High End Optics--Are they worth it?

[Ivantherussian03]

I have been wanting and wondering if a high dollar value binoculars are worth the money? I have looked through them in the stores; they appear identical. Field conditions are they real test? I never field tested them. My current binoculars are some no name garage sale bargain. Low investment has always equaled low attachment to me, especially if they are lost or stolen, or god forbide I flip my boat.


So I am wondering if any one has experience with them?:coffee:

[krag35]

I don't know about true "High End" optics, but last week I bought a set of Leupold "Mesa" series binoculars (8X42) They beat the heck out of any of those compact binoculars I have been carrying for years and don't weigh much more. $160.00 on sale, best money I ever invested in hunting. the ones I keep in the boat are Bosh and Lomb 8-24X50's that zoom feature is about the most worthless thing ever invented. Zoom = refocus and for me at least any thing over 10X with out a rest just shakes to much to see anything clearly anyway. BUT, they are BIG and look cool in a kind of Mimi Vice sort of way. ;-)

[Gunload Master]

I've looked through swarovski optics before at antelope, and at that particular time I didnt really have another pair to compare them with. But to be quite honest I would never pay the price for them. They were fairly clear and bright, but for 1,200 bucks that's just ridiculous. The optics are nice, but I personally don't think they are worth the price. I think Bushnell has some really nice optic lenses, but me personally, I am a BIG fan of shepherd optics. I've had a shepherd 6 x 18 scope on my hunting rifle for the last 4 years, and I've gone through hellacious conditions with that scope and it's came through almost every time. It failed me once, it was about 10 minutes before pitch dark and about 30 degrees out snowing and it fogged up to where I couldnt see the deer I was going after. Most of that was caused by me running to catch up to them breathing hard and not having any optic covers. But I highly recommend them for good optics and a good price..

[Blackwater]

"Worth it" is an opinion type question, and everybody's got at least a couple of opinions, so I'll give you mine.

Nope. Scopes now are VERY much better than they've EVER been, and you can now get a pretty danged reliable scope for $150 or so if you look around. A scope is a RIFLE SIGHT, not something we inspect the outer edges of the universe with. Some of the Bushnell lower line scopes seem to be doing good duty for the "average hunters." Any mfg., and that includes the high dollar German makers, will have problems from time to time. It's a whole lot more embarassing when you paid over a grand for a scope when that happens.

What does a scope DO, actually? It enables us to aim, and today, coatings, glass, etc. are so good that we can see to aim in all but pitch black dark. My eyes aren't as "bright" as they used to be, and I DO like a better, higher light transmitting scope, but the difference between a 90% transmission and a 95% transmission model really isn't that great to the human eye, from my experience.

Back when the steel tubed Weavers were still "new," I had a 4x that I considered WAY better than I needed. Now, that would probably be laughed at, but it worked, and it worked in some pretty low light back up under the pine canopies, where light goes away awfully fast. Knowing how to use a scope in low light helps a lot more than putting an extra $500 or more dollars in the scope, IMO.

But I'm just a dumb redneck down in the Georgia swamps, and what do I know? Guess I'll never be a rep for Zeiss.

BTW, the business I now work for is a certified Zeiss dealer, and we've had as many or more problems from their scopes as any other mfg., so ...... ???? Maybe this affects my opinion here? I'll say this, some of the 30 mm. euro designed and made ones are danged fine optics, if that's what you want. If you just want a rifle sight, and to save a little $$$$, I've come to like the Bushnells (at least mid level priced ones, with the 3200's and 4200's giving admirable performance), the Burris (Fullfield II's or higher), and now, I'd even consider the Simmons Master series. Their AETEC has also given good performance for many here.

I'd still hunt confidently with an old all steel Weaver, though, and do so with confidence even though I know its optics and light transmission isn't up to what's expected today. One of mine (that 4x cited earlier) took a whale of a lick once on the objective end. Changed POI only 3", which I considered miraculous. Couldn't believe the glass didn't break, but I used that scope a couple more years before trading it off and going to a newer (and brighter) 3-9x so I could aim better at the bench. Now I wish I had that old all steel Weaver again, and forgot what brand the 3-9 was.

