Do most

[Geno]

DF:

Good observation regarding eye relief forgiveness. I would add the forgiveness in terms of eye-to-center of lens. The Leupold and other more quality scope have lenses which are fully polished. In contrast, my SWFA scope has only the center of the lens polished. The instant I move a bit off center of the crosshair, the lens goes completely cloudy. My Leupold and Nightforce scopes are far more forgiving in this sense of forgiveness.

However, since the SWFA is for daytime hunting only, for varmints, the lens' lack of full polishing is less critical than my sun-up to sun-down Nightforce scope for deer hunting. I bought the SWFA solely because people seem universally to praise the excellent repeatability of the turrets, and the excellent cost. I have yet to deploy it on targets and varmints to assess it.

Too, adding an adjustable objective will add to that forgiveness in terms of perceived POA to POI accuracy. At 400 yards, it factors in at just under 1 inch. I believe it is 8/10". One inch at 400 yards on a deer is little consequence. One inch at 400 yards on a varmint headshot, now we're talking hit or miss. The problem is, some of my scopes do not have a clear sight picture at the indicated distance. Meaning, I know the distance is 300 yards per laser ranging. When I set the AO to 300, the picture is very unclear. I have to take the AO to about 380 yards for clear sight picture.

Geno

 

[DasFriek]

After writing my post i rethought my scope selection on my 50 yard benchrest CZ and put the 3-9x40 Nikon BM back on it.
Even tho its 9x and the CenterPoint is 16x i think both will be more than usable at that range. I may loose some magnification but i could be gaining things i didn't recognize at first besides the eye relief and "forgiveness". Im sure i made up the word forgiveness in describing how the reticle treats your eye in relation to position, But if there is a more "correct" term pls correct me.

At the gun store i was purchasing the Nikon from i was looking at 3 scopes.
Nikon Prostaff
Leupold VX1 iirc
and Nikon Buckmasters.
The Prostaff was cheaper with the BM in the middle and VX1 being higher in price.
But looking threw all of them in the shop there was an obvious difference in how the reticle treated my eye. But everything else all seemed equal quality wise.
That day it was hard to spend the extra money over the Prostaff just because it was easier on my eye. But i felt what the heck, If im spending over $100 i may as well get the one i like the best so i have no regrets.
I do regret i didn't buy a higher power BM now tho.

 

[cougar1717]

Quick story - I was shooting at the range next to a guy sighting in his new rifle. The guy noticed that I had a Zeiss Conquest and wanted to compare it to his scope. I won't name the brand, but it's about a $130 scope. When he shouldered my rifle, the first thing he said was "Whoa!" At this, I already knew what I was going to see. He handed me his rifle; I shouldered it, and saw a semi-clear center circle with an obviously blurry donut from the edge of center circle to the outside edge.

The moral of the story is this. Inexpensive scopes work but as price increases so does quality. There are many scopes better than a Zeiss conquest, but how much you spend is dictated by what's affordable. The best thing to do is go to a place where they will let you have a side by side comparison. I will say this, though, once I got one clear scope, I am spoiled with it.

 

[gunnie]

just 5 questions to determine if you actally need high end optics....

1 do you shoot at or above 300yds much? you should look into high end scopes.

2 will your rifle/ammo shoot MOA at 300 yds? you may be suprised how much better it could do with a high end scope.

3 are your targets hard to see? start pricing high end scopes.

4 will you be trying to find the hard to see targets in poor light? get a high end scope.

5 will these hard to see in poor light targets be likely to shoot back? you should already have a high end scope.

gunnie

 

[Maverick223]

will these hard to see in poor light targets be likely to shoot back? you should already have a high end scope.

LOL, very true.

 

[tactikel]

Really, paying $200 more for a scope that will give you superior preformance for a lifetime (guaranteed!) is a no brainer. A cheap scope on a hard kicking rifle won't last long. Spending $500-1000 on a deer hunt and relying on a $99 scope is unwise. Consider your rifle/scope a package. IMHO a 1.5 MOA rifle
with a scope that won't hold zero is really a 6 MOA rifle.

 

[Grey Morel]

I think OP has it a little backwards:

Nearly everyone can tell the difference, optically, between a $50 scope and a $300 scope. Few people can tell the difference between a $300 scope and a $600 scope.

There is a certain point, whose exact placement is highly debatable, where return start to diminish greatly; Some say its $300, some $500, some $700. Few would argue that a $3,000 scope is 300% better than a $1,000 scope.