Deciding on buying a scope for deer hunting this year and I have a lot of great options around $500. But my question is, what is the difference in glass? Most companies have glass made all over the world like Vortex and Burris in the Philippines, Riton and Trijicon made in Japan and China. So does the location it's made make a huge difference or should I worry more about the reticles and other features of the optics?
What's the Difference in Glass
rabid wombat
Member
First - welcome to the forums. Second, take anything I say with a large grain of salt. Smarter people will follow…
Good and bad glass can come from anywhere. In gross generalities, good glass comes in order from Europe, Japan, Philippines, and trailing China. You also get what you pay for - glass is a ‘buy once / cry once’ proposition. You will be better served not getting hung up on where the glass came from, but paying more attention to the overall quality of the Scope manufacturer.
A strong recommendation for you…narrow your selection down to two or three scopes that meet your needs. Find a store that has all three, and go look through them, A head to head comparison will mean much more than any thing I can contribute. You will be judging with your actual eyeballs.
Good and bad glass can come from anywhere. In gross generalities, good glass comes in order from Europe, Japan, Philippines, and trailing China. You also get what you pay for - glass is a ‘buy once / cry once’ proposition. You will be better served not getting hung up on where the glass came from, but paying more attention to the overall quality of the Scope manufacturer.
A strong recommendation for you…narrow your selection down to two or three scopes that meet your needs. Find a store that has all three, and go look through them, A head to head comparison will mean much more than any thing I can contribute. You will be judging with your actual eyeballs.
.45Coltguy
Member
Call Doug at cameralandny.com 1-866-967-8427. He will help you greatly.
Lefty38-55
Member
FWIW right now in the post on Arken scopes there is a great discussion, pictures and references to the 'same' scope, yet one with Japanese and the other with ... Chinese (yes, I said it ... ) glass.
Yes there is a difference in where the lenses are made even with the same model of scope or brand. In the thread that Lefty38-55 mentioned, I talked about the difference between the Arken SH-4 with Chinese glass and the SH-4J with Japanese glass. Other than the lenses, the scopes are exactly the same. And there is a definite differences between the two.
I also agree with LoonWulf, narrowing down what features you want and what you will compromise on will help us make recommendations.
I also agree with LoonWulf, narrowing down what features you want and what you will compromise on will help us make recommendations.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
It definitely makes a difference. I agree with the order above. The best comes from Germany and Austria. Behind that is Japan, then the Philippines and last China, as usual. Most manufacturers have different tiers of their products with Vortex being one glaring example. Their low end stuff is China. Mid-tier is Philippines and their best is Japanese.
doubleh
Member
First off I would settle on the best scope features for your type of hunting. Then start looking for scopes that meets your needs and what quality glass is used in the ones that interest you.
Craig C covered the quality of glass quite well. Having been a long time fan of Leupold I would start with them but that just me. I have never had a bad Leupold.
Craig C covered the quality of glass quite well. Having been a long time fan of Leupold I would start with them but that just me. I have never had a bad Leupold.
Conelrad
Member
Glass is pretty much just glass. Optical glass isn't hard to make right, but the coatings are where the performance lies.
The sputtered metal formulas used in lens coatings is the key, and are closely guarded secrets.
Those actually from Germany or Austria have the best light transmission capabilities, and $ to match.
The previous post with lens quality listed by country is right on.
The sputtered metal formulas used in lens coatings is the key, and are closely guarded secrets.
Those actually from Germany or Austria have the best light transmission capabilities, and $ to match.
The previous post with lens quality listed by country is right on.
Megawatt maker
Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2017
- Messages
- 699
The best glass to be had is made by Schott, and despite common "knowledge"..Schott has plants all over the planet.
Pennsylvania has a Schott optic glass plant, for example, where Vortex gets its glass for the Razor AMG.
Zeiss is also right up there, but Zeiss isn't just a company..it's a foundation, with many brands under its umbrella. Leica labs does a lot of R&D work for Zeiss optics glass as well. It's mostly made in Europe, but does have plants elsewhere. They keep their info a little closer to the chest.
China..again dispite common "knowledge" otherwise, is more than capable of making top end optic glass that rivals Schott. Any compaany who refuses to tell you, or makes you work at finding out, where their glass comes from..it's because it does, in fact, come from China. Leupold buys glass from China, so does Burris, Vortex,..everyone.
If a company tells you were the glass is from..it's for a reason, and it's always glass from Europe...or sometimes Shott. That's a marketing advantage for them.
Japan still makes optic glass, just not much for the sports optic market, and believe it or not...it's not what it used to be.
The Phillipines makes decent glass, middle of the road stuff. Most of Vortex and old Nikon sourced from there...but they don't make much, if any, high grade stuff.
The USA, sadly, makes very little. SCHOTT plant, and few other small ones here and there. Nothing major.
So really, it doesn't matter much for brand in the 500 buck range. I'd stick to the well know brands..Leupold, Vortex, Burris..you can't go wrong with any of those...