I'm having a custom .270 built, and when complete, it'll wear a plain 4x Leupold. Wt. and balance of the gun is the reason for the power choice. If I lived out west, I'd use the 6x42mm. Leupold I have, but I get some very close shots at times here in Ga., so will opt for the 4x. I once shot at a deer, during my only bout of buck fever, at QUITE long range, and had no problem aiming with the old 4x Weaver it wore. I figured there was a lesson in that, and have tried to remember it. Now, it's mostly 2-7x's because fixed 4x's are so hard to find.

I just don't see any return on the extra $500 or more the 1 grand plus scopes offer. Some like them, of course, and more power to them for buying what they believe in. I for one, though, just don't see the reason for it, in actual practice, and what experience I've had indicates the $250-$400 scopes perform as well, in actual practice, as the high dollar jobbies. Just MHO, FWIW?

[MT Gianni]

The Burris 3x9x40 with the give away 8x42 binos is a really good value. They were $200 this past fall for both. Gianni.

[cherok9878]

Blackwater, I have 3 of the old Weaver Steel tube K-series 4 power scopes mounted on rifles. One is the fine cross hair the other two are K4-60B post cross hair. Wouldn't part with them, to many memories.
If you can find the old steel weavers in watever condition, Weaver, Elpaso TX will rebuild. Did two of mine a few years back, $35.00 ea + shipping and insurance.
larry

[longhorn]

Scopes? they're for momentary _aiming_. All my rifles wear old steel Weavers or Leupold. Maybe specific European hunting practices require more light gathering than a Leupold will provide, but I don't need the capabiity.
Spotting scope? I spent the big bucks for a Kowa, and don't regret a penny of it! the clairity and definition are amazing-and you spend lots of time looking through a spotting scope.
Binoculars? I spent a Scout campout weekend once comparing a new Zeiss 10 x 50 set with my Burris 10 x 50's--from dawn to stargazing. The Zeiss were better, but cost twice as much. And this was 10 or 12 years ago-newer and less expensive binocs are now supposedly much better than just a few years ago. Ron Spomer or one of those guys with the much-maligned Rifle or Handloader magazine writes some great articles on sporting optics-a search might be a good idea--and what I gather from his writing is that modern optics make the difference between $300 and $1000 binocs very, very small.

[Pilgrim]

El Paso repairs/rebuilds the "old" weavers, but not the newer versions. BUT the cost of the rebuild is one helluva lot more than $35. I think the last K-4 I had done (at least 6 years ago was at least $60 (included replacing one lens and all seals). I got a deal at a gun show knowing a lens was chipped for $2. Bad decision on my part. I remembered the ~$#% repair bill I got from an earlier K-4. Ouch! I also had a Weaver T-6 rebuilt a year ago (parallax was hosed up) and it was about $90 IIRC.

John Barsness has a book out on optics. It's basically the "good - bad-ugly" and the why-fors, etc. I bought a Leica 8X42 binocular 5 or 6 yrs ago from a supplier that sells new and used optics. Mine are essentially new and I paid $700 for them. At that time retail was around $1200 I think. I still wonder if it was a good investment. However, I will own up to the fact that they are way better than my Zeiss 10X25's, and way better than any of the Trashco's I've owned or looked through. The optics that are available now (the last 5-10 yrs) are much improved over the optics we often use for our personal references (for example Weaver K-4's). If you had the opportunity to put binoculars side by side and compare them for clarity, sharpness, end of day use, etc, I believe you would see a difference in many of them. You will NOT see any differences in the store, unless its a true piece of junk compared to a good optic. Store lighting and distances simply do not provide a good test ground. One thing to remember is with optics (camera lenses, binoculars, scopes, etc) you generally get what you pay for. However, going from very very good to superb can be one large jump in $$ for a negligible increase in practicality.

Reading between the lines, I came away from the Barsness book with the impression you can get about as good as anything you reasonably could use for about $350 to $400 or so, as long as you stay in the 7X to 10X range. If you go to the special 12X, 15X tripod mounted binoculars, then all bets are off. If the objective lens is bigger than 40mm to 45mm or so, again, all bets are off. IIRC, the Pentax binocular (DCF??) was receiving rave reviews. I know that some of the Bushnells, Nikons, Leupolds, etc. are very fine glasses. However, that field (optics) changes faster than the computer world, at least from my perspective. Everybody has four or five versions of everything, and each of them is supposed to provide the "best" of all of the features. How can that be when within one brand one pair is $150 and the other is $500 +/- ? Rifle scopes are in the same category re: selections, and advertising hype.

