Question of scope quality- Leupold

[MIL-DOT]

In my opinion Leopold scopes are absolutely nothing more than overpriced garbage.....

While companies like S&B and Nighforce and a couple others may be on another level than Leupold, they'll also run you a hella lot more money, but to call Leupold, "nothing more than overpriced garbage" is just plain ignorant blather.

 

[HankB]

I have a number of Leupold scopes, from a Vari-X II that's been on my .30/06 for around 4 decades and has traveled from Minnesota to Africa to Texas with no issues whatsoever, to 6.5x20 and 3.5x10 Vari-X IIIs, a 6x42, and a couple of 2x handgun scopes on .44 mags, all of which have performed perfectly. Also have a compact set of 9x25 binoculars and a Leupold laser rangefinder that also work extremely well.

Maybe the new ones have gone downhill . . . but that would surprise me.

I've also in past years had a chance to look at Zeiss, Swarovski, Schmidt & Bender, and Nightforce . . . what stands out in my recollection is that the first two of these at least have had occasional issues with off-axis stray light. Not worth the premium price.

 

[MCMXI]

It's amazing how personal these threads get but it shouldn't be surprising since we're all different (visual acuity, color perception, etc.) and we use scopes differently and some are more observant and detail oriented than others. I've bought ten Leupold scopes in all with seven Mark 4s purchased between 2008 and 2011. I've sold three older scopes and am about to sell a fourth but still have all of the Mark 4 models. I also own scopes from Premier Reticles (2), Nightforce (1), Zeiss (4), Vortex (3) and Aimpoint (1). So what does all this mean for me. I know the difference between poor, average, good and excellent glass. I also know the difference between positive and "mushy" adjustments and have figured out which scope features are important for me for hunting, CQB, and tactical/long range. We tend to become loyal to what we know but should always be open to objective data. I used to argue with Zak Smith that Leopold's mil/moa system was fine but as I shot more, learned more and progressed I came to realize that it's not the best system. I still think that Mark 4 glass is good glass with minimal distortion edge to edge, good clarity and good color. However, the adjustments ARE mushy on the M1, M2 and M3 models and you need to use other brands to realize this if you think they're positive. I can't honestly say that new Leupold scopes are good value for money these days since there are so many good choices available. I would say that Vortex are great value for money and if you compare equivalent models from other manufacturers you will generally pay more for less.

Caveat: The M5 conversion for eligible Leupold scopes is a big improvement giving mil/mil and positive clicks. Also, I have two Mark 4s that are 3.5-10x40mm, one is front focal (M1) and one is illuminated second focal (M2). I consider those two scopes to be among the best Leupold has ever made. Despite slowly divesting myself of Leupold products, I will keep the front focal model till the end and possibly the other one too.

 

[gamestalker]

OK, so Leupold is lagging behind with technology and relying on their reputation? I'm laughing so hard right now, I mean this is hilarious.

Do you mean their century long reputation of making some of the finest quality glass in the world? That reputation?

I've been a long time Leupold consumer, not once have I bought any Leupold scope that didn't perform 100%, not even the Rfileman. Now that's not saying I haven't dropped one and broke it, but Leupold has always fixed them at "no charge" for me.

GS

 

[Skylerbone]

My single mil/MOA Leupold is a Mark AR which uses estimated yardage on the elevation turret so it's not such a problem in my case as I ignore the mildot reticle apart from the center for aim. I didn't set out to purchase that particular reticle but it was in stock at the time and the price was right so I jumped. Not as nice as the VX-3 or -2 but less colored to my eye than many others.

I do feel that the Mark AR's reticle choice was spawned from marketing to the tactical wannabe crowd, guess I'm a member now, as the dial system was the real hype. I suppose one could learn the subtensions and system to use it for ranging but me, I'll use the Leupold rangefinder for that.

Still good glass for my money and I agree, there's real competition in value priced optics from the likes of Vortex, Sightron, Nikon, etc. and I own a few of each of those as well. All of mine are more or less hunting scopes and squarely blue-collar choices.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

It's amazing how personal these threads get but it shouldn't be surprising since we're all different (visual acuity, color perception, etc.) and we use scopes differently and some are more observant and detail oriented than others.

yes that does come into play but 90 percent of these post are just people that don't have a clue bashing leupold. It makes them feel knowledgeable to bash something that is popular. Most crap like this comes from guys in there mid twenties that own one or two rifles and have shot maybe 2 or 3 deer in there lives and think they are now experts on whats best in the field. Or are just passing on info gleamed from some other blow hole that thinks he knows it all. Then you have the optics snobs who think that if you didn't pay 2k for a scope its no good and on the other end you have the cheapskates that spend 75 and want to convince themselves that anything more is just a waste of money.

