Eye of the beholder?

[Bonk]

Never owned or used Swaro, Leica, S&B, etc. I’m sure they live up to the hype but, frankly, I can’t afford them. Well, technically, I could but I’d rather spend that money on something I’d use more often, like a watch. I’m a Leupold guy and most of my rifles have them. Low end to mid range (VX5). They’ve never failed me and I’ve never felt like I missed out on an opportunity to shoot something because my scopes weren’t up to the task. Having never used high end Euro optics maybe I’m just blissfully unaware of what I’m missing. I’m good with that.

 

[BeeMaa]

Never owned or used Swaro, Leica, S&B, etc. I’m sure they live up to the hype but, frankly, I can’t afford them. Well, technically, I could but I’d rather spend that money on something I’d use more often, like a watch. I’m a Leupold guy and most of my rifles have them. Low end to mid range (VX5). They’ve never failed me and I’ve never felt like I missed out on an opportunity to shoot something because my scopes weren’t up to the task. Having never used high end Euro optics maybe I’m just blissfully unaware of what I’m missing. I’m good with that.

It takes about two seconds to “see” the difference between a Leupold VX6 HD and a Swaro Z8i. It’s drastic and so is the difference in price.

I’d highly recommend NOT looking through the top tier glass if you’re happy with what you have or your bank account could take a major hit. Ask me how I know.

 

[SaintPanzer]

I was not asking about physics so forgive me if your post was directed elsewhere.
In keeping with the OP what is a CURRENTLY produced American made rifle scope?

Other than Leupold and certain Steiner models are their ANY riflescopes currently made in made in the USA?
The Nightforce 8x32 NXS on my dog gun was labeled "Made in Japan". My 2.5-10x24 is labeled made in USA but that scope is no longer produced to my knowledge.
I have since traded off my Trijicon Accupoint 1-6x24 but if memory serves it was plainly labeled "Made in Japan".
I am not knocking any optics for where they are produced but what is a premium US scope?

Are not Swarovski Z3s made in Cranston, RI?

Visit to Swarovski Optik

 

[Longwalker]

One of the factors influencing people's opinions about optics it the ability of their eyes to see the small differences.
Years ago I insulted my sheep hunting guide by informing him that my cheap Bausch & Lomb porro prism 10x40's gave me just as good a view as his top of the line Leica binoculars. He was really proud of his Leicas and thought my opinion was really ignorant. But it was true. For me.
Then a year or two later I had laser surgery. It not only corrected myopia and astigmatism, but "opened my eyes" to the possibilities that really good glass offered. I never knew that anyone, especially I, could actually see small distant details so clearly. And looking through excellent binocular / rifle scope glass made that improvement even more enjoyable.
If your vision is limited, lower quality lenses may deliver all you're capable of seeing. If not, there are rewards available to you by being more discerning and spending more.
Only you and your optometrist know for sure. It's personal.
I have almost purged my rifles of Leupold, Bushnell, and Nikon scopes, and have come to appreciate Zeiss, Kahles, Swarovski and S&B. They are superior if you can see the differences.

 

[SStomcat]

In our country, we say, the more honey you add, the sweeter the drink becomes. And in this case, the “honey” is good old-fashioned dollars. So naturally, there’s a world of difference between a $2,000 binocular or scope and a $250 Leupold.

One lets you spot a kudu blinking at 600 yards.
The other lets you guess that something vaguely animal-shaped moved somewhere out there — could be a bush, could be a buffalo, could be your PH waving at you.

Both work… but one definitely tastes like aged single malt, and the other is more “cheap rum on special.”

 

[farmer_john]

In our country, we say, the more honey you add, the sweeter the drink becomes. And in this case, the “honey” is good old-fashioned dollars. So naturally, there’s a world of difference between a $2,000 binocular or scope and a $250 Leupold.

One lets you spot a kudu blinking at 600 yards.
The other lets you guess that something vaguely animal-shaped moved somewhere out there — could be a bush, could be a buffalo, could be your PH waving at you.

Both work… but one definitely tastes like aged single malt, and the other is more “cheap rum on special.”

One thing im curious about is not the glass people are using. But what reticles. I feel like im in the minority using horus and mil type reticles.

 

[Creigh]

One thing im curious about is not the glass people are using. But what reticles. I feel like im in the minority using horus and mil type reticles.

Leopold has simple cross hairs with a CDS cap. It's like magic sauce, just dial and shoot. I have a Mark 3 with no parallax that I had in a big bore, also very convenient for quick draw scenarios. Also basic cross hairs.

My only FFP scope has a Christmas tree. I like the open spaces on either side of the markings.

 

[Ray B]

One lets you spot a kudu blinking at 600 yards.
The other lets you guess that something vaguely animal-shaped moved somewhere out there

Precisely my question, although the answer provided nothing more than a subjective comment.
The definition of a glass to focus clearly enough for the user the see detail measuring 1 cm versus 20 cm could be quantified. So the fans of get what you pay for- what level of detail in specific terms, is available with your scope?

 

[farmer_john]

Precisely my question, although the answer provided nothing more than a subjective comment.
The definition of a glass to focus clearly enough for the user the see detail measuring 1 cm versus 20 cm could be quantified. So the fans of get what you pay for- what level of detail in specific terms, is available with your scope?

I Think if alot of people were honest. Youd find that alot of your cheaper mid priced scopes out there are lightyears better than alot of top of the line scopes 20 years ago.

But at the end of the day theres a diminishing rate of return on your investment.

Vortex since its hated on or bushnell elites are solidly above average scopes. If your shooting for their $500-1000 scopes
Does bauch and lomb nightforce and hensoldt/swaroski make better optics sure.
And if i was playing with something that could cost my life id go with the upper end of the optics price point. But ive seen dumb stuff happen to $ scopes and $$$$$ scopes.
And cheaper and not all get the job done if its a quality scope.

 

[SStomcat]

Precisely my question, although the answer provided nothing more than a subjective comment.
The definition of a glass to focus clearly enough for the user the see detail measuring 1 cm versus 20 cm could be quantified. So the fans of get what you pay for- what level of detail in specific terms, is available with your scope?

I’m no expert, my budget for whatever reason is 1k for scopes, I have a Leupold VX 5 as recommended by the experts here on my 30-06 and a Z3 on my 9.3. They are more than snuff for my needs and I like them both. Now if you going for mountain hunting or sniping your needs will be different and so will be the budget and your choice. My point is it does not makes sense to compare Swaro, Zeiss and Leica against a Leupold or Vortex that’s 1/4 th the price.
I have seen never used in different light conditions or field the high end Swaro ones. My friend st Gordy’s Houston a renowned hunter by himself commented “there is going to be differences but to a hunter like me the proverbial saying of diminishing returns holds true.