Get (buy, borrow) the Barsness book, and/or read a bunch of Al Millers stuff in past Rifle & Handloader magazines. I believe a bit of research will pay dividends and prolly save you $300 to $500 or so and you'll still wind up with a very good glass. FWIW.........Pilgrim

[carpetman]

The best value period in binoculars are the old Rochester,NY made Bausch&Lombs. Back then any optometrist you visited had B&L and this was both military or civilian. Military binoculars were B&L. Almost all used on ships were 7x50---heavy and Mac truck tough. They made the best. Go to EBAy and get a pair and have them completely refurbished(if needed and most likely not)and you will still have much less in them than the high dollar ones---and you have better binoculars--- technology advancements etc etc they still wont beat them.

[carpetman]

Back in the days that Weavers were made in El Paso,they were the poor mans scope for sure. The big debate was 4x or 6x for a hunting rifle. Now the poor mans scope is the Leupold. We have reports of rebuilding a Weaver being $35 or $60----Leupold it's free-like RCBS. Not only that,keep a Leupold a few years and it will bring more than you paid for it. Bushnell is cheap to buy,but the postage sending them back to be fixed and returned unfixed will break you has been my experience with them.

[7br]

Last year, my nephew had a 100 yard shot at a 12point buck. After three shots, the buck headed towards parts unknown with nary a scratch. Later in the day, we checked the zero and it was hitting all over the place. Rings and mounts were still tight. He sure saved money on the scope, but it cost him the biggest buck he had a chance to harvest.

[Four Fingers of Death]

I have used a few old Weavers and will only use the fixed power ones. The old variables have steel bodies, but a lot of the internals are plastic or nylon. I had a variable 1.5-4 or there abouts years ago. It worked fine on any setting, but needed re-zeroing if the power was changed. The scope guru in Australia is Fred Horton, he is semi retired now and will only repair scopes now if he has the bits in stock and he likes you. I seem to have got lucky on both counts as he is about to put a heavy post style reticle in my old 4x Pecar ( the fact that this was what I asked for when he rebuilt the scope about 5 years ago is neither here nor there, I'll gladly pay up to get what I want and not have to send it to Germany. Fred was the one who told me about the variable Weavers and he refused to repair it saying he couldn't guarantee getting it right. A yankee based company may have better luck. He was contacted by the Aussie Army to repair the epi scopes and sights in the Leopard tanks, as the Army was having trouble with the company in Germany. He eventually was doing work from Europe as well, he is that good. Leupolds and Pecars were the only scope not worth squillions of dollars that he had any time for. Some of the new Kahles scopes are the ducks guts as well.

I curently own a few Weavers, (all old models) a 4x which is fitted to a 30-30 Glenfield and a 1.5X which is fitted to a 444S. I'm eyeing off an old 8x, but have more scopes than rifles at the moment.

I have an old Redfield 3-9, nice scope going on my 22-250.

My fav scopes are the Leupolds, I have a VariX111 1.5-5 (or will have soon, it is going on my pre64 Mod 70), an old 2-7VariX11 which is fitted to a 3006 (my first Leupold and it has been a great scope), a newer 2-7VariX11, fitted to my 223, and several 3-9s, I VariX11 and a VX1 and a 6x compact, fitted to a 220Swift.

They are great! Never miss a beat.

As to binos, I bought a pair of Steiners recently. They were $AU900 and were on special, they are now $1300+! They are the night hunter model or whatever it is called and they really excell at night or in low light (they are not infra red, just specially treated glass lens to work well at night, they work great in the daytime as wel). These are brilliant. I have been jerking about with cheap binos for years and these really stand out. The performance is enormous, especially when looking into shade, etc, they are 8x40s from memory. I also have a small pair of Steiners. The only problem is that my wife and I always take our binos and love watching birds, ships, the surf, whatever and we are always trying to coax the other one to hand over the big binos. I'm gonna have to get a second pair of big ones to get some peace.

Save up and buy a good set. After using them for awhile, you will see where the money goes.

I know I have said this before, but remember what the Rolls Royce salesmen used to say, "The qality is appreciated, long after the price is forgotten." This is true, I have found, I can't afford a Roller, but appreciate a few quality item that I did save up for, like the Steiners and the Leupolds, etc.

Mick.

