Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Long Range Scopes and Other Optics

Long Range Scopes and Other Optics Nightforce Optics


Reply

Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 08-25-2013, 01:40 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 416
Re: Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timmay View Post
in the real world no difference. In the scope snob world, all the difference
Yep...that's probably true for one reason.
500-1000 is still in the lower end of scope quality, so you're looking at comparing a mid range inexpensive scope to an upper end inexpensive scope.

100-1000 is the low end quality
1000-2000 is the mid range quality
2000-3000 and up is excellent quality
3000+ is where you see a diminished return on your investment

What you get for your extra 500-1000 when you're at the low end of the spectrum is HUGE. Glass quality, tracking, illumination, FFP, objective size, tube size, durability, glass coatings, eye relieve yada yada yada.
It's not until you get over 2000 that you start to gain very little in features as you increase $$.
Once you get above 2000, features don't change much. About the only thing you're getting is better glass...and to some, it's not needed.
Last summer my three buddies and I laid down and set all of our optics to 14x and looked through them at the same target at 1460 yds. The difference was UNQUESTIONABLE.

A Bushnell G2DMR (around 900), a Nightforce NXS (1700 range) and Premier. (around 3000)
I'll use these three as examples throughout, since I got to look at each all at the same time. I've looked through the Vortex Razor HDs, Zeiss Conquests, USO, Leupold VXII, III, MK IV and a ton of others...but not all at the same time for direct comparisons.

It was clear the Nightforce was better than the Bushnell...but we concluded that it was not worth an extra $800, due to the features Bushnell offered.
It was also clear that the Premier was vastly superior to the NXS, although, it was hard to justify an extra $1000+.

"Real world" for you and "Real world" for someone else is VERY VERY VERY different.

If you don't shoot LR (beyond 1000), you don't rely on accurate tracking (from top to bottom on your turret, not just a few MOA here and there), you don't use your scope for glassing (targets or critters at or beyond a mile), you don't use a reticule for ranging (for targets or animals ) or calling misses for a partner...then your choices are vastly different than mine and your needs are much different as well.

I'm of the firm belief that your optic should be at least on par with the value of your rifle. If you're rifle ran you $1500, then you scope better at least give you $1500 worth of quality and features.

There are many optics that give you more for your dollar than others. In the comparison we looked at...I would be more than happy taking a NEW $1000 Bushnell Elite Tactical over a NEW Nightforce for $1800.
Now if you can get a used NXS for 1200, or a used Premier for 2300 then thats something I would jump on because there are just some things that retain their value.
__________________
"We do not rise to the occasion...we fall to the level of our training."
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-26-2013, 05:21 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 831
Re: Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

I guess i look at it like this. For my uses a 500 dollar scope gets it done. My long range shooting is at deer not paper targets. Absolute max range is about 600 yards. Most 400 or less. A 2k scope is surely not needed for this. I have no doubt something like a nightforce is going to be a better optic then my vx3 leupolds if a guy is a competitive shooter. But then id about be over half the nightforce and other top end scopes are bought by people who couldnt tell the differnce and are just trying to impress there buddys. Kind of like buying a porche instead of a camero. Sure the porche handles a bit better buy how many guys are really capable of seeing that limit on the street. Most porches are sold to doctors, lawyers and other yuppies that could probably drive a prius as fast as they do there porche. A 1000 dollar plus riflescope is no doubt a step up but youll never convince me that its an advantage on a hunting gun.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-26-2013, 12:34 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 416
Re: Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lloydsmale View Post
A 1000 dollar plus riflescope is no doubt a step up but youll never convince me that its an advantage on a hunting gun.
A hunting rifle is where I would RATHER spend the money. That's pure ethics.
If you miss a piece of steel or a piece of paper, it's no big deal...maybe your ego gets bruised.
You miss, or wound a 200" white tail because of your equipment, and that will haunt you forever.
If it's an advantage on A GUN, then it's just as advantageous on a HUNTING GUN.

Choosing to use lesser equipment is your choice, but don't place your limits on someone else.

(nearly)Perfect example.
Last October, we were lucky enough to have the crew from Carnivore on the Pursuit Channel come out to film a coyote hunt with us.
Their goal was 6 good kills filmed with TV quality action to produce a show for this season. We ended up getting 20+.
On the close of day two, we had a coyote approaching slow in the fading light.
It stopped on the opposite ridge and stood still for about 8 minutes, and as the sun set...we were running out of light FAST.
The host Dustin Whiticare, using his sponsored Nikon optic, couldn't even see the coyote in his scope. He told my partner that he couldn't take the shot cause he couldn't see it.
James, with the larger 56mm objective and superior glass, had plenty of vision to make the shot for a day ending 13th dog.

Now clearly...this kind of equipment isn't needed to take a lowly predator....but most of our equipment serves double/triple duty. It rides predator rifles, big game rifles and we take them to matches.
I hope the time comes, that you have a record setting animal present itself and you can't take the shot because of inadequate equipment.
Buy once, cry once.
__________________
"We do not rise to the occasion...we fall to the level of our training."
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-26-2013, 01:37 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 6,274
Re: Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

Quote:
Originally Posted by c_bass16 View Post
A hunting rifle is where I would RATHER spend the money. That's pure ethics.
If you miss a piece of steel or a piece of paper, it's no big deal...maybe your ego gets bruised.
You miss, or wound a 200" white tail because of your equipment, and that will haunt you forever.
If it's an advantage on A GUN, then it's just as advantageous on a HUNTING GUN.

