Im looking for a scope for a rifle

Leupold vx-5 be 3-15cds would be another option.
I also have a Conquest HD5 3-15 that uses a sfp her reticle, but came with turrets as well. Not sure what the newer conquests offer by mine is a really nice scope.

For big game hunting you don't need anywhere near 16X. Maybe for varmint hunting where targets are smaller. 10X is enough for 1000 yard target shooting and when you get above 10X there are a lot of negatives to consider. It gets harder to get a sharp clear image as you go up in magnification and price goes up exponentially. The clarity of the scope and reticle is more important than the number of X's. At reasonable hunting ranges a common 3-9X40 is more than enough magnification. If the max magnification is kept to around 10X or less FFP isn't an advantage.

I have both FFP and SFP scopes and the only advantage of FFP is when using less than the scopes max magnification. Most of my hunting scopes are SFP. I hunt 99% of the time on the lowest setting of either 1X, 2X or 3X depending on the scope. If I get a close shot I've got a large FOV on the lowest setting and I don't have to waste time messing with the magnification when shots are happening fast. I've taken deer at 200 yards with the scope at 2X. If I need more magnification and have time to set up the shot there is no reason to not go straight to max magnification where focal plane isn't a factor.

When you get scopes with crazy high magnifications you run into situations where the image isn't clear above 10X or 12X and you need to adjust down to 7-9X in order to see the target. In that case your scopes BDC markings are no longer accurate with SFP.

IMO you're specifying some features that you really don't need and that will just run up the cost, or lower quality. For a hunting rifle a reticle with multiple aiming points is good enough. Adjustable turrets are more precise, but in order to be repeatable you need to buy a higher quality scope.

Gadgets or a lot of X's run up costs and don't necessarily improve quality. For the same money I'd choose more quality glass over more X's.

Tucker25 said:

Nevermind. Does anyone have experience with a swarovski z5 3.5-18?

Click to expand...

I don't remember the specific Swarovski scope I had; it could have been the one you mention. The optics were fine but compared to other scopes with as good optics, it was pretty big and heavy so I sold it.

My scope of preference is the Leupold Mark 4. There are many on eBay in your price range.

Dunno about the weight, but I believe a Leupold VX-6 3x18 fits most of your criteria. I have a 2x12 on my 7 mag

Tucker25 said:

Does anyone have experience with a swarovski z5 3.5-18?

Click to expand...

I have two Swarovski scopes (ok, the first is on my wife‘s deer rifle, my brother borrowed the other), though not that one. I also have Swarovski binoculars and a spotting scope. I am looking at your same scope with a ballistic turret for one of my rifles. As good of glass as you can buy.

As others have said, Leupold and Zeiss make good glass, too. I have both of those, also. As another website preaches, “buy better glass typically at lower power vs poor glass at higher power.”

if you stay with a maker who has been making their scopes for over 50+ years with out being sold several times and who will repair-replace no matter who,s at fault, i think you will be fine.

jmr40 said:

10X is enough for 1000 yard target shooting

Click to expand...

This leads to my serious “wants” of a Schmidt & Bender fixed 10x!

I think everything has pretty much been said that needs to be said. With a $1500.00 budget the world is your oyster.

If it were me I’d be looking at the VX-5 and 6, Zeiss and Meopta. I’d try to look through the brand of scope you want before purchasing. Swarovski was not included in my recommendation because I don’t see well through them. I wish I did because they are great scopes. Chances are there will be a brand that doesn’t get along with your eyes as well as others.

Tucker25 said:

Nevermind. Does anyone have experience with a swarovski z5 3.5-18?

Click to expand...

The 2.4 - 12x50 is better for deer hunting. The 2.4x gives you a better field of view than 3.5x and you don't need 18x for deer -- you'll lose the deer in the narrow field of view. The 50mm objective is also brighter or gives you a bigger exit pupil.

The Swarovski has a good ballistic turret (available option). You don't need custom turrets because you can customize it, even in the field. It has 3 colored preset points, but of course you can click 1/4 MOA per click between those. For deer you don't need more than that because your POI isn't going to vary dramatically across the ranges you'd be shooting at. Even with a high-arcing trajectory like 450 Bushmaster, you can cover all your ranges with presets at 100, 200 and 300 yards. If it's 250 yards, you just set the turret halfway between the dots for 200 and 300. With something that shoots flat like 270 you could configure the presets at 100, 250, and 400. The BT-4W reticle is also good to make corrections for wind.

It's not a LRP scope, but it's really quite luxurious for hunting.

It's only 16 ounces. The bigger Swarovski's and Zeiss are 20, 24 or more ounces but they bust your budget. It's no ultralight, but the Z5 is reasonable for the stalker on foot and his lightweight rifle. Another options is the similar weight Z6 1.7-10X42, but it will be slightly over budget.

I like Ron, but I got distracted by the rifle....I may need to buy one of those ......

https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B00654G0F4/ref=emc_b_5_t

Along the same note, tax free if you use the B&H credit card and free freight. B&H has good people. Good service. I have bought a lot from them.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/837319-REG/Swarovski_59764_Z5_3_5_18x44_BT_Riflescope.html

I’ve bought from B&H once, it was seamless.

Tucker25 said:

Nevermind. Does anyone have experience with a swarovski z5 3.5-18?

Click to expand...

I have the Z6i 3.5-18x50 on a hunting rifle. What would like to know?

I think the parameters of both this and your other thread are restrictive to the point that even though you think you asked two different questions, the conceded answer for either will be the same.