I have used Leupold scopes all my life. Every time I get a different brand I hate it. There is something about the eye relief of Leupold scopes that is different. When I pick up a Leupold I notice two things: 1.) the actual eye relief is very generous so I don't have to put my head in just the right position to get a full view through the scope; 2) when I look through a Leupold I get a very full field of view. When I have looked through other scopes (the Bushnell Elite comes to mind) it literally seemed like I was looking through a paper towel tube. I can't explain it but I know there is a diffence.

What is the differece with the Leupolds? Am I the only one that notices this? Do any other scopes have the same full field of view that I have found with the Leupolds?

Thanks!

What you are talking about is Leupold's generous eye box. One of the major reasons why I'm such a big fan of Leupold rifle scopes.
The other advantage of their long eye relief is that it's easier to mount the scope and algin it with a moving target because the further the eye is back from the scope, the easier it is for the eyes to see around the scope.
Not all Leupolds are built this way, however. I've got a 3-9X33 Compact that has no better eye box than the 3-9X40 Zeiss Conquest, for instance. And my old 7.5XAO has no where near either the eye box or eye relief of the 6X42 the rifle also uses. E

E,

Funny you should mention the Zeiss. I recently purchased one and took one look through it and knew it was not for me. It was very clear, but getting a full view without having to line up perfectly was annoying. I was actually hoping the Zeiss would be better than some other scopes I have looked at.

I have noticed that the Redfield Revolution has a nice eye box, but then again, it is made by Leupold.

Any other scopes out there have generous eye boxes?

Do most Leupolds have this feature, if not, which ones don't? I am in the market for a new scope and wanted to try something different, but I think I will end up back with Leupold.

I'm not sure as to which have just what you want. What I'd do is try them on a stock that some of the gun stores like Sportsman's Warehouse has.
The 4-6X scopes all seem to do well in this area. The latest VX3's may or may not depending on which model. As a rule, the smaller scopes do, while the larger, more powerful 4.5-14X scopes have less.
BTW, the Zeiss Conquests in the 3.5-10x and the 4.5-14x sizes are unacceptable to me. But the 3-9X40 I could make do with. E

I'm primarily a Leupold user, but I get along with my 3-9x40 Conquest just fine. The trick with that one is to get it far enough away, it has a ton of eye relief. On a short action Rem 700 I have the scope forward so about a third of the adjustment housing is over the front receiver ring.

In my lineup the champs of "easy" eye relief are my 6x42 and 3.5-10x40 Leupolds and 3-9x42 Meopta.

This is what sold me on Leupolds to begin with. When shooting from field positions where you may not be able to get a perfect gun mount like you can at the range or when you have to make a quick snap shot it really helps. The fact that Leupolds are often 2" and about 1/4 lb lighter than most of the competion helps too.

I have a couple of 3-9X40 Zeiss. The eye relief is not quite as good, but I can live with it. Just wish they were as light as the Leupolds. I understand that some scopes are at least as clear, maybe moreso, and for less money. But the negatives still outweigh the positives and I keep coming back to Leupold as well.

its amazing how different people just prefer different things. for me the eye relief on leupolds and in particular the zeiss conquest 3-9 is too long, it means I have to mount the scope a long ways forward on the gun and the last ziess conquest I almost had to change my mounting setup. also there is no free lunch with eye relief it makes you need a more careful eye alignment. thats why I prefer the bushnell elite scopes over leupold. it simply comes down to preferences and quite possibly how most guns fit you. I am a larger guy that likes a long LOP on a gun, perhaps thats why I don't like leupold as much.

I have Bushnell Elite, Leupold, Nightforce, Nikon and Weaver. I don't see the big deal some people make over this?

cumminscowboy,

I am a small guy with short arms, maybe that is why I like the long eye relief of the Leupolds.....I think we have figured this thing out!

You've got it backwards. Longer eye relief means less critical eye positioning to see through the scope.

Sounds like you trying to shoot with the non dominate eye or something if you need your eye that close to a scope to see through it.

Fore and aft positioning yes but not necessarily side to side positioning.
Long eye relief generally means a smaller FOV too.

Maybe not, I'm 6' 2" and have a big wingspan and I prefer generous eye relief.

I doubt height has much to do with it. I'm 6'4" with a 6'5" armspan, and didn't really like the eye box on the Conquest 3-9x40 I had. I love the 4200 3-9x40 I have, though, and the VX2 3-9x40 on another rifle I have is also great. No better, no worse.

Seems like it's probably more related to your face structure, gun fit, and personal preference...


Something that DOES drive me a little nuts is variable eye relief. The Burris FFII 3-9x40 I have on one rifle is noticeable on this. One reason I used to stay away from Leupolds is their advertised "range" of eye relief. But after taking the plunge, it isn't really noticeable on my VX2.

Same here. I have several brands of scopes, but Leupolds have the longer eye relief that enables me to set up properly for me and my wife and daughter. Even allowing for the extra layers of clothes and thicker recoil pads.
And I do use my dominant eye.

stumpy

The only turkey in the Leupold line regarding eye box, in my experience, is the VX-3 4.5x14x40, 1" tube. I positively hated this scope, couldn't get rid of it fast enough. In that range, the 3.5x10x40 is superb, as is the 2.5x8x36. The 6x36, 6x42, 4x33, VX-2 2x7 all have great eye relief and generous eye boxes (the latter I value highly, as it makes the scope very fast on moving targets).

If you didn't like the 4.5-14X40, then you like the 2-7X28 and the 3-9X33 Ultralights even less. E

If you understand that different shooting positions place one's eye in different places on the stock, variable eye relief can be very useful.
BTW, the latest 3.5-10x40, VX3's don't have nearly as much of this variable eye relief as the older VariXII's had. Eye box isn't quite what the older VariXIII's had at the lower mnagnifications, but it's still pretty good.
Where I've found a long eye box to be very useful is when I need to shoot in a hurry. Especially if my target is uphill or downhill from me. E

That's likely so, but I just hadn't used them and find myself gravitating toward the really good fixed powers (such as the FX2 6x36).

The VX-6 has constant eye relief and a very good eyebox, so in my view it is a win-win situation. Especially compared to stuff like the 3-9x33 compact.