Optics Mfg. Questions

[Faine]

I am curious as to what are the 5 best optics manufacturers out there for civilians. What makes them the best and are their products worth the investment? Additionally, if I could get the best for ruggedness, value, and overall quality in your opinion.

I've been researching companies like US Optic, Swarovski and Trijicon but I don't even know where they would rank or if they would rank on a best of the best list.

Edit: I am looking at scopes for shooting 800-1500yds.

 

[ghostdncr]

I'll throw in a response. Just personal opinion, of course. Based on your range statement, I'm guessing a .338 Lapua or something along those lines? I'm going with the assumption that big recoil is apt to be part of this equation. My first choice would probably be a Leupold Mark 4 because of its blend of toughness, clarity, precision, and pricing. This line has been a go-to product for police and military shooters for many years now, and has been proven over and over again in some of the harsher conditions found on this planet. I wouldn't feel one bit compromised by going with a Mark 4.

If money was not a concern, I'd look into a Nightforce or Premier Reticles offering. I was looking through a $2000+ Nightforce a couple of weeks ago and can only describe it as otherworldly. It reminded me of Arthur C. Clark's great statement that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." This scope was almost there. I've no experience with Premier Reticles but with some offerings MSRP'd at over $3500, they must have something serious going on.

In more reasonably priced scopes, I'm mostly blown away by the lens quality found in the Vortex scopes I've handled. If I was just shooting for fun, this would be a definite research item for me. If I was planning a 1400 meter crack at Mullah Omar or some other life/death thing, I'd be inclined to stick with something having a lengthier track record, such as the Mark 4.

I'll also suggest you consider your mounting options as carefully as you do your optic. Those aluminum rings you see on Amazon that look like Badger Ordnance rings but only cost $39? There's a reason for the price difference, and it's pretty substantial downrange.

 

[42769vette]

Obviously the best for hunting is not the best for tactical. I will speak on Tactical because it sounds like thats what your looking at. Inside of each line there are better and worse, but as my opinion.

1. S&B
2. USO
3. New Vortex Razor
4. Preimer
5. Kahles
6. Nightforce

The 1st thing you need to think about is Internal travel. That will weed some out.

The 2nd is durability requirements. That will weed some out.

The 3rd is price range

The 4th is FFP vs SFP

The 5th is zoom range (has a large effect on a lot of design's internal travel)

Give me a call, we will figure out what is best for you. 765-580-0986

Best for hunting, and best return on investment are separate topics.

 

[Kirkd]

Its always hard to ask and get an answer what's the best of the best because:
1) people are biased
2) some people gravitate towards one brand and all others are junk in their opinion
3) honestly, who really has experience with all the scopes Out there? I don't. I can comment on what I have used and the pros and cons of that scope.
4) there are too many keyboard commandos who offer an opinion without ever using that said product or render an opinion offof something they have read.
5) it depends on your needs (tactical, hunting, benchrest, etc) and the caliber of the rifle (a good scope rifle may not be good on a 300 win mag)

Alan would be a good resource for you and he has commented. I think knowing your budget may help. For example if your budget is $300, then a fixed power scope would be better than any variable power scope because the glass will be better. And if your budget is $2k, then a lot of options will open up.

from what info you have supplied, you want a scope that has turrets you can dial and can do it reliably. You need to find out how much drop you need so you pick up a scope that has that range.

 

[Faine]

I'd be looking for something to put on a 300 win mag or 338 Lapa mag. I haven't decided on caliber just yet but I'm leaning towards 300 win mag due to price of the round and the fact I think I want to top out at 1500. This would be used for target shooting, not hunting. I'm expecting to spend 2800 to 4000 on this optic as this will likely be my only long range rifle. I'd say don't worry about rings, if I'm spending that much on a scope the host and interface will be more than sufficient.

As for focal plane I'm not decided at the moment, both have their benefits. Zoom range is negotiable, I've found that good glass makes needing more zoom less important.

As for my experience so far I've shot a USO, Leopold, and Vortex. Of the three the USO was the most impressive, but only having had this minimal experience has left me wanting opinions of others.

(Alan, I'll be seeing you in a month or so, we can talk then, I'm in planning stages now and with the cost it'll be a good long term project for me.)

 

[42769vette]

I'd be looking for something to put on a 300 win mag or 338 Lapa mag. I haven't decided on caliber just yet but I'm leaning towards 300 win mag due to price of the round and the fact I think I want to top out at 1500. This would be used for target shooting, not hunting. I'm expecting to spend 2800 to 4000 on this optic as this will likely be my only long range rifle. I'd say don't worry about rings, if I'm spending that much on a scope the host and interface will be more than sufficient.