[Ranch Dog]

I just retired a set of Stiener 6X30s that I've used for a lifetime. Their low light gathering ability had served me well but they rely on your eyeball to do most of the focusing (diopter adjustment for each eye) and my 50+ year old eyes are not the same as the 20 year old eyes that I started looking through them with. I needed to be able to focus the binocular. I had one dealing with Stiener over the years. I dropped the binocular on a rock while chasing desert whitetails and that drop left a very small chip in the lens. That was back in the late '80s and cost me about $300 and 4 or 5 months.

I bought a Bushnell Trophy 10X42 and they have now have several months of hunting behind them. I simply love them. I bought them based on my experience with the Bushnell Banner riflescopes, Trophy spotting scope and Legend Yardage-Pro I already own. I've had two warranty claims with Bushnell products: a Banner scope (still very usable but I thought the elevation "clicks" felt soft) and the Trophy spotting scope (I dropped it out of the back of a moving vehicle and destroyed it). Both where replaced under warranty (the spotting scope replaced for "good will") in five business days for $10 each.

The Steiner replacement took a dozen phone calls and pleading to get them back after I had paid for the repair. I've never talked to the folks at Bushnell. I've simply attached a note describing the problem and the $10. These are the two steps their warranty specifies and 5 business days later I had two new products. The first replacement made me their poster child as over the years I have had to beg and plead to get things done with various pieces of equipment. I'm sure some of you have experienced this frustration in your life... especially with a hunt approaching. Bushnell replacing the spotting scope I bucked out of my PUG and then ran over made me a customer for life.

I hunt trophy desert mule deer with an outfitter. I've become pretty good friends with the outfitter, ranch and guides. I gave my spotting scope to my guide because he was hogging it over his higher priced product. The outfitter is switching to Bushnell as he replaces the optics they are using. I've got to buy a new scope now and it will be another Bushnell.

[Ranch Dog]

Last year, my nephew had a 100 yard shot at a 12point buck. After three shots, the buck headed towards parts unknown with nary a scratch. Later in the day, we checked the zero and it was hitting all over the place. Rings and mounts were still tight. He sure saved money on the scope, but it cost him the biggest buck he had a chance to harvest.

Did he check the scope's zero prior to the hunt? I require my guest hunters to check the zero on their scope and about 90% are off from travel or (ambient conditions). I readjust my zero as the temperature changes during our two month hunting season. A lot of scope "movement" is simply a change in ballistics due to a change in ambient conditions.

[MT Gianni]

Last year, my nephew had a 100 yard shot at a 12point buck. After three shots, the buck headed towards parts unknown with nary a scratch. Later in the day, we checked the zero and it was hitting all over the place. Rings and mounts were still tight. He sure saved money on the scope, but it cost him the biggest buck he had a chance to harvest.

What brand and style of scope and about how old please. Gianni

[carpetman]

Scopes/binoculars are not flashlights/spotlights. They create NO light. Their efficiency is a matter of how much available light can they use. Go out at night and spotlight a jackrabbit at 100 yards and with the naked eye you are seeing it at 100 yards. Now look through a 4x scope and ofcourse you see it as if 25 yards and sure,because you see it more clearly,it might seem brighter---but it is not. If you could walk up to 25 yards away it would appear brighter than it did through the scope---you lose light. Anything added in front of the eye cuts light. Even clear eyeglasses cut out a miniscule amount of light. Don't believe it? If the lens could be made thick enough(probably many yards thick)they would become opaque. Look at the building block type windows--they are translucent. But wait--lens coatings make them brighter. Put a scratch in your glasses and you can't see through that spot. Now seal that spot and now you can see through it. Compare it to sanding a piece of wood real smooth. Under strong magnification you were actually putting scratches in it. Seal it off and it's smoother. There are a few minor players and one major player in the amount of light that is getting through. The major factor is the main concern and the rest really are very hard to detect with the human eye--although they can be measured with elaborate equipment. This major factor is that the exit diameter atleast is as large as your pupil. A ratio of the power to the size of the objective lens gives exit diameter. For example on 7x35 binoculars you would have a 5mm exit. On 7x50 the exit would be 7.143MM. If your pupils are 5MM for example you will NOT be able to determine one bit of difference between the two. Peoples pupils get smaller as they age. In the example above,a youngster might see a difference. Don't believe it? If you are older,go into a dark theater with a youngster. While you are still trying to see the floor,they will be able to spot their friends. A cop,especially if older is at a strong disadvantage going into a dark bar to break up a brawl. If possible if they can keep one eye closed for awhile before entering,that eye will adjust faster to the poor lighting. Back to the exit diameter--here's a test you can try. Go out at night with an assortment of sizes of tubes---drinking straws tubing,pipe whatever. Look through the smallest one and you don't get as much light through it. Keep increasing in size and you reach a point where going bigger produces no gain. An easier test is do it with a variable power scope. At the srongest magnification you might lose some light,but as you decrease power you probably start gaining light but reach a point where going lower power you dont gain anything. This is dependent on the power of the scope and its objective size in relation to the size of your pupil. It is true that clearer optics will seem brighter. Same with eyeglass wearers,things seem brighter with glasses on,but in actuality you are losing a small amount of light.

