$5,000 rifle scopes?

[nettlle]

I recently bought a new higher end Leupold scope (for me anyway) for a little less than 1K. My first new scope in decades. It has some nice features like side focus and the CDS system. Optics crisp and clear but that's always been the case with my Leupolds I have bought. Where's the 4K difference?

 

[horsemen61]

You’d have to ask someone who has both is my best guess

 

[Varminterror]

Where's the 4K difference?

The difference I see is out there in the soup. Seeing that isn’t worth as much to everybody.

Pretty few riflescopes are $5k, very few are even $4500. $3500-4500 buys as much clarity, quality, reliability, and features as can be had.

 

[C-grunt]

Only 5k scopes I've seen are high end rare European scopes.

Now, if we are talking about the 3-4k scopes like the NF ATACR, ZCO, S&B, and Kahles... there is definitely a difference.

 

[C-grunt]

Shooting paper at the range, you won't really see much of the difference.

But look for an unpainted steel target in the shade under a tree at 800 yards, you'll see the difference. Add in the extra durability and reliability and you have the extra money.

 

[e rex]

Sure glad I'm having great luck with my old Weaver K6w.

 

[Varminterror]

Sure glad I'm having great luck with my old Weaver K6w.

We’re all glad for you, too.

 

[hawg]

If I pay that much for scope it better skin a deer, clean it, butcher it and cook it. I paid 1,500.00 for a scope back in the 90's. Never again.

 

[hq]

If I pay that much for scope it better skin a deer, clean it, butcher it and cook it.

It probably won't do that but it'll enable you to see, identify and shoot one in extreme low light. Even in just bioluminescence with zero ambient light. Very common in Europe. Not to mention the optical clarity in all situations. Then again, as already has been pointed out, most high-end hunting optics are in $2-3k range, more expensive being tactical scopes with special features.

The current king of the hill in low light seems to be Schmidt & Bender Polar -series, followed closely by Zeiss HT, Swarovski Z6i, Leica Magnus, Kahles Helia, Docter/Noblex and a number of others.

Optics are a prime example of the (in)famous buy once / cry once -principle.

 

[Nature Boy]

Trying to convey the differences in scopes through an internet post is inadequate at best but I’ll take a crack at it.

I don’t have first had experience with any $5,000 scopes but I do own several with street prices that range from $2,800-$2,300 (Kahles, Swarovski and Nightforce)

Like the OP I also own a few Leupold scopes, including one that I bought for $900.

I’ll make a cautionary statement here. If you are happy with your sub $1,000 scope DO NOT LOOK THROUGH, BORROW OR OTHERWISE TRY ANY HIGH END OPTIC. There is a reason they cost more and it’s obvious when you use one. Ignorance will save you money and avoid periods of painful yearning.

If you’re a casual user and don’t spend a lot of time behind a scope then the differences may not mean as much but if you hunter or competitive shooter that spends hours behind your scope then you will appreciate the qualities that come with higher end optics.

I’ll choose hunting applications for comparison. These are all cell phone pics at different magnification and lighting conditions so take it for what it’s worth.

I really like my Leupold VX3. For hunting it is a fantastic value. I think I paid ~$400 on sale. Good clarity, good light amplification, great eye relief.

This 10 point went home with me


young 8


On the other end is my Swarovski Z6i. I got a great deal and paid $2,300 for it. Fantastic clarity, field of view and unbelievable low light performance. I can glass the field for hours on end with no eye fatigue. I have a very nice pair of Leica binos but rarely use them when I’m hunting with the Swaro.

another young 8


late evening hunt in Mississippi


Dusk in my living room

 

[jmr40]

Most hunters and casual target shooters can do just fine with a $500 scope. There are even some $200 scopes that I'd not feel handicapped using. The light transmission on high end scopes is one big difference, but even most $300-$500 scopes do fine during legal hunting hours.

In most places that is 30 minutes prior to sunrise, and 30 minutes after sunset. For non-hunters, there is still plenty of light 15 minutes prior to sunrise and 15 minutes after sunset. It is really only those first and last 5 minutes of legal hunting time where light transmission matters.

But in at least one state (South Carolina) legal shooting time is one full hour before sunrise and one hour after sunset. In those conditions a scope well into 4 figures can make a difference.

