing to envy over it, especially at one third the price.

So am I the only one who has trouble appreciating the Leupolds? They are lightweight, they have a legendary customser serivce, but only if you live in the US, and do fill a bit of a price gap between the true high end scopes and the budget stuff, but I fail to see how anyone can lop them in with the true high end scopes out there today.

 

[HARPERC]

I just went through the scope buying process myself. I broke off from Leupold for the first time in a long time. It was a difficult process, as there are all of these wonderful optics out there that are unavailable to handle, especially side by side.

Most stores are limited on brands, and push what's in the counter as latest and greatest. Some have used a lot of products such as you, most know ocular, from objective. Not many teachers among them.

Maybe they have such things and I haven't seen them, but Leupold is at the show's with a booth, out in the streets with a trailer. They're working hard for their market share.

I'm kind of in an awkward phase in that I have used Leupold in the past, have them on several rifles now and would buy another. I'm not as enthusiastic as I once was, and I don't recommend them like I used to.

Dollars and cent's wise it seems to me Leupold has pegged about where the market peters out. Some good scopes not a huge amount more money, but that little bit seems like a bunch in todays environment. Especially if it's a mistake that you can't afford to correct. We know Leupold, they have made sure we see them, and know they have something for every purpose.

 

[cwinner]

This might start a fire, but I've had it on my mind for years now and want to put it out there...

Then I ordered an ER/T M5 6.5-20x50. It's nice. But the surprising thing is that my first Vortex, a HS-T, has nothing to envy over it, especially at one third the price. .

And your question is?........I'm afraid there's not much that can be done for you if you can't see a difference between a Mk IV and a HS-T

 

[lloydsmale]

I see even for you that leupold are the scopes you want to measure the others by Im not saying that if you compared every leupold made to every other scope in its price range at that magnification that leupold would win them all but it surely would be a contender in any comparison. Im also not saying if you have enough money you cant find a better scope then a leupold but theres Probably a reason there the ones others compare by. How many posts on optics do you see with statements like. My scope is better then a leupold, my scope is as good as a leupold for less money ect. Your rarely here the same kind of comments directed at bushnell, burris ect.

 

[SidecarFlip]

and...who else produces gloss finish scopes in just about every flavor. I happen to like gloss finish myself....but then I'm different anyway....

 

[TXshooter]

I grew up with all leopold scopes and personally would never buy one again. That are the scope everyone compares to only because for a long time they were the only affordable scope worth a crap. The competition was bushnell, tasco, redfield, or Swarovski. So of course everyone had leopolds. Now I'm not saying they are a bad scope. But these days there are way to many other options that are just as good or better for a better price.

 

[lloydsmale]

id say dollar for dollar theres a couple brands like vortex and nikon that are as good as a leupold but i still dont see any that are hands down better. I think these days its kind of gun cool for lack of better words to bash leupold. I think some think there looking like they know optics when they critisize something that others think is good and some that feel the need to justify the off brand stuff they buy by saying there better then a leupold. Buy what you want but ive used leupolds for over 30 years. Have had very little trouble with them. When i have leupolds been first rate taking care of those troubles. Maybe 5 years ago with there varyx line of scopes they were starting to fall behind in the bang for the buck race. but the newer vx line of leupolds is as good as anything in there price range. Think about it this way. the vx1 your buying today has the same coatings on the glass and the same mechanics that a varixIII had 10 years ago and can be bought for a bit over 200 bucks which is half what that old vari xIII cost 10 years ago and thats a bargin considering everything else in life has gotten more expensive. that brings up another thing that happens with these comparisons. Someone goes and buys themselves a new vortex and takes it home and compares it to a 20 year old leupold. take that same scope and compare it to a new leupold and id bet your tune will change.

 

[Pdvdh]

Re: Leupold...I dont get it.

The number of competing manufacturers of optics and rifle scopes has ballooned in the past 8 years. And that's about the last time I purchased a Leupold scope ~ 8 years ago. And I've since sold it.

I don't have anything against Leupold. I've just become aware of other scopes that I think offer more of what I find appealing - for the dollar spent. My initial comparisons years ago focused on the quality of the glass, resolution, and light transmission. Leupold scopes were lacking compared to others in the same price range.