[db2]

What I have found looking through higher end binos is yes, they are better than lower end glass. I have a cheap pair of Winchester 7X50 binos. For 95% of the time they do just fine. However, the last 10 minutes of hunting time they are useless. You can not see anything but dark greys. This is were better quality comes into play, with better glass coatings, and interior coating. Not only can you see whats going on out there, but a lot of times you can see past legal light.

Last week I was looking at a buck trying to decide if I wanted to take him. I was looking into the back lit sky (sun all ready set) and my bino's failed big time. I was forced to use my rifle scope (Leopold). The difference was night to day between the two.

I have looked thru Stiener's 7X50's and in lower light you can see thru Stiener's after my Winchesters quit working. Some day when I have some extra money I plan on buying a pair.

You might want to try here for some cheaper prices on optics.
http://samplelist.com


I hope this helps
db2

[KCSO]

You can't tell the difference until you have about 6 scopes lined up next to each other and you lok through them from low to high and back. The difference in sharpness of image is very evident. Now if you are plinking at 100 yards or shooting a deer for the yearly larder this might not be real important to you, but if you are going on a trophy hunt of a lifetime and will be in bad weather you might just want the best you can get. In 1971 I spent an ungodly amount of money for Redfield scope, it cost more than the Remington 721 I put it on. It is still clear, sharp and giving great service, I have thrown away several Weavers and Bushnell's over the years. I consider the Redfield the better buy. It always has amazed me that someone would buy a $600 gun and load for it with another $500 worth of equipment and then want to put a $30 scope on the gun.

[carpetman]

db2---I too have a pair of cheapo Winchester binoculars. With 7x50's you really shouldn't see as vast a difference in them and better glass--not the difference you described. I'd suspect a problem with them besides not being that good to start with. Look through them backwards one lens at a time(look into good light)and see if perhaps they are mildewed,dusty or some such which would make them perform poorly.

[Uncle R.]

You can't tell the difference until you have about 6 scopes lined up next to each other and you lok through them from low to high and back. .

Right you are - and in a way I've done exactly that. Every year our club runs a deer hunters' "sight in days" and many customers opt to have their rifles sighted in by the "experts." [smilie=1:

For several years I've been shooting and sighting in customers' guns - sometimes a hundred guns in a weekend. I've had opportunities to sight through, shoot and adjust hundreds of scopes from the very cheapest to some good quality stuff. There are absolutely differences in optical quality, and there are absolutely differences in the accuracy and reliability of the adjustments.
By far the el-cheapo scopes predominate in my "tests" since these are (after all) shooters who pay someone else to sight in their guns. Danged if I'll ever understand the logic of mounting $40 scopes on $500 rifles but they do it nearly every time.
Sometimes the cheap Bushnell Sportview or Tasco will give good performance, but too often trying to sight them in is an exercise in frustration. You wouldn't believe the weird things that happen when you start turning the screws. Some of them are optically so bad it's like looking through waxed paper.
When the occasional Nikon or Leupold makes its way to my sighting bench the difference is dramatic. You can SEE through them - and the adjustments do what they're supposed to do.
Even for those on a budget, I'm convinced that the smart money is spent on "medium quality" optics like Leupold VXs, Nikon Monarchs and Buckmasters, or Burris Fullfields. These scopes track well, have optical performance whithin a few percent of the Zeiss or Swarovski scopes, and cost less than half as much. For the really tight budget, the Weaver "Classic" series are also excellent scopes for the money. I wouldn't recommend anything less...

Just my .02 - but I've seen a LOT of scopes...