 

[hq]

But in at least one state (South Carolina) legal shooting time is one full hour before sunrise and one hour after sunset. In those conditions a scope well into 4 figures can make a difference.

Like I've said earlier, light transmission is largely a legislative issue. I've shot quite a few of my best trophy deers between 11pm and 3am and at these latitudes (60°N+) we get less than six hours of daylight a day in December, from 9am to 3pm. So it's DARK. Fortunately the deer season spans from early September to mid February.

But there's no denying that a quality scope is a pure joy to shoot in daylight too, and as @Nature Boy demonstrated, there's a huge difference between a mid-priced and an expensive scope.

It all boils down to what you're comfortable with. Some people drive Bentleys, some Chevrolets and some are content with walking, too. There's no right or wrong, just "good enough", "better" and "good, period" in everything.

 

[lightman]

You bought a really nice scope. It will do everything you want it to do. And probably for a lifetime.

More expensive scopes will have even more clarity and light gathering ability. They may have more adjustment range, and may be more rugged. They will have very dependable adjustments and return to zero more precisely. My Nightforce have 100 or 110 inches of adjustment. If you check the adjustments on target they move what they claim and return to zero precisely.

NF used to have an advertisement about a scope getting shot and the scope held zero even though the adjustments were disabled. US Optics used to advertise zeroing one of their scopes and taking it off and driving nails with it and it held zero once it was remounted. Those 2 examples sound extreme to me but............

 

[Conelrad]

Military snipers use the high-end scopes. The only things they hunt are 2 legged, or material denial.

It a 24/7 kind of application, and usually at crazy distances and crappy conditions.

Considering what their mission costs overall in terms of lives and support, the optic $ is of the least concern

 

[jmorris]

Trying to convey the differences in scopes through an internet post is inadequate at best but I’ll take a crack at it.

The best way I have ever seen to quantify clarity is to have a number of optics handy and see how far away you can discern barbs on a wire fence. The number of “Oh, wow, yeah.” comments from folks in the group makes me believe they were seeing things for the first time, so to speak.

 

[jmorris]

Military snipers use the high-end scopes. The only things they hunt are 2 legged, or material denial.

It a 24/7 kind of application, and usually at crazy distances and crappy conditions.

Considering what their mission costs overall in terms of lives and support, the optic $ is of the least concern

I would only have the best available glass if I could get you guys/gals to buy them for me too.

 

[Varminterror]

Below are some frame captures from video through my Swaro SLC 15x56mm binos, illustrating my statement made above…

When a target which is shaped like this:


Is sitting at 600 yards and looks like this through the scope (heavily cropped vs. actual FOV):





Great glass can’t resurrect light which has been bent into a pretzel by mirage downrange, long before it ever reaches the optic, but great glass CAN help the shooter resolve swirls and flares within the mirage, so instead of a fuzzy, rainbow blast of distortion and aberration, we can find the edges of targets between flares and realize that coyote target is actually almost twice as big in both directions as it appears after being chewed up by mirage, AND we can realize the center of the target is actually about where its bottom edge appears to be in the mirage. Spotting that day beside my son, an experienced match spotter himself, he couldn’t resolve the numbers on the IPSC or on the tires in his inexpensive binos (~$150 retail) - with those numbers being around 18” tall at 600yrds - while I could obviously discern what’s what, as seen above, through my Swaros.

Or when a target angle in the morning of a match - where only a point or two means the difference between 1st and 5th - leaves a relatively freshly painted target looking like this:


And a left edge strike looks like this - note the subtle spall signature, the little puffs of gray, spraying from the top and bottom right sides, blown by wind, if your spotter doesn’t see that, the shooter gets docked points…


But a right edge strike turns the target into the morning sun, revealing that it is actually still well painted and is, in fact, BLUE… it’s pretty easy to understand that a shooter in the afternoon will have an advantage of better visibility when the sun swings onto this plate, even if it has been beaten grey, over the shooter in the morning - and further, we hope the spotter has good binos too so he can score this stage fairly throughout the day, rather than giving a “no call” and scoring misses on shots which were left edge in the morning and his bullet splashes weren’t visible in cheap glass…

 

[mcb]

I have had the opportunity to use scopes like the Schmidt Bender PMII 5-25x56 and the Night Force ATACR – 5-25x56mm F1 and they are spectacular scopes especially for the very long range shooting where you are dialing in the ranges. I shot the PMII out to a mile and the ATACR out to 1000 yards. That said my personally owned most expensive scope is a lowly Leupold VX-3i LRP 6.5-20x50mm, I can see the difference and I miss a couple of the features of the more expensive scopes for sure but until I start shooting a whole lot more PRS type shooting I can't justify the price difference. The VX-3i does just fine out to 1000 yards in my limited use so far.

