Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Fixed Leupold vs Variable S&B

E-

your unreal man. I give you credit for staying the course no matter what. I dont know how many people on how many different boards disagree with you on this based on their tests with their own eyes but that isnt good enough for you becauser you are the only person in the world who knows how to focus a scope. Leupolds are great scopes. you refuse to belive anything could be better. I just dont understand why you think that. You base things on tests that are years old, when in reality the only tests that matter are the tests of an individual's own eyes because they are ultimately pulling the trigger. Its amazing all these expensive scope companies stay in business-- according to you everyone should have realized long ago they are just a big waste of money.

The tests E refers to are old, no question about it. Since 1993 many new scopes came in the market. But that is not the main issue. The real problem is that E refers to outdated tests that are flawed. You cannot characterize the optical performance of a scope by just determining the light transmission though it. And you don�t have to be a scientist to understand that. At day, I can see the same with or without sunglasses that cut about 70% of the light (30% light transmission). But how well I can see depends upon my eyes resolution. A scope test that doesn�t confider that is just pure junk. Here is once again a quote from a very qualified source, US Optics,

US Optics quote


So the tests E refers to are old, thats ok. But the main problem is that these tests are invalid and cannot be used to characterize a optical devise since they mention nothing about resolution. So they are flawed and useless to say the least.

Aic

As I read the whole set of comments by US Optics, he was refering to a wide variety of scopes. He talked about "bright" as in "too bright" and their needing an aperture, or funnel, to tone them down. This sort of cheap trick is only found in the really cheap scopes like the Tascos which have nothing like the percentage of light transmition, that the top scopes have. They do have "too much light" total, and that's why they use an aperture. Without one, the stray light in the scope would degrade the image. He also plugged his so called hot, new set up.
In otherwords, you got suckered by add hype.
There is no mystery to the relationship of brightness to contrast. The whites are brighter and the black colored objects stand out in bolder contrasts. The other colors of the spectrum may vary a bit, depending on what wavelenths the maker of the scope chooses to work with, but the more total light means more contrast between the light colored objects and the dark colored ones. It's that simple. From then on, all the scope has to do is focus the image. E

My disagreement is not that they didn't see what they saw. They assume that because one brand looked brighter than another that it because one scope brand is better than another. I've noticed this is often not the case. The people who do their own testing lack the knowledge as to the pitfalls of doing this. As a result, they make false assumptions based on faulty testing.

You need not spend lots of time and money doing your own testing. Many other, honest posters, with vast experience, have already done this. John Barsness is one, JJHack is another. Matt in Virginia is another. So is Cheaha. Big Stick keeps trying to tell us what works so well for him. Ray Atkinson over an accuratereloading is another. The list is endless.

For the record, we have lots of fine, bright, reliable rifle scopes these days. The truth is that the even the very best need not cost more than a good rifle. The Bushnell Elite 4200's are a good example of this. E

E,


Aic: bla bla bla resolution is different than brightness bla bla bla US Optics bla bla bla..



E, you dropped the resolution... Finally, are you learning something here afterall <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />. I know you'll prove my exitement wrong but anyway...
Aic

All of you fellas are beating a dead horse. It really ISN'T that hard to find a scope that fits your needs very well. What works for me may not work for Eremicus and vice versa. What makes Aicman happy might not be what makes Eremicus happy.

However Eremicus, please understand that there are many posters on the net that have done a lot of testing and some will agree with you and some won't. I do respect your opinion, BUT you do come across as someone that does not respect anybody's opinion that differs significantly from your own.

BTTT

Comparing a $270 Leupold 6x42 and a S&B scope? S&B better win that test. A Leupold 6x42 gives you a whole lot of bang for your buck though. But in the end, the guy who brings home the biggest animals wins.

Really? Hunting is a contest? What's the prize??

Dave,

Out of curiosity, why are you bumping this thread from over 6 years ago TTT??

I'm beginning to think someone wearing a Leupold jumpsuit kicked his dog and drank his last beer.

I really don't understand a lot of the Leupold vs. S&B (Kahles, etc) arguements that go on here. If you're paying 4 or 5 times as much for the S&B as the Leupy I'd hope you got a 4 times better scope. Go out and use that S&B and be happy but don't insinuate that I'm an idiot because Leupold or Burris is what I can afford (and that is pretty much how a lot of these arguements come across).

If you want to argue Conquest vs. Leupold that's different, it might be a worthwhile read...

SotG,

I suspect many of these threads are nothing to do with optics but merely a way to pull E's chain, kinda like kids pulling the legs off a spider!

Regards,

Peter

Anyway, the S&B 4x36 I have blows all of the competition out of the water, including Leupold's fixed 4x, by a wide margin.
It's kind of unreal how much better it is, after using Leupold's fixed 4x for years, and thinking it was the best. The best just got a whole lot better.
I think that variables have a place, but I'm seriously questioning their use on big game rifles, where you set a variable to some intermediate setting, and leave it there??? The only time I used the max setting on a variable was for zeroing the scope/rifle combo.
I do like a 6-20x variable on a groundhog rifle, so I can dial the power back at mid-day when the mirage is bad.

I'm sure that is the case, in fact I truely hope so. And I agree with you regarding fixed power scopes on BG rifles Don, the only variable I have mounted is on a .223 varmint gun.

Would be interested in looking at a 6x Conquest if Zeiss would bring one out.

Don,

How's the eye relief on the S&B 4x? On paper it looks short (3.3"). Is the eye relief critical?

I've been using the Kahles Helia C 4x36mm. Good glass and the eye relief is a little larger (3.54").

I think the Leupold fixed scopes are good, durable scopes that work well. I find the Leupold fixed scopes are very good on rifles where weight, size and/or durability are a concern. I especially like the 6x36 Leupold and think ounce for ounce and dollar for dollar is one of the best scopes going. Are they as good as a S&B? No, but that's not a fair comparison as S&B's cost multiples of what a Leupold does.

Variable scopes are especially useful for a hunter with one rifle and hunts in woods and plains. That said, we don't seem to have many one rifle hunters on this forum.

I agree that a 6x Conquest would be interesting. I don't agree that the guy with the biggest animal wins. I think they guy who has the most fun hunting with his family and friends wins.

I've seen guys theorize about needing a 1k+ scope to gain that extra 3 minutes of hunting time, or needing a high x scope to pick out the biggest mule deer from a running herd 800yds away, or being able to see bullet holes at 200yds etc. My point being that a scope isn't going to make the difference in the hunt, and what ultimately really matters is what hits the ground. Hunters kill animals, not scopes. What underwear I wear has more of an effect on my hunt than what scope I happen to have on a rifle.

If you want to use high dollar scopes, go ahead. I know some very successful guys use them. I also know some very successful guys who run $270 scopes.

Generally that's true, in most cases and applications. However, there are exceptions.

For me, I utilize the expensive S&B Zenith Flash Dot for a very specific purpose. Hunting feral hogs well after nightfall and in extreme thick dense cover.

Simply put, everything else on the market just doesn't compare (unless one forks out even more thousands for Gen 3 and/or a FLIR). Granted, a highly specialized nitche, but it is what it is.

Leupold vs. Schmidt & Bender - C'mon man!!

That's like comparing a Datsun against a Ferrari.

Datsun vs a Ferrari? You guys sure are proud of your scopes!