Best quality optic sub 1k

Rifle scopes, iron sights and optics. Spotting scopes and target acquisition devices.

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by deye243 » 02 Mar 2019, 5:52 pm

TassieTiger wrote:
deye243 wrote:I highly doubt a vx2 would be any where near a Swarovski


Care to elaborate ?


TT You said it was a vx2 as in a 4-12 but the article says 3.5-10 which is a vx3 so I'm lost a bit ........ now I have seen through a z3 and no way a vx2 will be as good as a vx2
User avatar
deye243
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2208
Victoria

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by TassieTiger » 02 Mar 2019, 6:57 pm

deye243 wrote:
TassieTiger wrote:
deye243 wrote:I highly doubt a vx2 would be any where near a Swarovski


Care to elaborate ?


TT You said it was a vx2 as in a 4-12 but the article says 3.5-10 which is a vx3 so I'm lost a bit ........ now I have seen through a z3 and no way a vx2 will be as good as a vx2


I’m confused as well now - “no way a vx2 will be as good as a vx2”??

For clarification -The article refers to a vx3 vs a Z3.

I said from memory the article said... - and my memory ain’t what it used to be...so I dug through 50 mags and dug out the article - cause I wanted to clarify. I thought you might have had some real world experience with Your comment re “I doubt a vx2 would be anywhere near a swarkovski” well...what swarkovski? Or did you mean any swarkovski?

My understanding is that the diff between vx2 and Vx3 is a 1% increase in light gathering ability, custom turret selection, more reticle choice and more robust internals. So not really a huge visual difference in real world light at least.

I’ve looked through some top end swarks including z8I and various z5’s and they are good, very good - but I’m not convinced they are triple the $$$ better...?? I haven’t looked in a Z3 as yet. It seems to me that swarkovski is known as a premium European brand name and whilst you’ll get a fantastic product, you’ll also pay a lot for that name on the side?
Tikka .260 (Z5 5x25/52)
Steyr Pro Varmint .223 - VX 3
CZ455 .22 & Norinco .22 (vtex 4-12, bush 3-9)
ATA 686 U/O 12g & Baikal S/S 12g.
Adler a110 reddot
Sauer 30-06 - VX 3
Howa 300 win mag. SHV 5-20/56
Marlin SBL 45/70
TassieTiger
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3704
Tasmania

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Bill » 02 Mar 2019, 7:53 pm

did you just compare a bushnell to a Swaro via loopy...... each to their own I reckon, I love my burris fullfieds and prefer them over VX3's.....
When a guy is digging his own grave, you don’t fight him for the shovel.

Success leaves clues, Fools follow failure !

20 Hornet, 218 Bee, 222 Rem, 256 WM, 6mm ARC, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5x55 Scan, 270 Win, 357 Mag, 358 Win, 9.3x62, 500 A Square
User avatar
Bill
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1253
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by SCJ429 » 02 Mar 2019, 10:09 pm

Bill wrote:did you just compare a bushnell to a Swaro via loopy...... each to their own I reckon, I love my burris fullfieds and prefer them over VX3's.....


No sure what you are saying Bill. I did say that if you compare a $600 scope to a $1200 scope and can't justify the extra money. Why stop there, compare a $250 scope to a $600 scope and you may conclude that you don't get much more for your money.

For me, I bought a Nightforce Competition series scope, if someone beats me using a $600 Leupold I will then consider that I wasted my money.. I was using a cheaper scope but was beaten by Nightfoce users. I thought if I couldn't beat them I would join them.
SCJ429
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3207
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by deye243 » 02 Mar 2019, 10:27 pm

TassieTiger wrote:
deye243 wrote:
TassieTiger wrote:
deye243 wrote:I highly doubt a vx2 would be any where near a Swarovski


Care to elaborate ?


TT You said it was a vx2 as in a 4-12 but the article says 3.5-10 which is a vx3 so I'm lost a bit ........ now I have seen through a z3 and no way a vx2 will be as good as a vx2


I’m confused as well now - “no way a vx2 will be as good as a vx2”??

For clarification -The article refers to a vx3 vs a Z3.

I said from memory the article said... - and my memory ain’t what it used to be...so I dug through 50 mags and dug out the article - cause I wanted to clarify. I thought you might have had some real world experience with Your comment re “I doubt a vx2 would be anywhere near a swarkovski” well...what swarkovski? Or did you mean any swarkovski?

My understanding is that the diff between vx2 and Vx3 is a 1% increase in light gathering ability, custom turret selection, more reticle choice and more robust internals. So not really a huge visual difference in real world light at least.