Choosing to use lesser equipment is your choice, but don't place your limits on someone else.

(nearly)Perfect example.
Last October, we were lucky enough to have the crew from Carnivore on the Pursuit Channel come out to film a coyote hunt with us.
Their goal was 6 good kills filmed with TV quality action to produce a show for this season. We ended up getting 20+.
On the close of day two, we had a coyote approaching slow in the fading light.
It stopped on the opposite ridge and stood still for about 8 minutes, and as the sun set...we were running out of light FAST.
The host Dustin Whiticare, using his sponsored Nikon optic, couldn't even see the coyote in his scope. He told my partner that he couldn't take the shot cause he couldn't see it.
James, with the larger 56mm objective and superior glass, had plenty of vision to make the shot for a day ending 13th dog.

Now clearly...this kind of equipment isn't needed to take a lowly predator....but most of our equipment serves double/triple duty. It rides predator rifles, big game rifles and we take them to matches.
I hope the time comes, that you have a record setting animal present itself and you can't take the shot because of inadequate equipment.
Buy once, cry once.
Agreed! Which is why my target-only guns get cheaper scopes than my hunting guns.

I had the sun go down and not be able to see my bow sights on a MONSTER (150"+ rack) whitetail one evening. I am still pissed about that. I drew back, sun dropped into a shade, and I couldn't see which pin was which. I was MAD! I drew back down, and let him pass...........Never seen another one that big within bow range since. Maybe this year I'll get my chance.
__________________
"I'm just a peckerwood who lives in the hills with too many guns..." - Bob Lee Swagger

"Give me a minute...I'm good. Give me an hour...I'm great. Give me 6 months...And I'm unbeatable." - Col. Hannibal Smith

Ignore everything I say, because I have a reading comprehension and memory problem...

Quote:
Originally Posted by WildRose View Post
The 284 is to the STW what a tricycle is to a Ninja.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-26-2013, 01:39 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Wolf Point, MT
Posts: 279
Re: Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

Bear in mind, these "small" differences can mean a lot in real world opportunity as c_bass' example proves. That coyote could have been a 350" bull on the last day. I personally sold every vx3 Leupold I owned when I saw how much longer and better into dusk conditions I could see and shoot with Weaver Grand Slams. It was 20-30 minutes! Grand Slams are in the same tier as the Leupolds and the mid and top tier stuff is significantly better still.

The glass is usually much better in adverse conditions from 500 to 1000. At 2:00 pm looking across a stubble field the difference wont seem to justify the extra money.

The composition of the device is usually much more precise and rugged. If you actually shoot beyond point blank and holdover range repeatability is ESSENTIAL.

1500 will show a significant improvement over 1000. That price point opens up a lot of options in the used market.

You've gotten some real insight here. People have spent thousands of dollars in tuition at the school of hard knocks to figure out what these markets are "really" like
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-26-2013, 02:01 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 6,274
Re: Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

JAKelly, if you like those Weavers, you should look through a Zeiss. It's insane how well you can see over an open greenfield at night when coyote hunting...

I shot a deer @ 120 yards with my 7mm STW about 10 years ago @ 8:00 at night. I could see him perfectly enough to make a clean and humane kill. Was using a Bausch & Lomb Elite 3000 3-9x50 30mm with a German #4 FireFly reticle (gathered star light). That scope was insane. It traveled around from rifle to rifle in my stable, till it landed on my Browning A-Bolt II 7Mag, and both of them got stolen back in 2008. I have since replaced the A-Bolt with another identical to it, but haven't been able to find another one of those scopes identical to that one I had. When I do, I'm snatching it up! That scope was one badass optic.
__________________
"I'm just a peckerwood who lives in the hills with too many guns..." - Bob Lee Swagger

"Give me a minute...I'm good. Give me an hour...I'm great. Give me 6 months...And I'm unbeatable." - Col. Hannibal Smith

Ignore everything I say, because I have a reading comprehension and memory problem...

Quote:
Originally Posted by WildRose View Post
The 284 is to the STW what a tricycle is to a Ninja.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-27-2013, 01:30 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Wolf Point, MT
Posts: 279
Re: Real World Difference Between a $500 and a $1000 Scope?

Somewhere on the web I was reading an optical analysis of many scopes. There were scopes from all different price points. This was done by a computer and supposedly empirical. The best overall and lowlight performance was the Zeiss Diavari 3-12x56 and almost all the highend companies had representation (S&B, Swaro, Kahles, et al). The margin was fairly impressive. The roo shooters seem to prefer the straight 8x56 and they shoot all night. I guess I'm saying you're probably right about the conquests. I actually have a 4.5-14x50 Conquest that I just got as part of a package, I'll have to check it out at night.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC