"In 2006, everything you know about rifle scopes will be Eclipsed"
- Thread starter GunGoBoom
- Start date
- Status
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
No, but my guess is that this is simply a teaser (as you suggested) for a new product line that they feel is really good. I highly doubt it will be all that big of a deal compared to their hype. The line VX-3 is their new hunting scopes.
William P.
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2005
- Messages
- 25
Hopefully when it comes out it'll be mounted on the "new" Glock thats going to revolutionize firearms we've been told was coming.
SLCDave
Member
There was a teaser ad in the last issue of G&A as well.
IMHO the ones to beat are the new Simmons and Redfield models that were completely redesigned after Meade Optics bought out both of these companies. They are genuinely revolutionary designs for rifle scopes whose optics have been in the dark ages as modern optical design goes.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Well, so far the rumors are not very amazing sounding.
I have to wonder if they are using some sort of reflector technology. I figure they are doing something with the play on the word "eclipse."
I have to wonder if they are using some sort of reflector technology. I figure they are doing something with the play on the word "eclipse."
I'll be the "Eclipse" bit is going to be a catchy little marketing slogan that their "new" rifle scopes will completely eclipse the other rifle scopes.
Obviously, it's working, as we are actually talking about their marketing.
hillbilly
Obviously, it's working, as we are actually talking about their marketing.
hillbilly
Freelance Tax Collector
Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2005
- Messages
- 222
Ive heard murmurs about certain scope companies tying laser rangefinders in with their scopes. It's already been done by Swarovski and a couple others, but it's high price couldnt justify its usefulness, so they were discontinued.
Anyways there is now a company which is doing that in scopes (I seem to have some odd recollection that it was burris) and that is supposed to be groundbreaking, but I personally believe that this is a bad idea which is destined to turn out the same way Swarovski did. If it works, and im wrong, then thats even better, but I suspect that people are going to be using rangefinding reticles for a very long time.
Perhaps this is what Leupold is suggesting towards?
Anyways there is now a company which is doing that in scopes (I seem to have some odd recollection that it was burris) and that is supposed to be groundbreaking, but I personally believe that this is a bad idea which is destined to turn out the same way Swarovski did. If it works, and im wrong, then thats even better, but I suspect that people are going to be using rangefinding reticles for a very long time.
Perhaps this is what Leupold is suggesting towards?
Now I'm thinking about it more...what happens in an eclipse? The sun gets blocked out by the moon and it becomes darker. You can physicially look straight at it without feeling like you're looking into the sun (although don't do that!!). Maybe this is some new scope that will purport to have ideal light delivery to the eye whether you're point straight into the sun or in dark conditions or something. Something to do with light transmission. Just trying to work it out from the little that's been given.
If you go to leupold.com the intro has a little flash video that portrays what looks like a solar eclipse occurring and then the Leupold logo appears where the moon would be...so I'm going with the above or something like it. The again, it's Leupold...they have the capacity and drive to pull out something more impressive than that.
brad cook
If you go to leupold.com the intro has a little flash video that portrays what looks like a solar eclipse occurring and then the Leupold logo appears where the moon would be...so I'm going with the above or something like it. The again, it's Leupold...they have the capacity and drive to pull out something more impressive than that.
brad cook
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
hillbilly said:
And yet at the same time, it wasn't working in the sense that the catchy slogan didn't seem to instill and good faith, amazement, or wishing to buy the new product. In fact for many of us, the catchy slogan sounded like a crap slight of hand magician's trick.
So the the giant front optic with the bite out of it is the great new innovation? The term of eclipse doesn't fit. Sure, part of the optic would be covered up, if it was there, but it isn't there. Even if it was there, it would be a very minor partial eclipse.
I think they meant to use the term "clipped" not "eclipsed."
Me, I think it looks like the scope the Cookie Monster would use as in stereotypical fashion, it has a bite out of it.
So what is the big deal? You get a larger optic that can be mounted lower, or closer to the bore so as to have less parallax problems. That is fairly nifty, but not hugely amazing, not enough so for the likely high cost. Plus, since they are using a non-round optic, you won't be able to add generic or photographic filters in front of the front optic to protect the front optic and to change your sighting options as desired. You won't find any nifty flip-up front lens caps and unless they sell buttloads, you probably won't either. Trijicon ACOGs have been around for a while, but they don't have these options for the ACOGs either and they are being widely used in the military and sold quite a bit in civilian markets.
Heck, take a look in the picture. The front lens already is spotted and there is dust inside the housing infront of the lens. A clear filter would have been nice to keep the front lens pristine (as filters can be replaced fairly easily with round lenses), but that ain't going to happen with the cookie monster bitten objective.
I wonder how much distortion is introduced and how they have compensated for it.
Freelance Tax Collector
Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2005
- Messages
- 222
Sir, I think that picture is a photoshop joke. I think it is very unlikely that is what Leupold has in mind for 2006.