I like some here hunt hard and have been for over 40 years. I USE my equipment. Ive had most every brand of scope at one time or the other and for the most part anymore buy either a Nikon monarch or a vx1 or better leupold. Why? Because they WORK. Yes there are some others comparable but nothing really better for the dollar. Nothing wrong with a ziess conquest, bushnell elite, vortex razor ect. But you don't look intelligent because you brag on one of them and bash a perfectly good leupold. Just the opposite. It shows any real rifleman that you know nothing.

 

[notaglockfanboy]

yes that does come into play but 90 percent of these post are just people that don't have a clue bashing leupold. It makes them feel knowledgeable to bash something that is popular. Most crap like this comes from guys in there mid twenties that own one or two rifles and have shot maybe 2 or 3 deer in there lives and think they are now experts on whats best in the field. Or are just passing on info gleamed from some other blow hole that thinks he knows it all. Then you have the optics snobs who think that if you didn't pay 2k for a scope its no good and on the other end you have the cheapskates that spend 75 and want to convince themselves that anything more is just a waste of money.

I like some here hunt hard and have been for over 40 years. I USE my equipment. Ive had most every brand of scope at one time or the other and for the most part anymore buy either a Nikon monarch or a vx1 or better leupold. Why? Because they WORK. Yes there are some others comparable but nothing really better for the dollar. Nothing wrong with a ziess conquest, bushnell elite, vortex razor ect. But you don't look intelligent because you brag on one of them and bash a perfectly good leupold. Just the opposite. It shows any real rifleman that you know nothing.
__________________
sixgun junky

X10 on this post. Gotta love the fanboys, and misinformed!!!!

 

[Sheepdog1968]

I have three Leupolds, 2.5x scout scope, 4x scope for hunting rifle, their 3-9x long rant tactical. I've been very happy with all three. All three have good positive clicks and have held zero. My needs are mostly hunting, range work to practice for hunting and self defense, and self defense classes. If I did more bench rest work and competitions is likely look at knight force and sight tron bAsed on fellow bench shooters input. Other than that my default scope is Leupold. Maybe not the best but they are very good and have worked well for me.

 

[jrdolall]

The OP is going on a hog hunt in Florida. I have hunted turkey, hog and deer all over Florida. I spent most of last week down on Lake Okeechobee for a little work and a little fishing.
I hate to be the one to tell people but a $79 Walmart special will work on a hog hunt in Florida. Ranges will be 100 yards or so. We hunt hogs using dogs and we ride horses or 4 wheelers. We often catch the hogs with bare hounds after the catch dogs subdue them. Hogs tend to hang out in swampy areas. Guess what else tends to hang out in swampy areas in Florida? A 357 is more valuable than a $2500 rifle setup for this hunting. We have hunted hogs in the orange groves over near La Belle where a 200 yard shot is possible but normally we have to go get them since they tend to visit the open areas at night. One group got a 350 pounder back in January. The hog was shot at 35 yards.

If you need a $2000 scope to hunt hogs in Florida then you ain't doing something right. If you are hunting Dahl sheep or trying to shoot elk at 400 yards in poor light conditions then get the best money can buy. If you need to make ragged holes in paper at 100 yards then use whichever name brand floats your boat. If you plan to hunt hogs in the crap I hunt in central and south Florida then just about any scope/rifle combination will work.

 

[COLOSHOOTR]

While companies like S&B and Nighforce and a couple others may be on another level than Leupold, they'll also run you a hella lot more money, but to call Leupold, "nothing more than overpriced garbage" is just plain ignorant blather.:

Check your facts buddy..... In the high end tactical scope game Leupold scopes are actually some of the most expensive ones out there and actually can be more expensive than S&B, Nightforce, Steiner, Kahles, Vortex and so on (I could continue the list if you would like.) For example 5-25 S&B PMII $3500, Leupold 3.5-25 MK8 $4300. You get better reticle options with the S&B too.

