I'm really sick of the Tasco crowd thumbing their nose at me for having a Centerpoint. The Centerpoint has all the fetures and more than the Tasco for a lot lower price. Why would I want to pay the high price of a Tasco when the Center point can get it done for less?
I thought about a Tasco for the last rifle I scoped but went with the Centerpoint instead 'cuz I could get a couple boxes of shells along with it and be out shooting that day for the same price as the Tasco.
Seriously, I put 3 different scopes on my daughters rifle 'till I settled on a Burris timberline 4.5x14 32mm for $200. Started with 3x9 Nikon prostaff for $169, didn't like it and took it back. I needed a scope cause I was load developing and the season was close so I picked up the Centerpoint 4x16 for $69 till I decided on the Burris.
I kept the Centerpoint as a spare. I felt the quality was the same as the prostaff as far as the glass was concerned. Both are finicky on the eye relief compared to the Burris and my Monarchs, Just a little tougher getting the sight picture (not good for a young shooter). The Centerpoint obtained tighter groups than the Prostaff I contribute that to the higher power. Even if the CP cost as much as the PS I'd go with the CP because of the higher power, the parallax adj and the target knobs.
The Burris even with the 8mm smaller obj lens is head and shoulders above both the CP and the PS. Better glass, more forgiving eye relief and the parallax adjust works better.
For $100 more you can get the Burris in a 42mm fulfieldII same thing but bigger.
For $100 more than that you can get a Nkon Monarch 4x16 42mm
So on and so forth.......
I believe that over about the $600 range is when you start running into diminishing rate of returns on your money.
It's kinda like building a hot rod engine. Horse power up to a certain point is cheap after that point you start paying alot for little increases.