Suspicious
What is suspicious, in post # 14 above, if this is a Leupold factory test rifle and scope,..are the mounts. They don't appear to be Leupold's. They appear to be Brownings new one piece ring/base shown in this Browning add:
Top photo, (could not separate photos)
What is suspicious, in post # 14 above, if this is a Leupold factory test rifle and scope,..are the mounts. They don't appear to be Leupold's. They appear to be Brownings new one piece ring/base shown in this Browning add:
Top photo, (could not separate photos)
Last edited:
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Well, yes, the picture could be a Photoshopped creation that even could fool the moderator of another forum. Just because a moderator posted it does not make it any more or less authentic. I played with the image some and could not discern that it was Photoshopped, but qualify manufactured images will hide many of the common mistakes in modified images such as differenent sizes of pixelattion, the modified areas being different in the pixellation from unmodified areas.
Heck, the image presented could just be a completely electronic concept image and not anything real at all.
What is suspicious is the comarison of new and old Browning mounts/rings. I am not claiming any wrong doing, but pointing out something that looks interesting, actually a couple of things. Based on similarities in the pattern of the numbering below the rear mounts, it appears the same gun is being used as the model on which the scopes are posed. The lower image is of a slightly different contract and is lacking a bit of detail, it would appear to almost be the same.
Now, if you take a look at the shiny part of the bolt between the rings, about 80% appears white, as if reflecting light. To the right upper portion, there is an strange shaped dark area that would appear to be reflecting something dark, such as part of the underside of the scope. If you blow up those dark areas, you will see that they are irregularly pixellated. On the top image with the one-piece mounts, the irregularly shaded area appears to be shaded as a result of using the rubber stamp tool in Photoshop and the person copied over the same spot more than once, resulting in the almost parallel striatations.
The images may be of real items, but they have been doctored.
Heck, the image presented could just be a completely electronic concept image and not anything real at all.
What is suspicious is the comarison of new and old Browning mounts/rings. I am not claiming any wrong doing, but pointing out something that looks interesting, actually a couple of things. Based on similarities in the pattern of the numbering below the rear mounts, it appears the same gun is being used as the model on which the scopes are posed. The lower image is of a slightly different contract and is lacking a bit of detail, it would appear to almost be the same.
Now, if you take a look at the shiny part of the bolt between the rings, about 80% appears white, as if reflecting light. To the right upper portion, there is an strange shaped dark area that would appear to be reflecting something dark, such as part of the underside of the scope. If you blow up those dark areas, you will see that they are irregularly pixellated. On the top image with the one-piece mounts, the irregularly shaded area appears to be shaded as a result of using the rubber stamp tool in Photoshop and the person copied over the same spot more than once, resulting in the almost parallel striatations.
The images may be of real items, but they have been doctored.
HUH?????
A........what????? Sorry, I guess I don't understand your point. The Browning photos are not in question. What's in question here is the Supposed picture of the Leupold Eclipse Scope in the posts above the picture of the Browning mounts????????? Have you looked at that post?? #14
To make it clear, I'm saying that that Leupold scope in post #14 above does not have Leupold mounts. Something I don't think the factory would do when testing a prototype.
Other observations of that photo, the finger smudge on the objective bell and the indentation in the leather on the sand bag where the scope bell is touching it. If it's fake, the maker is a real artist.
A........what????? Sorry, I guess I don't understand your point. The Browning photos are not in question. What's in question here is the Supposed picture of the Leupold Eclipse Scope in the posts above the picture of the Browning mounts????????? Have you looked at that post?? #14
To make it clear, I'm saying that that Leupold scope in post #14 above does not have Leupold mounts. Something I don't think the factory would do when testing a prototype.
Other observations of that photo, the finger smudge on the objective bell and the indentation in the leather on the sand bag where the scope bell is touching it. If it's fake, the maker is a real artist.
Freelance Tax Collector
Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2005
- Messages
- 222
They may very well have taken a POS scope, and modified it to look that way, then painted the gold ring and such on it. Does anyone else notice those bumps around the edges of the lense?
On the other hand though, I did see this on another board, so this could be the biggest most elaborate hoax in riflescope history (the only elaborate hoax in riflescope history?) or this could be for real and leupold would be crucifying themselves. Does anyone else besides me think that such a concept would not sell?
Oh, and I think those TV shaped reticles were the widefield scopes made by redfield. There could have been others, but those are the ones I know of.
On the other hand though, I did see this on another board, so this could be the biggest most elaborate hoax in riflescope history (the only elaborate hoax in riflescope history?) or this could be for real and leupold would be crucifying themselves. Does anyone else besides me think that such a concept would not sell?
Oh, and I think those TV shaped reticles were the widefield scopes made by redfield. There could have been others, but those are the ones I know of.
coylh
Member
- Status