Go into the lower priced hunting models and yes Leupold may be more moderately priced but you can get others like Vortex in the same, and possibly even lower, price point. This level of scope is not my area of expertise though I have owned a few low/mid range scopes in my time. I use high end glass as that is what is required when you spend most of your range time shooting more than a few hundred yards. Poor glass is pretty apparent at 1k just sayin....

OK, so Leupold is lagging behind with technology and relying on their reputation? I'm laughing so hard right now, I mean this is hilarious.

Do you mean their century long reputation of making some of the finest quality glass in the world? That reputation?

I've been a long time Leupold consumer, not once have I bought any Leupold scope that didn't perform 100%, not even the Rfileman. Now that's not saying I haven't dropped one and broke it, but Leupold has always fixed them at "no charge" for me.

GS

Absolutely they are lagging behind. They were one of the last major optics companies to actually do matching turrets and reticles preferring instead to stick with MOA/MIL scopes while everyone else had seen the light. Reticles are another area they are lagging in MIL dot or Horus is about it with Leupold. Other companies offer way more options. They have finally caught up making better turrets with good zero stops but even just five years ago there were some issues with turrets being mushy and some breaking or not tracking right. Yes they will take care of you as will Vortex, Steiner, S&B, Bushnell, Kahles and pretty much everyone making high end glass now days. Most of those big companies have excellent lifetime warranties but even the ones that don't have the lifetime warranty they still have the reputation of taking care of their customers most of the time at no cost. Apples to Apples Leupold doesn't offer anything that other high end scopes do and in some cases offer less while coming in at a higher price. Once again I'm not talking low/mid hunting scopes but top end glass. At the price point they sell their high end / tactical stuff at Leupold does not offer any additional value to justify the high prices. Now if you get that Leupold on the over 50% off mil discount you might actually be doing okay as that is where I think they should be priced for the general public.

yes that does come into play but 90 percent of these post are just people that don't have a clue bashing leupold. It makes them feel knowledgeable to bash something that is popular. Most crap like this comes from guys in there mid twenties that own one or two rifles and have shot maybe 2 or 3 deer in there lives and think they are now experts on whats best in the field. Or are just passing on info gleamed from some other blow hole that thinks he knows it all. Then you have the optics snobs who think that if you didn't pay 2k for a scope its no good and on the other end you have the cheapskates that spend 75 and want to convince themselves that anything more is just a waste of money.

I like some here hunt hard and have been for over 40 years. I USE my equipment. Ive had most every brand of scope at one time or the other and for the most part anymore buy either a Nikon monarch or a vx1 or better leupold. Why? Because they WORK. Yes there are some others comparable but nothing really better for the dollar. Nothing wrong with a ziess conquest, bushnell elite, vortex razor ect. But you don't look intelligent because you brag on one of them and bash a perfectly good leupold. Just the opposite. It shows any real rifleman that you know nothing.

I really wish I were still in my mid 20's. It would make my job easier and I sure would not be so sore after serious work outs or even a day out on the slopes. I never remember hurting like this when I was in my 20's! To say I have no clue really shows your lack of understanding in the optics world. When shooting long range competitions (if I actually get the time off from work to make the comps) higher end glass is needed. I'm not saying you need to go spend $4500 to be competitive but then again that is exactly why I do not have a Leupold MK8 since I don't have that much money to blow. Most people doing the tactical/practical matches have over $1k in glass on their rigs and most are at or over that $2k mark just for that extra little edge. I don't see many guys place very high with low end glass although one guy at Raton did very well (mid pack) in the sporting rifle match using his old 30-06 and mid range hunting scope so it can be done with the right shooter that knows his gear. Still, I do use and unfortunately sometimes abuse my gear running and gunning with it. One guy I shoot with actually made it on an ad for a well known and very popular scope mounting system and for a optics company after tripping on a rock while running to the next position in the stage and landed right on top of the rocks scope first then head following onto the scope requiring several stitches.... That's the use I'm taking about with the glass/rifle system I use (while I have not dropped mine on to the scope yet I have dropped the rifle and have fallen while running with it and darn near took a rifle stock to the berries for my trouble).

