Finest Riflescope?

Now we're mixing metaphors and really getting off track! Land Rover: best looking car broke down on the side of the road? ;)

All jokes aside, there are decent optics in all price points it's just that a $200 product cannot compete with a $2000 product. In both cases there are better models than others at each price point.

This thread has been fun and I think we had a good time answering the fellow's question. I'll bow out before I insult someone's favorite auto by accident or on purpose. :)
 
Several years ago, on a dreary, overcast late March afternoon, I did low-light resolution and brightness testing on some of the scopes I owned at the time. I'll highlight to shorten the story.
Resolution: All at 6x
Docter Optic 6x
Docter Optic 2.3x10, Kahles 2-7x36 AH
Docter Optic 3-9x40
Nikon Monarch 3-9x40
Leupold VXIII 3.5-10 (2008), Leupold VXII 3-9x50 (1995),
Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40, Leupold VXIII 2.5-8 (2003)
From top to bottom, there wasn't more than 4% difference.
Scoring decidedly lower in resolution, maybe at 93% of the best
Nikon Monarch 4-12 AO
Leupold VXII (1984) 4-12 AO

Brightness: All at 6x
Kahles 2-7x36 AH. This was like turning on a light bulb. If I give the Kahles a 10, the next brightest would be only a 7.5
Docter Optic 6x
Docter Optic 2.5x10, Leupold VXIII 3.4-10 (2008)
Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40, Nikon Monarch 3-9x40
Leupold VXII 3-9x50 (1995)
Leupold VXIII 2.5-8 (2003)
Besides the incredible showing of the Kahles, the Docter 6x was decidedly ahead of the rest of the pack. The others were all very close.
Again, bringing up the rear were the
Nikon Monarch 4-12 AO
Leupold VXII 4-12 AO (1984)

There were a few other scopes that scored lower. Then, before I could test my Zeiss Conquests in 1.8x5.5, 3-9x40, and 4x, it got very dark and began raining.
 
John Barsness, a very well known and respected gun writer and author, has a new book out regarding optics for the hunter. It is a great source of information. He has access to, owns, and tests most every hunting scope in existence, and the results are in his writings. Many would be surprised at some of the results, given the obvious bias shown in this thread alone.
 
Here is an interesting study JB reported (via copy and paste from another forum)......a very accurate assessment IMO.




Yes, human eyes vary considerably, and there are even some general trends. On average women are more sensitive to the blue side of the spectrum, and men more sensitive to the red. The pupils of older people don't normally open as widely in dim light, which means a "full-sized" exit pupil of 7mm or so doesn't make as much difference to them as quality glass and coatings.

But our brains also play tricks on us. Several studies have down that price affects not just our judgment, but can actually make the part of the brain perceiving anything respond favorably. One study I came across was of a wine tasting. A bunch of bottles of wine without any label other than price were tasted by a bunch of people, some "sophisticated" wine drinkers and some not. The people were told they were rating new wines as an aid to wineries.

The price labels were phony. Some $5 wines had $30 labels, and some $40 wines had $8 labels, and so on. Overall, the more "expensive" wines were given higher marks, and it didn't matter if the taster was a wine sophisticate or not. That's not surprising, but the people were also hooked up to sensors that recorded responses in various parts of their brains. When most people responded favorably to a cheap wine, it wasn't just price prejudice. The part of their brain involving "taste pleasure" also lit up.

One of the tests I ran about a dozen years ago was covering the name of two brands of roof-prism binoculars of the same magnification and objective-lens diameter with duct tape. One was a high-dollar Big Three Euro, and one was a Japanese binocular costing half as much--though it was the "affordable" favorite of the year. They also resembled each other physically enough that most people wouldn't know the difference.

I don't recall the exact results, but out of about 20 people slightly more picked the Japanese binocular over the Euro, and a few called it a draw. There weren't any price tags on the binoculars, so I think the results were valid.

But binoculars also vary from year to year. Those same two binoculars would be considered very good today, but not top of the line. Some people keep chasing the flavor of the moment, but one thing I've noticed is that while individual eyes vary in optical preferences, skill in glassing varies even more.
 
Last time I went shooting I hit a deer sized rock, right where I was aiming at. 891 yards with my $750 Vortex Viper PST 6-24x50. Good enough for me!
 

Forum statistics

Threads
54,083
Messages
1,145,313
Members
93,576
Latest member
FreemanHar
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

Nick BOWKER HUNTING SOUTH AFRICA wrote on EGS-HQ's profile.
Hi EGS

I read your thread with interest. Would you mind sending me that PDF? May I put it on my website?

Rob
85lc wrote on Douglas Johnson's profile.
Please send a list of books and prices.
Black wildebeest hunted this week!
Cwoody wrote on Woodcarver's profile.
Shot me email if Beretta 28 ga DU is available
Thank you
 
Top