They are all close to the same in that price range...
When you cross the 2k range is when ratings get very interesting.
Pennsylvania has a Schott optic glass plant, for example, where Vortex gets its glass for the Razor AMG.
Zeiss is also right up there, but Zeiss isn't just a company..it's a foundation, with many brands under its umbrella. Leica labs does a lot of R&D work for Zeiss optics glass as well. It's mostly made in Europe, but does have plants elsewhere. They keep their info a little closer to the chest.
China..again dispite common "knowledge" otherwise, is more than capable of making top end optic glass that rivals Schott. Any compaany who refuses to tell you, or makes you work at finding out, where their glass comes from..it's because it does, in fact, come from China. Leupold buys glass from China, so does Burris, Vortex,..everyone.
If a company tells you were the glass is from..it's for a reason, and it's always glass from Europe...or sometimes Shott. That's a marketing advantage for them.
Japan still makes optic glass, just not much for the sports optic market, and believe it or not...it's not what it used to be.
The Phillipines makes decent glass, middle of the road stuff. Most of Vortex and old Nikon sourced from there...but they don't make much, if any, high grade stuff.
The USA, sadly, makes very little. SCHOTT plant, and few other small ones here and there. Nothing major.
So really, it doesn't matter much for brand in the 500 buck range. I'd stick to the well know brands..Leupold, Vortex, Burris..you can't go wrong with any of those...
They are all close to the same in that price range...
When you cross the 2k range is when ratings get very interesting.
Last edited:
Any foreign manufacturer will produce products to the customers specifications. So yes it is possible to get excellent products from other countries to include China. But the truth still holds that in general, Chinese glass is not as good as glass from other countries. But it boils down to optic coatings and also what the customer is willing to spend. Most companies use Chinese glass for the lower price point because consumers want the lower prices.
There is some great information and, best of all, non-biased and straight shooting. Price is the big factor in lens coatings and where the product is made. I added a Riton Optics 3 Primal 3-18X50 to my .300 WinMag rifle, and at under $600 (got it on sale), I am very pleased. It has a lot of the features you may or may not need. Features include an Illuminated Reticle, First Focal Plane, Exposed Turret with mil adjustments and Mil reticle for bullet drop. The only feature I could give up for a hunting rifle is the exposed reticle, but only because I can use the scope reticle similarly. There is much to consider, but you have come to the right place. For $500 you can definitely get something that will serve your needs very well.
Scopes are one of those things you need to look through before buying esp at low light.
Unless it’s something your already familiar with.
I am of the buy once cry once crowd.. been burned by too many times.
A “lifetime warranty” means little when it ruins a hunt that costs thousands.
Unless it’s something your already familiar with.
I am of the buy once cry once crowd.. been burned by too many times.
A “lifetime warranty” means little when it ruins a hunt that costs thousands.
I have an X5 Primal taking the place of my Epl4 on my 7Prc for a bit. Ive had it for a while, but its been on loan to a friend. Were both pretty happy with it.
Scopes have come a long way over the years. You can definitely get more scope for your money now days. While I am liking my Arken SH-4, SH-4J, and Swampfox Optics Patriot scopes, none of them will compete with my older Bushnell Elite 4500 scope when it comes to light transmission and clarity.
The Happy Kaboomer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2012
- Messages
- 385
Buy(quality)once.....Cry Once...........I only use Swarovski---Meopta and Leupold VX 3 and above.............Our deer hrs are 1 hr before sunrise to 1 hr after sunset...........Cheap scopes won't "cut it" at these times..........Many many years ago I think I bought the first Tasco to come to America(junk), And over the years I've been climbing the ladder of Quality of scopes and binoculars..........Experience is a costly but great teacher.
Zeiss owns the glass manufacturer Schott and Swarovski owns their own glass and crystal branch. Their glass was always great but the coating of the lenses has improved in the last decades. I was always impressed with the view through Zeiss/Hensoldt, S&B, Kahles and Swarovski scopes where there is no tunnel effect.
If you're only considering the glass quality then price is a pretty good way to judge what you're going to get. I realize everyone has different expectations, but if MSRP is below about $200 I don't want it. There are some scopes with MSRP right at $200 that are often discounted below that price that I find perfectly acceptable. The Burris FF-II and the lower end Leupolds fall in this category.
Once you get into the $300-$500 range that is as much quality as I need. You can get a very good scope IMO at that price point. You can spend more, but once you get to around $500 quality only goes up slightly for huge gains in price. Yes, a $1000 scope is going to be better than a $500 scope. But it won't be twice as good. Probably 10% better at most. To some people that slightly better glass is worth double the cost. Not to me, not for what I do.
Features matter. More magnification means more money. A basic duplex reticle or a simple one with a few dots/dashes for long range holdover cost less than the busy Christmas tree reticles. If you want to twist dials for long range don't buy a cheap scope. A 1" tube costs less than a 30mm tube, is much lighter and does anything a hunter needs.