I’ve looked through some top end swarks including z8I and various z5’s and they are good, very good - but I’m not convinced they are triple the $$$ better...?? I haven’t looked in a Z3 as yet. It seems to me that swarkovski is known as a premium European brand name and whilst you’ll get a fantastic product, you’ll also pay a lot for that name on the side?


Don't get sucked in to the light gathering ability thing there is a hole lot of more important things like contrast depth of field and chromatic aberration and over the years I have had about 6 vx2 and 9 vx3 and the 3 win hands down but then again most of my scope work is at night and a NF NXS leaves them all for dead day or night
User avatar
deye243
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2208
Victoria

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Bill » 03 Mar 2019, 8:19 am

SCJ429 wrote:
Bill wrote:did you just compare a bushnell to a Swaro via loopy...... each to their own I reckon, I love my burris fullfieds and prefer them over VX3's.....


No sure what you are saying Bill. I did say that if you compare a $600 scope to a $1200 scope and can't justify the extra money. Why stop there, compare a $250 scope to a $600 scope and you may conclude that you don't get much more for your money.

For me, I bought a Nightforce Competition series scope, if someone beats me using a $600 Leupold I will then consider that I wasted my money.. I was using a cheaper scope but was beaten by Nightfoce users. I thought if I couldn't beat them I would join them.


I had 2 bushnell on rifles over the last 2 years as gap fillers till cash flow allowed an upgrade, terrible under a spotlight, very critical eye relief they were really only useful for range pinking. Gave 1 away to a mate kids and sold the other to a mate for $100 despite being new, I sold it being very budget knock about scope, let's not polish what really is a turd of a scope.
When a guy is digging his own grave, you don’t fight him for the shovel.

Success leaves clues, Fools follow failure !

20 Hornet, 218 Bee, 222 Rem, 256 WM, 6mm ARC, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5x55 Scan, 270 Win, 357 Mag, 358 Win, 9.3x62, 500 A Square
User avatar
Bill
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1253
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by TassieTiger » 03 Mar 2019, 8:30 am

deye243 wrote:
TassieTiger wrote:
deye243 wrote:
TassieTiger wrote:
deye243 wrote:I highly doubt a vx2 would be any where near a Swarovski


Care to elaborate ?


TT You said it was a vx2 as in a 4-12 but the article says 3.5-10 which is a vx3 so I'm lost a bit ........ now I have seen through a z3 and no way a vx2 will be as good as a vx2


I’m confused as well now - “no way a vx2 will be as good as a vx2”??

For clarification -The article refers to a vx3 vs a Z3.

I said from memory the article said... - and my memory ain’t what it used to be...so I dug through 50 mags and dug out the article - cause I wanted to clarify. I thought you might have had some real world experience with Your comment re “I doubt a vx2 would be anywhere near a swarkovski” well...what swarkovski? Or did you mean any swarkovski?

My understanding is that the diff between vx2 and Vx3 is a 1% increase in light gathering ability, custom turret selection, more reticle choice and more robust internals. So not really a huge visual difference in real world light at least.

I’ve looked through some top end swarks including z8I and various z5’s and they are good, very good - but I’m not convinced they are triple the $$$ better...?? I haven’t looked in a Z3 as yet. It seems to me that swarkovski is known as a premium European brand name and whilst you’ll get a fantastic product, you’ll also pay a lot for that name on the side?


Don't get sucked in to the light gathering ability thing there is a hole lot of more important things like contrast depth of field and chromatic aberration and over the years I have had about 6 vx2 and 9 vx3 and the 3 win hands down but then again most of my scope work is at night and a NF NXS leaves them all for dead day or night



This is where I get confused....I currently have a vx2 and a vx 3 and if I put them on 7- 18 mag so they are comparable - I along with various friend - shooters and non shooters - cannot split them optically - so when you say the vx3 wins hands down, what is it that stands out ?
Tikka .260 (Z5 5x25/52)
Steyr Pro Varmint .223 - VX 3
CZ455 .22 & Norinco .22 (vtex 4-12, bush 3-9)
ATA 686 U/O 12g & Baikal S/S 12g.
Adler a110 reddot
Sauer 30-06 - VX 3
Howa 300 win mag. SHV 5-20/56
Marlin SBL 45/70
TassieTiger
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3704
Tasmania

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by JSS » 03 Mar 2019, 10:44 am

TassieTiger wrote:This is where I get confused....I currently have a vx2 and a vx 3 and if I put them on 7- 18 mag so they are comparable - I along with various friend - shooters and non shooters - cannot split them optically - so when you say the vx3 wins hands down, what is it that stands out ?