[Larry Gibson]

I have been wanting and wondering if a high dollar value binoculars are worth the money? I have looked through them in the stores; they appear identical. Field conditions are they real test? I never field tested them. My current binoculars are some no name garage sale bargain. Low investment has always equaled low attachment to me, especially if they are lost or stolen, or god forbide I flip my boat.


So I am wondering if any one has experience with them?:coffee:

Appears your question about binoculars got off on a rifle scope tangent. It is my experience that with either you get what you pay for. Yes there is a difference between the low end, medium priced and top end binoculars. I have on a shelf in my garge the remains of numerous scopes and binoculars. None of them, let me say that again, none of them are medium or top end products. That speaks to quality of manufacture and durability. I have had the better name and higher priced optics go bad (always to mistreatment on my part) but they are always worth fixing.

The other part of the equation is the quality of what you see. If you don't spend much time looking through optics then you won't notice much difference. But if you are a varmint shooter or a big game hunter who uses binoculars all day long then you will notice the less eye strain and the finer detail you can see at distance with the better quality binoculars. I have a pair of military 6x30s (made by B&L) that I've used and still use for still hunting in close thick stuff. I wanted a higher powered binocular for varmint and long range big game hunting. I was fortunate that the owner of a local gunshop (because I spend the extra money there to buy stuff there instead of cheaper elsewhere's) let me step out side with different binoculars to test them at distance. I did this with binoculars priced from $500 up through $1500 over the course of a year+ looking through and comparing them side by side under varying light and weather conditions. I would look at the branches and leaves of some different trees out to 600 yards away. It boiled down to 3 different makes all with in $200 of each other in the $1000+ range. We also have different eyes and what works for me may not be the best for you. But I will wager the best for both of us will be at the top end.

I bought the Zeiss 10x40 Victory's. For what I have paid for the several less expensive makes now laying defunct in the garage I could have more than paid for a pair of original Zeiss years ago. I was elk hunting a couple years ago with my friend who has a nice Stiener binocular (medium priced model - $500). We spotted some elk coming up out of a canyon 1000+ yards away. I said; "There's a spike just jumped the fence." He said; "Are you sure that's a spike?" I said; "Very sure, the spikes are just longer than the ears." He said; "Let me see them Zeiss." I took his Stiener's and focused them but could not see the spike of that elk. My friend had dropped the Zeiss down from his eyes and was staring at them. He said; "Damn, these are nice!" We could both see the spikes with the Zeiss but not the with the Steiners. Just last month I was again hunting with him and another friend who has Leupolds 10x40 Wind Rivers binoculars. I was able to see much more detail, particularly at distance than they were.

Guess it depends on what's "good enough" for you and your type of hunting. With good, really good binoculars, you will use them more because you can see more. You will also take "ownership" and care for them. I would advise you get the best you can afford even if you have to scrimp, save and wait a little while longer. Much better in the long run....wish I had got the Zeiss years ago.

Larry Gibson

[db2]

Carpetman, now that was cool. I see what you mean by a good light, it took a flashlight to really see the insides. There was a couple of dust particles on the prisms, other wise the insides were clean. I feel it is exactly what I payed for, a 60 dollar pair of binos.

Thanks for the tip
db2

[Jack Stanley]

I've owned exactly two different binoculars in the last twenty-five years . The first one I bought was a Bushnell 7X50 I think in 1980 . A couple years ago , I got a Pentax 8X43 that is absolutely great . Looking into the shadows or at fine detail does not strain my eyes like the old set .

Jack

[carpetman]

Larry Gibson--This might be difficult because they are not the same power. How do you compare the old B&L's to the higher dollar glasses? Of course you can't expect a pair of 6x to bring things up as close as 10x. Things like clarity and brightness.

[carpetman]

db2--I doubt that the couple dust spots are having much effect???????

[Ivantherussian03]

My main hunting binocs are cheapos from a garage sale many years ago. I thought I would buy from Ebay a pair Zeiss military issues 8 x 32 from the 70's. I was thinking probably anything would be better than what i have; I am not happy with them. I bought them last spring.

I might buy a new set soon. I am lucky; I got a actual bonus. The only one I can expect for my career.[smilie=1:

[7br]

Did he check the scope's zero prior to the hunt? I require my guest hunters to check the zero on their scope and about 90% are off from travel or (ambient conditions). I readjust my zero as the temperature changes during our two month hunting season. A lot of scope "movement" is simply a change in ballistics due to a change in ambient conditions.

