Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Price point of diminishing returns for hunting scopes

I have owned hunting scopes ranging from cheap Tasco's back in the 80s to mid range Swarovskis. Obviously cheap Chinese Tascos are junk and a poor value even at the $39 bubble pack price from Walmart. Swarovkis and similar are excellent scopes with fantastic glass, but are not cheap. It seems to me that I reached the point of diminishing returns somewhere beyond the Meopta Meopro and Leupold VX-3i class of scopes. Both get me past the end of legal shooting light. Alpha glass is clearly better, but only a small fraction better, and definitely not 2-5 times better. For my hunting, the Zeiss Conqust/Meopta Meopro/Cabelas Instinct seems to be the sweet spot where quality and price meet. How about you all?

Good glass comes pretty cheap these days. To me, it's about the mechanics. I am still trying to find the tipping point for that.

Much the same, with a “but”. Have gone from taking the weight penalty to get better glass, to now taking the “meh” glass to get lighter weight/better balance. Strangely, feels like everyone else went the other way!

For a hunting scope? So long as you remove target shooting from the equation, IMO there's far too much emphasis placed on fiddling and twisting and not enough on hunting.

I paid less than $200 for an elite 4200 and a sightron Sii. I'd say that price point is right around that at which returns are start greatly diminishing.

Glass with bino's, not the scope. Set and forget and hunt closer instead. Be prepared to pass game that is nearer to half a mile away than 75 yards away.

Somehow our grandfathers did it with peep sights and cloudy weavers. The tacticool trend has convinced a lot of people that they need something that somehow got along fine without. It sure does sell scopes though, so there's that.


Short answer- somewhere around a FFII and 4200.


YMMV.

And we wonder how we as hunters/shooters lose ground everyday.

A lot wrong in the statement.

This +1000.

Glass is better than ever and relatively cheap. Seems the current generation of hunters wants to be able to brag about seeing the hairs on an elk's ass at 600 yards and takes mechanical reliability for granted. So, the scope manufacturers and marketers read the demand picture and that's what they gear their advertising toward.

It's a gun sight first and an optical instrument second. Mechanical excellence comes at a price.

Paul

I used to buy only fixed scopes that were specified as having fully multicoated lenses and click adjustments. I am showing my age here I guess but that is what it took if you wanted something bright.

To get that you used to have to go to a Vari-x 3 level, then it got to be a VX 2, and now even VX1 levels have it all.


Modern variables have gotten so good that I fhave moved away from fixed powered scopes and enjoy the larger FOV lower powers give me in the field.

not that long ago I found a Burris that has those features, along with an illuminated center dot #4 and think it is every bit the scope my Vx3 is for about 1/3rd it's price. $200 ( I even paid a fair bit less) will get you one heck of a workable hunting scope these days. The best deal ten years ago, to me, was probably a Weaver K6 for $99. More than adequate.

Bullshit. I don't care if I am shooting steel or a critter. A scope that pukes at any range is a scope that I don't want.

I have VX3i’s. They do me fine. If I was going on guided hunts or I hunted on a place that had trophy deer, I would have a designated rifle with a Nightforce scope.

Glass....big deal.

SWFA scopes have proved this over and over and over and over.....again. Not expensive but reliable.....$299....Even less money in their sample list...price point then $300.....all else is bull$hitz and fluff.

Repeatability and Zero Retention and Return to Zero.....is all that is needed

Dusty lens, Fogged lens, Scratched lens the list goes on......as long as it is still ZEROED and holds it.........thats what flashes through our/your mind in that instant before or as the shot is taken......

best

Heavy

Leupold VX3 range is just fine with me. I use them, I trust them. Would rather put extra money in binos.

Bullshit.

You either misunderstand me or I bumped a little too close to home.

I'm the last guy here who would try to ban anything, as I've seen the results of that mindset.

Hunting has become more and more expensive in opportunity cost (place to hunt, travel, etc) and time to hunt (which to me is becoming more rare) so equipment failure is not an option for me. Durable and reliable is paramount but another issue we deal with here in the south (GA) is low light utility. We typically hunt in planted pines and or firebreaks around them and glass with binos to the end of legal shooting light. I need a scope that will get me to the end of the hunt and keep up with my binos (Swarovski EL 8.5x42). That's the challenge, if I can see it in low light with the binos, I need a scope that will keep up. I have a number of brands that work well but the baseline for me has always been Leupold VX3i's for me and up.

In my experience in SW Mississippi, the reticle is the most important factor 30 minutes after sunset which is our legal end.

I think there are a couple of sweet spots. Real bargains on closeouts and discontinued models like the Minox ZX3s I got for under 100 with no issues so far. Then another jump in to the 300-500 range which is usually where I stop. Are the more expensive scopes better? No doubt they are, but do I need them is the question, most if not practically all the time I don't. The only time I have been let down by optics is when shooting into the sun and I don't know if any of the anti reflective coatings will overcome this. Way back fogging issues were more common but not now. I have had scopes knocked out of alignment and the price did not seem like a factor at all. In two seasons I had $100 to $800 dollar scopes knocked out and the $800 scope took the least bump to do it.

I wish the budget to moderate scopes had more recticle choices but some already do. I tried to figure out how much actual time I spend looking through the scope vs binoculars and I couldn't but the total amount of time seemed to be about a thousand to one in favor of binocular time. Binocular time on a spot and stalk hunt would be even higher by ten fold amount or more.

I totally agree with you and your selections of value scopes!

In the past, whenever I've spent more than the price of a Weaver classic V or K, I've felt I got very little of any value for my money. I have been able to kill during all legal hunting hours with these scopes so many times over the years that it isn't a concern to me at all. Likewise I have several that have held zero dependably for decades, despite some less than gentle treatment. I have several scopes from Leupold, Nikon, Sightron, Bushnell {Elite and Banner} and Bausch & Lomb and none offer anything of significant value to me over the Weavers except in rare cases when more mounting length or eye relief was necessary for a certain application.

I’m with the OP. I think the drop off starts right after the Conquest/Meopro level for me. Up until recently I have been a set and forget guy and better than half my scopes are in the 3-9x40ish range. I have few higher powered scopes on guns that I’m learning to dial for but they are in the same range.

I have owned higher end scopes in the past and never discern enough differences between them and my Meopros to justify the cost so end up selling them off.

Spot on.But for the record,a used $150-$200 Grand Slam,or Elite has done all I ever needed...

I'm here, too.

I'll also echo the earlier posters who noted that good glass is less expensive now, while repeatable tracking has gotten more expensive. While I love good glass, it's not too useful if the crosshairs won't go (and stay) where you need 'em to be.

I've mentioned my friend a few times in this forum, who can't see any difference between Leupold Rifleman scopes, and anything more expensive. It's hard to make fun of him when he spends so much less $ on scopes than I do. He even manages to kill stuff pretty well, too. Ignorance can be bliss, I suppose.

FC