Clever marketing :lol: :drinks:
User avatar
JSS
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 295
Queensland

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Stix » 03 Mar 2019, 12:17 pm

TassieTiger wrote:This is where I get confused....I currently have a vx2 and a vx 3 and if I put them on 7- 18 mag so they are comparable - I along with various friend - shooters and non shooters - cannot split them optically - so when you say the vx3 wins hands down, what is it that stands out ?


Hey Tassie...
Chromatic abberation is where the light "prisms"--refracts through the other end & seperates all the colours if you like...
It will appear as a slight warm shade (say orangy red) on one side of an oblect, & a cooler colour on the other side, say a greent blue.
I have a "fantastic" Ziess that cost me $1500 & is real bad for it.

There is also edge to edge sharpness--this same zeiss is sharp image for sure...but blurry outside the centre general viewing area, & badly distorted image around the edges.

Also test a scope in bright sunlight...look & see how much detail you can see in the shadows & for that matter the highlights...but if doing this, dont let your eyes do the adjustment for you...! cos your brain will adjust what it sees giving you a flase impression of how good it is, & or any differences between scopes...
Lke setting the dioptre on a scope for your own eyes, only have glances then look away to do these tests---seeing people look through a scope for long periods of time (like the test in that NIOA video) lets your brain adjust to what you see, which couldl be a reason they cant tell a difference between the top 2--(note i say could be)

for example...look at the likes of (maybe a bad exampe) a wedding dress in bright sunlight...a cheaper scope gives you the impresion its "very clear & sharp" a because the coatings on it give the image a very high contrast, so a red bucket will look VERY bright red on a dull day...
But if you look at the wedding dress in bright sunshine, it will be so bright you will only see a glary haze of white causing you to squint even looking through the scope...
Look at the same dress with i high end glass & you will se the detail in the lace & not have to squint...

That is an extreme examle, but food for thought hopefully mate...

You could do that type experiment in the snow on a sunny day--that will show up good optics for sure.

These things may be subtle, but along with the fine resolving power of good lenses, they do make a difference in such things as spotting goats from 600 yds on a sunny day...at long range, what you can barely make out with a Vx2 & thus come to the conclusion is an old burnt out stump that has silvered off on the outside, turns into a big billy goat with a Swaro Z6.

And what JSS says too... :thumbsup: Clever marketing...
Jonny Walker is not a great scotch by any stretch, but people think a black label is classy---yuk---!!...but it sells hand over fist... :unknown:

:drinks:
The man who knows everything, doesnt really know everything...he's just stopped learning...
Stix
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3675
South Australia

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Sergeant Hartman » 03 Mar 2019, 9:22 pm

I don't have a swaro or nightforce. But a friend has both and he has decided that the nightforce is better than the swaro. He is not talking about the basic models either.

I got a vx3 and a sightron s3.... and both are better than an athlon argos, that the yanks absolutely rave about as a very good value 4 money scope.

I need 1 more scope and I am in a dilemma, do i get a sightron 8x32 (from a mate) for a really good price or wait and get a nightforce br 12x42 for nearly 2 thirds more.

I have come to the conclusion, that the best thing is to try and get a used good quality scope esp seeing many have lifetime warranties over a medium or low quality new scope.
Sergeant Hartman
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1722
Victoria

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Chappo » 03 Mar 2019, 10:00 pm

Get back on topic you lot!
I still haven’t made up my mind :D
I’ve been reading this one with great interest to figure out which way to go with a new 22-250 for hunting.
So far I’m thinking of saving my pocket money and giving a Nikon prostaff 4-12 a run?
Although I do like the idea of a higher quality second hand one?
Chappo
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 251
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by deye243 » 04 Mar 2019, 12:00 am

Chappo wrote:Get back on topic you lot!
I still haven’t made up my mind :D
I’ve been reading this one with great interest to figure out which way to go with a new 22-250 for hunting.
So far I’m thinking of saving my pocket money and giving a Nikon prostaff 4-12 a run?
Although I do like the idea of a higher quality second hand one?


Anything less than a VX3 6.5-20X50 will leave you wanting if you intend using a 22-250 for what it was designed to do ......
20190304_005800.jpg
20190304_005800.jpg (350 KiB) Viewed 4449 times
User avatar
deye243
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2208
Victoria

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Sergeant Hartman » 04 Mar 2019, 12:32 am

Hey I have a nikko Stirling 4x16x50 ...

Selling cheap to fund my next scope.....rotfl
Sergeant Hartman
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1722
Victoria

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Sergeant Hartman » 04 Mar 2019, 12:32 am

Hey I have a nikko Stirling 4x16x50 ...