It's easy to spend $300+ on a scope with a lot of fancy features, but still have lower quality than a basic scope costing $200.
Once you get into the $300-$500 range that is as much quality as I need. You can get a very good scope IMO at that price point. You can spend more, but once you get to around $500 quality only goes up slightly for huge gains in price. Yes, a $1000 scope is going to be better than a $500 scope. But it won't be twice as good. Probably 10% better at most. To some people that slightly better glass is worth double the cost. Not to me, not for what I do.
Features matter. More magnification means more money. A basic duplex reticle or a simple one with a few dots/dashes for long range holdover cost less than the busy Christmas tree reticles. If you want to twist dials for long range don't buy a cheap scope. A 1" tube costs less than a 30mm tube, is much lighter and does anything a hunter needs.
It's easy to spend $300+ on a scope with a lot of fancy features, but still have lower quality than a basic scope costing $200.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
IMHO, +30mm tubes are way overrated. I think folks tend to overlook the weight of them. In a lower power variable, they can weigh double that of a 1" equivalent, most often with no tangible benefit to the shooter.
Primarily they offer a greater adjustment range and are stiffer just because they are bigger in diameter.....I dont know if upsizing the components inside makes any difference, or if they even do it. I havent pulled apart a 30mm tube scope.
Anyway, those previous options only really matter to me on the scopes used for longer distance shooting. I shoot most of my rifles at distance, and running out of adjustment is frustrating, especially when you dont have a graduated reticle to fall back on.
In a hunting specific scope, Ill accept 30-40moa of adjustment, and take the trade-off of lighter weight.
I also dont really get the advantage of 30mm tubes in LPVs, but I also dont generally use LPVs, so my opinion is based on limited experience.
EDIT: 30mm and larger tubes usually come with better turrets (in addition to more adjustment range), as they are generally meant for more dialing than their 1" counterparts....
Last edited:
Since the scope will be used primarily for deer hunting and the budget is $500 it will not be a premium scope that the OP needs but a decent scope. Assuming that shots will be under 200 yards, a 6x magnification should be sufficient and in the field it is more important to figure out the shooting distance right when we go past 150 yards than looking at the deer's ears. I collect Zeiss/Hensoldt, Kahles, Swarovski and vintage German scopes but have a Vortex Spitfire 3x on an AR and feel confident with the scope at any normal hunting distance. The importance of a good mount should also not be overlooked.
The premium glass and coating make a bigger difference when hunting is done at night, like on European wild boars. A good friend gifted me his old Schmidt & Bender 3-12x52 after replacing it with an equally large Zeiss on his Blaser Bergstutzen in .222 Rem and 30/06 but he hunts 880 acres of prime hunting land in Lower Saxony.
The premium glass and coating make a bigger difference when hunting is done at night, like on European wild boars. A good friend gifted me his old Schmidt & Bender 3-12x52 after replacing it with an equally large Zeiss on his Blaser Bergstutzen in .222 Rem and 30/06 but he hunts 880 acres of prime hunting land in Lower Saxony.
entropy
Member
Thank you, PzGren, for pointing out Zeiss owns Schott. As you point out, historically, Zeiss and Swarovski have led the optical field, and this is due to constant and aggressive R&D. In my branch of optics, eyeglasses, Zeiss and Essilor, a French company, run neck and neck in R&D.
I have a set of Pilla glasses for Trapshooting, though I use them for hunting also. Zeiss makes the proprietary colorings for Pilla, the lenses themselves, and coats them with the finest antireflective coating made. They were not cheap, but worth every penny, they make the clay pigeons glow.
Coatings are a good part of why other scope makes have improved in the recent past. For dawn and dusk use, a scope must have good antireflective coating.
I have a set of Pilla glasses for Trapshooting, though I use them for hunting also. Zeiss makes the proprietary colorings for Pilla, the lenses themselves, and coats them with the finest antireflective coating made. They were not cheap, but worth every penny, they make the clay pigeons glow.
Coatings are a good part of why other scope makes have improved in the recent past. For dawn and dusk use, a scope must have good antireflective coating.
ExtremeSquared
Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2008
- Messages
- 258
Like may purchases, there is a logarithmic cost return.
Spending an extra $100 at the low end provides more return than spending an extra $100 at the high end.
Once you get high enough, the price/performance graph starts to get pretty flat.
In general.
Spending an extra $100 at the low end provides more return than spending an extra $100 at the high end.
Once you get high enough, the price/performance graph starts to get pretty flat.
In general.
I found that out with the Arken SH-4 scopes. The SH-4J with Japanese glass is well worth the extra $100 over the SH-4 with Chinese glass. The SH-4 is still useful and fits my needs but the SH-4J is a definite improvement.
ExtremeSquared
Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2008
- Messages
- 258
Agree on Japanese glass, based on a couple Kowa optics I have.
One caveat: I might take certain 2020s Chinese glass over 2000s Japanese glass, though, if I was reasonably certain the mechanical bits wouldn't fall apart. The quality has advanced.