I still stand by my point going apples to apples with high end glass. Heck even one of Leupolds primary user groups over the years, the US Military, is going away from Leupold scopes and is going to S&B scopes. Leupold does make good mid range hunting scopes but in that mid range area their is a ton of competition and many of them are just as good as Leupold. Some are even priced better with more/better features if you shop around. Sorry, I know you may be a fan but Leupold is not at the top of the game anymore and trying to wrongfully attack my age and experience level only shows your bias and lack of experience with the higher end glass that I do have experience with. On the other hand I do agree with you that you can't go super cheap and expect a reliable scope with decent glass. I've still seen enough issues with the Leopold tactical scopes over the years that I have a sour taste left in my mouth and yes I am biased against Leupold because of it. In the end for the OP going hog hunting in Florida a Leupold hunting scope will do just fine for him as would a Vortex or a Nikon or even a S&B if that is what he wanted on his rifle. My point is you still can do just as good if not better for the money going away from Leupold even for a hunting rig.

 

[cdb1]

I own Burris Fullfield II's, a Bushnell Elite 4200, two Meopta MeoPro's, a Zeiss Conquest, a Clearidge RM, Leupold VX-2, VX-R and VX-3 and two Vortex Vipers. I hunt, no tactical shooting, sight in my scopes and don't touch the turrets again. The OP is going hog hunting, doubt he will be spinning turrets. As usual people got off track and were bashing Leupold for their turrets - don't think that applies to the OP.

For a hunting scope Leupold is a great choice, so is Nikon even though I don't own any Nikons. I work the gun counter at Cabela's and a such sell firearms and scopes all day, except for when I'm mounting scopes - when I'm on duty I'm the primary scope mounter.

Most brands of scopes(excluding bubble pack) will do the job for hunting distances of 300 yards or less, which covers the vast majority of hunting situations. My number one priority in a scope is low light performance. Based strictly on experience with my scopes my Meopta's are the best followed by my Conquest and then a two way tie between my Elite and my VX-3. My worst low light scopes are my Vipers though they are very bright with good sunlight.

I would be shocked if other people had the exact experience with the same scopes that I have. Why? People see better out of certain brands of scopes than they do others. Nikon makes good scopes for the money but I don't see well out of them. I see much better through a $200.00 Burris Fullfield than I do through any Monarch. But you will never hear me bashing Nikon. I personally have received the lowest bang for my buck with Vortex but I will not diss Vortex. Vortex has outstanding customer service and for many people their glass is top notch.

You also cannot tell the true quality of the glass in a scope in a store. You have to look through it in low light and bright sunlight to tell.

 

[teetertotter]

Yup, scopes, like rifles, have many varying opinions.......pertaining to the same brand models or a specific manufacture with good experiences and bad experiences. It is not to argue, but just express one's opinion and move on.

I appreciate cdb1's review and says a lot. I am an off hand target shooter, which requires a AO target scope. I'm not a hunter and if I was, I'd buy a Bushnell 4200 scope. Now replaced with the 4500 series with side focus with parallax of 25 yds. Cheers!

 

[Lloyd Smale]

I still stand by my point going apples to apples with high end glass. Heck even one of Leupolds primary user groups over the years, the US Military, is going away from Leupold scopes and is going to S&B scopes

Ill have to ask where you gleamed this from. I know the majority of snipers are still using leupold scopes with a few night force thrown in for the special forces but this sure isn't nothing new. Never heard a word about them switching to S&B scopes. Looked around on the internet and found nothing about s&b taking over. Its kind of a unfair comparison anyway. I would sure hope that a 2000 dollar S&B or night force is hands down better then a vx2 leupold. I think this post is more aimed at meat and potato mid range scopes then it is 2k scopes. The government can afford to spend my money and buy expensive scopes but they don't leave me enough to be able to afford them myself. Im stuck in the 200-600 dollar range for the most part. In that price range the leupolds made today compare favorably to ANY competitor dollar for dollar. Still probably the best selling scopes in this country and for good reason.

 

[COLOSHOOTR]

Ill have to ask where you gleamed this from. I know the majority of snipers are still using leupold scopes with a few night force thrown in for the special forces but this sure isn't nothing new. Never heard a word about them switching to S&B scopes. Looked around on the internet and found nothing about s&b taking over. Its kind of a unfair comparison anyway. I would sure hope that a 2000 dollar S&B or night force is hands down better then a vx2 leupold. I think this post is more aimed at meat and potato mid range scopes then it is 2k scopes. The government can afford to spend my money and buy expensive scopes but they don't leave me enough to be able to afford them myself. Im stuck in the 200-600 dollar range for the most part. In that price range the leupolds made today compare favorably to ANY competitor dollar for dollar. Still probably the best selling scopes in this country and for good reason.