Selling cheap to fund my next scope.....rotfl
Sergeant Hartman
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1722
Victoria

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Chappo » 04 Mar 2019, 10:25 am

deye243 wrote:Anything less than a VX3 6.5-20X50 will leave you wanting if you intend using a 22-250 for what it was designed to do ......


Well then i guess I’m not sure what a 22-250 was designed to do but like I said I intend to hunt with mine so I think I’ll leave the 6.5-20 alone.
Chappo
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 251
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by TassieTiger » 04 Mar 2019, 10:31 am

Stix wrote:
TassieTiger wrote:This is where I get confused....I currently have a vx2 and a vx 3 and if I put them on 7- 18 mag so they are comparable - I along with various friend - shooters and non shooters - cannot split them optically - so when you say the vx3 wins hands down, what is it that stands out ?


Hey Tassie...
Chromatic abberation is where the light "prisms"--refracts through the other end & seperates all the colours if you like...
It will appear as a slight warm shade (say orangy red) on one side of an oblect, & a cooler colour on the other side, say a greent blue.
I have a "fantastic" Ziess that cost me $1500 & is real bad for it.

There is also edge to edge sharpness--this same zeiss is sharp image for sure...but blurry outside the centre general viewing area, & badly distorted image around the edges.

Also test a scope in bright sunlight...look & see how much detail you can see in the shadows & for that matter the highlights...but if doing this, dont let your eyes do the adjustment for you...! cos your brain will adjust what it sees giving you a flase impression of how good it is, & or any differences between scopes...
Lke setting the dioptre on a scope for your own eyes, only have glances then look away to do these tests---seeing people look through a scope for long periods of time (like the test in that NIOA video) lets your brain adjust to what you see, which couldl be a reason they cant tell a difference between the top 2--(note i say could be)

for example...look at the likes of (maybe a bad exampe) a wedding dress in bright sunlight...a cheaper scope gives you the impresion its "very clear & sharp" a because the coatings on it give the image a very high contrast, so a red bucket will look VERY bright red on a dull day...
But if you look at the wedding dress in bright sunshine, it will be so bright you will only see a glary haze of white causing you to squint even looking through the scope...
Look at the same dress with i high end glass & you will se the detail in the lace & not have to squint...

That is an extreme examle, but food for thought hopefully mate...

You could do that type experiment in the snow on a sunny day--that will show up good optics for sure.

These things may be subtle, but along with the fine resolving power of good lenses, they do make a difference in such things as spotting goats from 600 yds on a sunny day...at long range, what you can barely make out with a Vx2 & thus come to the conclusion is an old burnt out stump that has silvered off on the outside, turns into a big billy goat with a Swaro Z6.

And what JSS says too... :thumbsup: Clever marketing...
Jonny Walker is not a great scotch by any stretch, but people think a black label is classy---yuk---!!...but it sells hand over fist... :unknown:

:drinks:


I'm going to have to try this out. It all get a bit confusing. Some of the Z8's are asking $4-$5k and you have to wonder how much better they can be - again, you don't know what you don't know - so without the experience, you assume that what you have in front of you is very good - but as I'm learning, this is not necessarily the case. I guess its like riding a bike with crappy suspension, you get used to it and then someone puts you on a new bike and you think - I didn't know it could be this good...
Thanks for the response Stix. Even if I had to google some of those big bloody words lol :drinks:
Tikka .260 (Z5 5x25/52)
Steyr Pro Varmint .223 - VX 3
CZ455 .22 & Norinco .22 (vtex 4-12, bush 3-9)
ATA 686 U/O 12g & Baikal S/S 12g.
Adler a110 reddot
Sauer 30-06 - VX 3
Howa 300 win mag. SHV 5-20/56
Marlin SBL 45/70
TassieTiger
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3704
Tasmania

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by deye243 » 04 Mar 2019, 1:43 pm

Chappo wrote:
deye243 wrote:Anything less than a VX3 6.5-20X50 will leave you wanting if you intend using a 22-250 for what it was designed to do ......


Well then i guess I’m not sure what a 22-250 was designed to do but like I said I intend to hunt with mine so I think I’ll leave the 6.5-20 alone.


It was designed to knock off little furry critters at 0 to 500+ yards .
User avatar
deye243
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2208
Victoria

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Stix » 04 Mar 2019, 5:31 pm

Chappo wrote:
deye243 wrote:Anything less than a VX3 6.5-20X50 will leave you wanting if you intend using a 22-250 for what it was designed to do ......


Well then i guess I’m not sure what a 22-250 was designed to do but like I said I intend to hunt with mine so I think I’ll leave the 6.5-20 alone.