He had checked the zero within a week or so when he zero'ed my xp100. (He doesn't have kids, I do). When we checked the zero later in the day, it would throw two shots within 3inches of each other. We would adjust the scope and other than heading in the general direction of the adjustment, there was no telling where the next two were going to hit. We both live in Wichita and were hunting in the Emporia area. About 80 miles by turnpike. It would be about another 30 minutes via mostly blacktop with about 5 miles of gravel to get where we were hunting.

I can see a couple of inches worth of difference at a 100yds with a .30-06, but not two feet.


What brand and style of scope and about how old please. Gianni
It was a Simmons brand and one of the higher magnifcation variables. Not sure of the age

[db2]

carpetman, no I do not think it is the little bit of dust is causing the problems. I feel the lens coatings are not all that good. I feel like the available light in low light conditions are not being gathered but reflected away. This is not much of a problem during the day, just during the evening times.

7br, a month before season I had trigger work done on my rifle. A couple of times a week I was going out to the range. That rifle would not hold zero, every time I took it out everything changed. Had me highly excitable a couple of times. The smith did not tighten the stock screws. After I tighten them up everything calmed down. Just something else to check.

Did you see the buck in Sundays paper from unit 14? All I can say is WOW!!!

[montana_charlie]

I have used a few old Weavers and will only use the fixed power ones. The old variables have steel bodies, but a lot of the internals are plastic or nylon. I had a variable 1.5-4 or there abouts years ago. It worked fine on any setting, but needed re-zeroing if the power was changed.
While the author of the thread was asking about binoculars, much of the discussion has been about rifle scopes. So, I would like to drop a word of praise for Weaver.
My first centerfire rifle was a Rem. 700 (BDL) in 7 Rem. Mag. That is still my caliber of choice. For that rifle, I bought a Weaver V-7, and that scope is on the gun I now own. The scope is over 30 years old.

When it was about five or six years old, I was adjusting the focus, and screwed the rear end completely off of the scope. It went back on without problems, but the watertight integrity was gone. That winter it fogged up on me.
The following summer I sent it to El Paso for repair (which was free) and asked for a different reticle to be installed (which cost $5). Turn around time was about six weeks...and I have had no problems with it since.

I sight the scope in at 200 yards with it set at 7 power. I will also do most of my shooting at 7 power, unless the target is very close to me. If impact point changes as power is changed...it must be that it matters little (for me) because the range will be so short the difference is unnoticeable.

I have missed a few shots taken with this scope, but it was never the scope's fault...
CM

[Ivantherussian03]

I do have a pair of older Zeiss 8X32 binoculars. Can I check them for internal problems or send them away to be refurbished/cleaned up?

[Larry Gibson]

Larry Gibson--This might be difficult because they are not the same power. How do you compare the old B&L's to the higher dollar glasses? Of course you can't expect a pair of 6x to bring things up as close as 10x. Things like clarity and brightness.

I'd have to say the quality is there with the old B&Ls. They have always been quite clear and bright but as you suggest it is a difficult comparison. However, let me say this. Were I short range big game hunting in dense stuff and not expecting to look much past 150-200 yards the 6x30s would still be my choice. I have used them for big game hunting (and a lot of varmint hunting also) since I got them in '67 at a garage sale for $5 not far from Fort Bragg. I've no doubt they were lifted from the military (serial # was filed off) but since I've been in for the last 42 years and have used them on most every deployment including the last trip to Iraq I'd say Uncle Sam's got his money worth, out of both of us maybe. The Zeiss are obviously a little more clear than the older glass and the 10X does bring the small distant details into much better view. I also pick up about 15-20 minutes of more useable light on each end of the day with the Zeiss, that is important. Love the Zeiss but I'm not divorcing the B&Ls.

Larry Gibson

[Explorer1]

I have owned Swarovski SLC glass, great item but I was afraid of damaging to carry them all the time. I traded 'em for a Cooper rifle and use my Brunton binocs constantly.
I also own one NightForce scope, but it was hard to spend that much. It is a GREAT piece of work. Would I buy another? Maybe.
Overall are upper end stuff worth it? Its a personal decision. My income does not support many of 'em, not to mention concerns of damaging them due to my "sillyness" as "stuff" happens.
Best bet is probably buy good stuff and use the savings to practice!

[7br]

Did you see the buck in Sundays paper from unit 14? All I can say is WOW!!!

Another one of Hayden's Hunters, although from the write up, it sounds like the guy did it right.