Well you need to learn how to do better research. S&B was awarded the USMC sniper scope contract I believe in 2005 and continues to supply the Marines. Nightforce has had contracts with NSW (AKA: SEALS) but the last SPR contract for US SOCOM (All branches including SEALS) went to S&B. The S&B has also been a front runner for the PSR contract too. There are still Leupold scopes out there as they have the political backing just like Remington (even though I personally feel there are better purpose built sniper rifles than the Remington out there that were submitted for the contract) but still S&B is taking a big share of the contracts. Still, you don't see a lot of Leupold scopes in the PRS type matches and that says a something as that is a hard use environment.

I can't believe you'd even go there to compare a PMII to a VX2. Of course there is not contest between the two as they are at totally different price points and for two completely different user groups. I've mentioned "apples to apples" a few times now... I agree the OP would be served just fine with any decent hunting scope but he'd also be just as happy with a Nikon, Vortex, Sightron, Bushnell, Weaver or any other manufacture that makes quality hunting scopes. I refuse to believe a VX2 is night and day better than a Nikon Prostaff.

People like to bash those of us with expensive glass and call us optic snobs. The thing is the high end stuff is where the men are separated from the boys so to speak. Any decent hunting scope will work just fine for the zero and forget type that most shooters are. Once you start to extend the ranges and have turrets that are exposed to turn you learn how important tracking and reliability are as you dial up and down to shoot a stage with targets set all over the place instead of set distances. Where Leupold really lags behind is the technology they always tend to be the last ones to release a product years after everyone else. For example the Mil/Mil or Moa/Moa scope everyone else did it while Leupold offered a Mil reticle with Moa turrets then years later Leupold finally released scopes with matching turrets. I really wish an American company like Leupold would produce the worlds best, most advanced optics and do it at the same or better (since no import costs would need to be paid unlike S&B) price point but it's just not happening. Still, in the end I'm entitled to my opinion and it may differ from that of others but that is one of the things that makes our country great.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

nobody here is stupid enough to claim that leupold is the best scope on the market. Nobody here that knows spit about scopes is going to say there no good either or aren't as good as they were a few years ago. A few years ago leupold was a bit behind its price competitors but has upgraded its products at least 3 times in the last 5 years or so. Right now meat and potato hunting scopes being the consideration you aren't going to get any better for the money then a leupold. Yes you can get a 2k ziess, s&b or Swarovski that is better. No doubt about it buy the average hunter doesn't need to resolve targets at a 1000 yards or have adjustments so precise that they are perfectly reliable at a 1000 yards.

If you want it and can afford it, go for it. Surely theres nothing wrong with using the best but don't try pretending you are superior in knowledge because you have a thick wallet or pretend that you are actually going to shoot an animal with your 2k scope that wouldn't have been taken with a 500 dollar leupold or Nikon or burris. I drive a corvette. It goes a 180 mph but I cant drive it that fast. It looks nicer and gives me pleasure to drive but my pickup will get me to the same place for 1/2 the money and my wifes buick will do the same at a 1/3 the money. I don't drive my vette around thumbing my nose at other drivers and tell them that they just didn't pay enough money to possibly have a good rig. I don't bash ford mustang drivers because they picked the wrong brand. I know the vette gives slightly better performance then a mustang or camero but not two to three times as much. I know that in all reality its me who lost the bang for the buck race buying the vette. Same goes for scopes. Your going to have an uphill battle bashing leupolds here. theres just to many VERY experienced hunters that have used them for 30 years or more that know that they FLAT WORK. They know that's the reason you probably see more leupolds on custom rifles, guides rifles, rifles taken on safari and even competition guns then all the other brands combined.

Make you a deal. You post pictures of all your rifles with s&b scopes or other high dollar scopes with the same background and a calendar in the picture with todays date circled so we know your not just finding pictures on line and ill do the same with all my rifles with leupolds. By the sounds of it your quite the expert on it and sure must have quite a few examples to show us.

 

[taliv]

can't we all just get along?