Chappo,
Personally id go for higher mag too.
Maybe 4-16...?...this would be the minimum mag id put on 22-250.
The 22-250 was (as i believe anyway) designed as a varmint cartridge, designed for flat & longer range busting of little furry critters.

If your hunting will not involve regular close quarters running shots, like say stalking up on a mob of pigs or goats, then you may not need the magnification to be as little as 3x or 4x, & you might get away with 6x.
Then a 6-18 or 6-20+ odd something could be on the cards. :unknown:

The debate of how much mag required is always well debated, but im a fan of higher mag on an outfit like that.

I could loan you a 4-16x40 & a 6-24x50 to try if you lived closer...& i would suspect after knocking a few bunnies in the head with higher mag over on the next hill, you wouldnt be so content with a 4-12 again.

Just my opinion & im not trying to antagonise the folk with the opposite school of thought... :)
:drinks:
The man who knows everything, doesnt really know everything...he's just stopped learning...
Stix
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3675
South Australia

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Chappo » 04 Mar 2019, 5:59 pm

Thanks Stix
The new 250 will be for roos and foxes.
I went with a 250 over a 223 for accuracy mostly (and other reasons.)
I’ll be shooting roos to 300yds but I would take a fox past that if I couldn’t get him in closer.
Im not a huge fan of long range hunting for ethical reasons and the places I hunt don’t often present a long distance shot that can’t be taken closer with a bit of stalking.
I’ve used optics with bigger mags before but thought they were best left to the target blokes.
I think a 4x is best for me down low and as high as 16 would get used occasionally but 12x is usually sufficient.
I have always been of the belief that a scope with 3x mag ie 3x9 or 4x12 will be of better quality and more robust than a 4x ie 3x12 or 4x16. And I’d rather something simple with less moving parts and robust for hunting.
Having said that I would definitely buy a 4x16 of “keep it forever quality” under 1k
The prostaff is just a thought because they are cheap and I’ve heard way more positive reports on them than negative ones.
Chappo
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 251
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Stix » 04 Mar 2019, 6:32 pm

Chappo...you mention moving parts being a of concern...a 4-12 prob has just as many moving parts as a 4-16... :thumbsup: It may have less glass though.
If a scope of that price range is going to fail its going to fail...!x more mag will most likely not be the determing factor for failure....it will be its ability to hold zero &/or be repeatable.

there maybe a slight loss of optical clarity in going to 16, but in that price range i doubt youll see it if it were even measurable...
The only difference will be that more mag will block out more light in low light times like dusk...in which case if ness just wind back a little.
I find if i cant see anything with 15 power at dusk when sniping bunnies, its too dark antway & im just seeing a blurry silhouette no matter what scope or mag im using. :unknown:

You will see more difference in the brands really.

Also, i dont see a 22-250 being more accurate than a 223.. :unknown: .it just has more advantages in hold over (less--or further range without holdover), energy & pushing through the wind a little better with the extra velocity...

a 4-12 it is then for you... :thumbsup:

Personally i couldnt imagine taking a shot on a fox beyond 300 with just 12x,...& i can barely see a bunnies head at 300 with 12x, so with the reticle covering it up id have no hope with my eyes... :lol:
i just feel for my liking, 12x is restricting the legs of the 250 somewhat...but its about what you are comfortable with on your rifle & how you shoot...there are plenty guys here who use what you want & swear by it, :thumbsup:

Make sure you show us pics of it laying over some fur... :clap:

:drinks:
The man who knows everything, doesnt really know everything...he's just stopped learning...
Stix
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3675
South Australia

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Chappo » 04 Mar 2019, 6:45 pm

Will do mate cheers! :drinks:
Chappo
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 251
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by solarpak » 05 Mar 2019, 8:35 pm

Chappo,
On my 22-250 i have a Hawke Endurance 8x56 with the LR Dot illuminated reticle................spot on - and no need for any more magnification..............
A great scope for around $500 and great back-up from Guy at Hawke Australia..........

I have half a dozen Hawke's and they have been superb ........the Endurance and Frontier models are superb in low light too. Great Iluminated reticles too

CK
solarpak
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 355
South Australia

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Chappo » 05 Mar 2019, 9:09 pm

Thanks ck.
Gaz will chime in here and say +1 for the Hawke.
I’d like to have a gander through one, I’ve heard a lot of good things about them but the 3 lgs I have access to here don’t stock them.
Chappo
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 251
New South Wales

Re: Best quality optic sub 1k

Post by Gaznazdiak » 05 Mar 2019, 9:36 pm

+1
I hate to disappoint :D

But yes, big fan of Hawke, won't be having anything else. :drinks:
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

PreviousNext

Back to top
 
Return to Scopes, sights and optics