Maybe I am out of touch with wildlife economics, but I am getting dismayed about the amount of out of state hunters we are getting. I used to hunt on the refuge up by Hartford as it is slug/blackpowder only. I could drive all over the place and see one or two vehicles going after venison. Two years ago, it seemed like every little pull in had an out of state vehicle in it. The walk in hunting program is a great idea, but it seems like the really good stuff is on private/leased ground. A poor boy like me that moved to the big city(Wichita) really doesn't have much of a chance.

I really shouldn't be whining. I would love to take a Colorado Elk hunt and I am hoping to get together with my sister and brother-in-law for an antelope hunt in New Mexico. There are places that a guy can find on public land that is still relatively hidden. The biggest problem is the loss of huntable land. Every little 10 acre wheat field between here and Oklahoma has a bunch of survey flags in it and the bulldozers are getting ready to roll. Still, everytime I see a hunting show on TV with Kansas as a destination, I wince.

[carpetman]

IvantheRussian---I am confused. What's new. If I read this correctly you have a pair of Zeiss 8x32 and you are thinking of buying another pair. 8x32 by their size would not be the best of choice for low light situations. They only have a 4mm exit,which surely is smaller than your pupil,thus you would lose some. Now this is not earth shattering,but a consideration if buying. If buying,again I'd recommend a pair of Bausch & Lomb New York made from WW2 forward. 7x35's or 6x30's should do you well. The pair you currently have can easily be checked to see if refurbish needed. Look through each lens backwards into strong light. Should be able to detect a problem if it exists. I have never used this guy,but talking to him on the phone,he seems to know his stuff. Mountain Optics in Montana. 406 857 2354 or toll free 1 877 756-2466. Now him being from Montana,I don't know how often he leaves his sheep to fix binoculars--dont know about his turn around time.

[Ivantherussian03]

No, i am not thinking of buying another 8X32. I have a pair. I hunted with for a year, and was not happy with them. From reading all the discussion here, I just expected to much from them. They are ok for short distances. I need to be able out a mile. I have been thinking of buying a high power long range binocular. But I wont really use them too much so I have put a lot thought into the decision. I would use them mostly for scouting from around the few hills. It is a question of piorities and vanity. $1000 dollar pair of binoculars is pretty ostentatious for the people I hunt with. I try not to stand out from my peer group, if I can help it.

[7br]

Hmmm, I use 1/2 of a cheap Tasco 10x binocular as a monocular. Would that be considered too ostentatious for your peer group?

Sorta like, "Is that half a binoculars in your pocket or are you just happy to see?"

By the way, if binoculars is singular, what is plural form? Is half a binoculars a binocular?

[carpetman]

7br--You done answered your own question. Half a binocular would be a monocular if cut in half one way. Cut the other way it would be junk. Like is half a bicycle a bicycle? No it's a unicycle if cut right..

[carpetman]

IvantheRussian--Teach,for the usage you describe,a spotting scope would serve you better. As Krag35 mentioned above 10x shake is magnified too much with binoculars. I was thinking you were hunting animals--not constellations.

[Ivantherussian03]

Yeah, I am not sure I really need them. Actually, i dont. I call my moose in. It does not matter when I see them, just so long as I see them before they get too close. A nice spotting set up would be good. It would be nice for looking for trophy animals.

:Fire:

[waksupi]

IvantheRussian---I am confused. What's new. If I read this correctly you have a pair of Zeiss 8x32 and you are thinking of buying another pair. 8x32 by their size would not be the best of choice for low light situations. They only have a 4mm exit,which surely is smaller than your pupil,thus you would lose some. Now this is not earth shattering,but a consideration if buying. If buying,again I'd recommend a pair of Bausch & Lomb New York made from WW2 forward. 7x35's or 6x30's should do you well. The pair you currently have can easily be checked to see if refurbish needed. Look through each lens backwards into strong light. Should be able to detect a problem if it exists. I have never used this guy,but talking to him on the phone,he seems to know his stuff. Mountain Optics in Montana. 406 857 2354 or toll free 1 877 756-2466. Now him being from Montana,I don't know how often he leaves his sheep to fix binoculars--dont know about his turn around time.

Carpetman, interesting. This guy has to live within a few miles of me, from his phone prefix. I'll have to look him up. Thought it might be Pierre St. Marie at first, as he does some scope work, but he lives west of me.