Leupold is no longer resting on their haunches, relying on their brand name recognition for future business. In the past 4-5 years they seem to be motivated to catch up to some of their competition. There were some years where it seemed to me they failed to keep their pencils sharpened, and fell behind in quality of product offerings. Similar to what the US auto industry had done. Didn't recognize the risk the competition posed to their market share.

All I owned were Leupold scopes for many years, when Leupold was one of the only moderately priced scopes that performed reasonably well. I've sold most of those scopes over the past 8-10 years. Replaced them with Zeiss Conquest, Sightron SIIIs, and Vortex PS scopes. I'm definitely not one to get hung up on brand loyalty. If Leupold begins to offer the same quality and features at competitive prices, I'd be just as content owning Leupold scopes as any of the rest.

Leupold's current offerings to compete with other brand scopes with higher quality glass, reticles, and features is coming at a price premium, in my opinion. Otherwise I'd have purchased some Leupold products during the past 8 years.

 

[FEENIX]

Life is all about choices; I am thankful I have them. lightbulb

 

[FearNoWind]

Re: Leopold...I just dont get it.

The evidence is on the target. My Leupold puts the holes as close to the center of the target as the Nightforce on the rifle next to mine on the firing line; for a lot less money. The defense rests.

 

[Pdvdh]

Re: Leupold scopes...

The evidence is on the target. My Leupold puts the holes as close to the center of the target as the Nightforce on the rifle next to mine on the firing line; for a lot less money. The defense rests.

That's a bit simplistic, unless you place very simple standards of performance on your scopes. Who said Nightforce sets a high standard for glass quality? The glass is average to low-average for their cost. Scopes costing significantly less have comparable quality glass. Nightforce scopes do excel in structural strength, accurate/repeatable turrets, multitude of tactical/LRH reticle options, and boat anchor weight. Great for many long range hunting uses. In the past year I've read some of their current model scopes are starting to use HD glass providing better resolution. But those models cost and weigh even more than their predecessor models.

Leupold excels in lightweight scopes and warranty service. And they do a lot of the other necessary things reasonably well also. The models providing their higher quality glass cost more than the comparable competition, in my opinion. Which is why I don't own many Leupolds now. I still own a couple 2.5-8x36mm Vari-X IIIs. One that's ~38 years old. One maybe 10 years old. They've been reliable, functional scopes. I've always felt they were relatively poor in light transmission. The newer model VX-3 was a little better in light transmission. But the 4.5-14x Zeiss Conquest I replaced it with was vastly better in light transmission.

 

[Mikecr]

I consider my 8.5x25 Mk4s the best OVERALL, regardless of price.
That is, not the best in any single category, but best overall.

No particular brand loyalty from me here.
So when I find better, someday, that's where I'll head.

 

[JoeS1044]

id say dollar for dollar theres a couple brands like vortex and nikon that are as good as a leupold but i still dont see any that are hands down better. I think these days its kind of gun cool for lack of better words to bash leupold. I think some think there looking like they know optics when they critisize something that others think is good and some that feel the need to justify the off brand stuff they buy by saying there better then a leupold. Buy what you want but ive used leupolds for over 30 years. Have had very little trouble with them. When i have leupolds been first rate taking care of those troubles. Maybe 5 years ago with there varyx line of scopes they were starting to fall behind in the bang for the buck race. but the newer vx line of leupolds is as good as anything in there price range. Think about it this way. the vx1 your buying today has the same coatings on the glass and the same mechanics that a varixIII had 10 years ago and can be bought for a bit over 200 bucks which is half what that old vari xIII cost 10 years ago and thats a bargin considering everything else in life has gotten more expensive. that brings up another thing that happens with these comparisons. Someone goes and buys themselves a new vortex and takes it home and compares it to a 20 year old leupold. take that same scope and compare it to a new leupold and id bet your tune will change.

I work in a store that sells both the products and I compare vortex and leupold everyday I would for the most part pick the vortex everyday a lot of times and the customers who purchase scopes from me would agree you are getting an equal if not better image quality from the vortex usually at a lower price point.

 

[Pdvdh]

Re: Leupold...I just don't get it.

I work in a store that sells both the products and I compare vortex and Leupold everyday I would for the most part pick the vortex everyday a lot of times and the customers who purchase scopes from me would agree you are getting an equal if not better image quality from the vortex usually at a lower price point.

Yup. I just purchased a 1-4x Vortex PST for an AR15. Very nice scope for that purpose, and for the money.