 

[Walkalong]

$1000 can buy a really nice scope that will be a pleasure to use for most situations.

Enjoy.

 

[redneck2]

I had a friend that always bought cheap scopes for hunting. They were “good enough, and just as good as my Leupold VX-3’s”. We were sitting side by side deer hunting, facing into the sunset. He glassed the tree line directly into the sun and he commented that it was impossible to see anything due to light flare. I had him look through my scope, which was clear looking at the same place. His rifle had a VX-3 shortly thereafter.

I’ve never used a $2,500 scope under outdoor conditions but as outlined multiple times above, I have every confidence there is a noticeable difference assuming one has the skill set to take advantage. I probably don’t at my age. Maybe never did.

Understand too that the value of money is different to different people. I have an acquaintance that makes a multiple thousand dollar income every work day. For him, a $2,500 investment only represents maybe a couple hours. For most people it may be 2-3 weeks of work.

Also, you’ll see guys that have multiple safes full of guns they seldom or never use but claim that they don’t have enough money for a higher end scope, whatever that means to them.

 

[Jimfern]

Military snipers use the high-end scopes. The only things they hunt are 2 legged, or material denial.

It a 24/7 kind of application, and usually at crazy distances and crappy conditions.

Considering what their mission costs overall in terms of lives and support, the optic $ is of the least concern

I don't believe they have to pay for them out of their own pockets.

 

[entropy]

I work in the optics industry, and have plenty of experience seeking out aberrations in lenses. So the difference in a $500 scope and a $5000 scope are (pardon the pun) clear as a bell to me.
As Nature Boy says, if you can't notice the difference, (and many can't) you'd be wasting money buying a $5000 scope. For those of us who do notice, his warning is true. It's hard to go back to other scopes once you look through one.
The reason for the costs are several:

• Top quality glass, precision ground.
• The best coatings, usually Zeiss, even in other make scopes. This feature is why Nikon scopes were a value for the money. Nikon's coatings were very close to Zeiss quality, and the glass was excellent for the price also.
• Arraignment and mounting of the lenses in the scope body itself. This usually what separates 'good' and 'cheap' . Well designed focal plane layouts with solid (and repeatably tracking, for variables) mounting are worth their weight in gold.
• Adding side focus or even adjustable objective makes it that much more difficult to keep the quality top notch, and solid, repeatable, reliable turrets add into the mix.

All of this has to be fit into as small and light of a scope body possible that can still deliver the optics needed. (Large objectives, 30 & 34mm tubes, huge exit pupil, etc.)
I don't own any top end scopes, though I definitely appreciate the quality therein. I just don't have any rifles worth putting one on.

 

[Walkalong]

I have one "top end" scope ($3800 Zeiss S5 LRP 5-25). It resides on my PRS rifle, where I can see and make use of the quality. Better eyes and shooters can make even better use of it, but I still get more out of it than my previous $1800 "midrange" scope, so for me it has been worth it. Hurt to buy, but now it's paid for and it will outlast me.

 

[JFrank]

Only 5k scopes I've seen are high end rare European scopes.

Now, if we are talking about the 3-4k scopes like the NF ATACR, ZCO, S&B, and Kahles... there is definitely a difference.

IOR valdada iirc are around $3500, new march high master list for $4500 super ED glass is beyond my resources, my NF comp has ED glass at $2400 and my vortex Golden Eagle with HD glass was $1200

 

[hq]

I just don't have any rifles worth putting one on.

You do have a rifle, don't you? Any rifle. Mounting a good scope doesn't mean that it has to stay there forever. I've rotated a bunch of scopes (even some high-end ones) from one rifle to the next and only a handful have found a permanent "home". That said, my Ruger deer guns (Deerfield and Mini30) have Zeiss scopes on them and they are there to stay. Why? I like these rifles a lot so I make shooting them as pleasant as possible. It doesn't matter if the scopes cost quite a bit more than the rifles, it's all about the combination and a personal preference.