scope recommendations

Status
Not open for further replies.
Over the past 10 years I replaced all of my Leupolds with Zeiss. The Zeiss simply have vastly superior low-light performance. You can get a Conquest 3x9x40 for about 375 bucks and there is no Leupold in that price range that will touch it. Mind you I still review the Leupold line (among others, I am not a brand loyalist, just a performance loyalist) when scope shopping and did a Pepsi challenge against a Zeiss 3.5x9x44 in October. No competition. Bought the Zeiss (again) without ever second guessing myself.

Go with Zeiss. Better optics in my opinion.
 
i have just the oposite opinion. Ive got to zeiss conquest 3x9s and think there probably the most overated scope on the market. They may have a slight advantage to an vx2 in low light buy not much and a nikon monarch or vx3 will beat them handly. I also had one that shook loose inside and have heard of many others who have had reliability issures with conquests. Just keep in mind that for ziess to make a 400 dollar 3x9 they have to be compromizing somewhere. there better scopes cost 5 times that much. Guys think because they say zeiss on them that there automaticaly a top shelf scope to to me its like saying a leupold rifleman is as good as a vx3 because it says leupold on it. Dont get me wrong. there not junk. there comparable to vx2s and burris full fields and nikon buckmasters but you can pick up any of those for about half the price. If ever there was a firearm related product that you were paying for the name the ziess conquest would be it. Id bet half of them are sold to guys that just want to brag they have a ziess product. If they were as good as some would say theyd sure have a problem getting people to justify laying down 2 grand for one of there scopes that really is top shelf stuff.
 
Leupold is American made which is getting harder and harder to say this day and age.Their warranty cant be beat. I had a used Leupold that had problems they fixed no questions asked and at no cost.We Americans need to remember the jobs we keep doing away with might some day be ours. We got to money conscience and forgot about American made now everything you buy has to be ordered from somewhere else. the company I work for is now selling Chinese copies of American electric motors and I hate it. Enough ranting because I do like CZ and other European companies just like to see more American made stuff again.
roc1
 
roc1:

Yes, they are USA-made, but the glass is from Japan. :( As you said, gettin' harder and harder to find American-made.

Geno
 
The vortex optics are probably the best Glass and internals you can get for the Money. But you wouldn't go wrong with a Leupold either. Nikon is also a good piece of glass for the money.
 
i'll agree id like to have a 3X9X40 VX-3 if I can swing it.Just curious they say twilight lens system are they brighter than the old VXIII
 
If your budget is $350, I'm surprised no one mentioned the Bushnell Elite. I recently purchased a 3200 4-12x40 AO for $219 from Cabellas. The optics are just as clear and crisp as my Leupold VXII. That scope comes with rainguard, a one year no questions asked return policy and a lifetime warranty. Sort of hard to beat for the $$. I would buy another one in a heartbeat.
 
I agree that the 3200s are a good bang for the buck. Just keep in mind there lifetime warantee is against defects from manufacturing not from handling. Leupold or nikon will warantee your scope even if you drop it. Bushell wont. They will even fight you on the factory defects. I got one that wouldnt hold zero new. Sent it back and they tried to claim the tube was bent and wouldnt warantee it. the scope had been mounted in lapped rings and has maybe ten shots out of a 06. By the way that was a 4200 which is suppose to be even a better scope then the 3200. I wont by another and its a dirty shame as ive had a couple 3200s and though they were good scopes and my first impression of that 4200 was that it was a great scope but i wont give any more of my money to bushnell. It seems silly when i can buy a nikon or luepold and have peice of mind that if i have ANY problem there going to take care of it. By the way when i was going through this ordeal with bushnell trying to get some satisfaction i did some checking on the differnt forums and found that the way they delt with me was typical of what others experiences were. ****!
 
I won't buy anything but Leupold for my big game rifles.

leupold is proven. As are other scopes. But if I am going to spend good money on a scope its more than likely gonna be leupold. My grandfather's m37 from '71 has a leupold mounted on it i'm guessing from '71 and its a deer slayer to say the least. been bounced around deer hunting for little over 40 years now! Tough package.
 
Last edited:
No doubt Leupold is the better scope as I own both the VXII and VX3. I have the 3200 on a .22 rifle, and for the $$ it was a good deal for me. Not sure how it will stand up to recoil, however.
 
We bought a Redfield this year from Gander Mountain. They told me that Leupold had bought the company. Same life time warranty and it's made in the USA. Can't beat that. Good luck on your new scope.
 
45 I have thought about the 2.5 X8 X 36 how3 does it work in low light
Depends on the coating of the lenses. I've had a lot of experience in hunting situations. Quality of the glass is FAR more important than size of the objective.
what makes Leupold so exspensive
I will preface this by saying that I'm a scope snob. I've had cheap scopes fail on hunts when I had a chance at true trophy animals. I've had it with cheap scopes.

I was buying a scope for a Canada hunt. I was going to get a Swarovski (the best). Maybe overpriced, but I can afford it. Before I die I wanted one of the best.

So anyway, while looking at Swarovski I got talked into comparing against a Leupold VX-R. For clarity, the VX-R was very slightly clearer. I would never have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself. I've now used the VX-R on several hunts. My friend's Redfield would glare when pointed toward the setting sun. VX-R can be pointed directly at the sun with zero glare. Low light resolution is astounding. I could easily shoot when it's way past time that you could use irons.

In any event, IMO brand is not nearly as critical as price. Any good company's top of the line is going to be better than another's mid-line product, and significantly better than their low line product. In optics, you get what you pay for (unless you get a screaming deal on a discounted one).

With a cheap scope, you can get internal fogging on a rainy day. In poor light at high magnification, it will look like there is wax paper in front of the lens. The image is milky. In the show room, everything looks good in strong light at relatively close range.

If you get VX-III, Nikon Monarch, Burris Black Diamond, or B&L 4200 you'll be fine IMO.
 
Last edited:
Since we are throwing optic names out there I'll throw out a name I haven't seen on here yet:

Minox

German glass with parts made here and there and assembled in America. I've been impressed with my 3-9 x 40.

Biker
 
Personally, for my budget, I like Leupolds, Vortex and Nikon. I generally favor the first two as those companies have incredible customer service.

As someone said, there is a sale on some Leupolds at Cabelas and SWFA right now.
 
icon308win
I have thought about the 2.5 X8 X 36 how3 does it work in low light

It is simply outstanding and you do not need any more brightness for legal game hunting hours in the U.S. At the time, it was reportedly the brightest scope Leupold made, including the 50mm models. The newer VX-III and VX-3 models should work even better than my Vari-X IIIs do. I sent mine back for the heavy duplex reticles for low light visibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top