As for focal plane I'm not decided at the moment, both have their benefits. Zoom range is negotiable, I've found that good glass makes needing more zoom less important.

As for my experience so far I've shot a USO, Leopold, and Vortex. Of the three the USO was the most impressive, but only having had this minimal experience has left me wanting opinions of others.

(Alan, I'll be seeing you in a month or so, we can talk then, I'm in planning stages now and with the cost it'll be a good long term project for me.)

For this one, I would make a trip out here. I think I have the option you will go with (RZR 4.5-27). The nice thing about coming out here, is you can actually look at things 2200 yds away. Its pretty rare I get worked up over a scope, but the new RZR has me excited. I ordered 2 for personal use, and they will be demos, so you can look at it mounted on a rifle.

Of the 3 options you have seen USO is the clear winner. I'm hesitant to say the new gen2 RZR will beat a USO because it seems crazy, but I swear I think it will. Ill know for sure after a month or so of having them on my rifles.

 

[Kirkd]

I'd be looking for something to put on a 300 win mag or 338 Lapa mag. I haven't decided on caliber just yet but I'm leaning towards 300 win mag due to price of the round and the fact I think I want to top out at 1500. This would be used for target shooting, not hunting. I'm expecting to spend 2800 to 4000 on this optic as this will likely be my only long range rifle. I'd say don't worry about rings, if I'm spending that much on a scope the host and interface will be more than sufficient.

As for focal plane I'm not decided at the moment, both have their benefits. Zoom range is negotiable, I've found that good glass makes needing more zoom less important.

As for my experience so far I've shot a USO, Leopold, and Vortex. Of the three the USO was the most impressive, but only having had this minimal experience has left me wanting opinions of others.

(Alan, I'll be seeing you in a month or so, we can talk then, I'm in planning stages now and with the cost it'll be a good long term project for me.)

For your budget and what you are wanting to do, first focal plane is the way to go. That way the substensions are good on whatever zoom you are set to. Traditionally speaking, optics are not the best when zoomed in fully. I can't speak on specific scope glass, but as a photographer, glass is only so good and you will typically have some chromatic aberrations and loss of contrast at the furthest zoom range, even with pro glass. I'm sure that scopes in your price range will have coatings on the glass that lower end models will not have and should help.

Take Alan up on his offer. He has sold me a red dot and scope.

 

[42769vette]

I can't speak on specific scope glass, but as a photographer, glass is only so good and you will typically have some chromatic aberrations and loss of contrast at the furthest zoom range.

You sir are correct, that's the case with any optics. Its just a fact of optical engineering. Scopes in this price range (a couple scope excluded) typically have glass quality that your getting to the ends of a humans ability to decipher, so when you get that little bit of extra aberration, it still has a nice crisp picture.

 

[Faine]

So with the Vortex 4.5 - 27 would there theoretically be less achromatism at say 20 magnification than a USO 4-15 at 15 magnification?

I know what it looks like but exactly how it plays out in lens physics is something I'm still trying to get a complete grasp of. It would vary greatly by the lens itself if I understand correctly the theory behind it. Each lens type has different focal lengths and as the visible color spectrum doesn't always align with a single focal point it causes achromatism. As I understand it, lens coatings reflect certain wavelengths just as the glass itself will and they can be used to correct for what the glass reflects which reduces distortion perceived?

 

[42769vette]

So with the Vortex 4.5 - 27 would there theoretically be less achromatism at say 20 magnification than a USO 4-15 at 15 magnification?

It doesn't really work like that. There are to many variables that come into play to go between brand's (IE design's). Also a good chunk of it depends on individual eye sight with scopes. It I were a guessing man I would guess the USO at 15x would be better at 15x than the Razor at 20x. Overall zoom plays a large part in it, because every little inconsistency in the glass is magnified.

I know what it looks like but exactly how it plays out in lens physics is something I'm still trying to get a complete grasp of. It would vary greatly by the lens itself if I understand correctly the theory behind it. Each lens type has different focal lengths and as the visible color spectrum doesn't always align with a single focal point it causes achromatism. As I understand it, lens coatings reflect certain wavelengths just as the glass itself will and they can be used to correct for what the glass reflects which reduces distortion perceived?

This is correct, each and every scope on the market is set up to be better in certain parts of the spectum. There are A LOT of things that effect how each scope does with certain colors, then it rolls back to individual eyes. That's why you constantly see some folks arguing "USO glass is better than S&B, of S&B is better than Swarovski". when you see that argument to a extent both could be right for there eyes.

Answers in red sir.

By the way, AWSOME topic.

 

[Tombs]

My mind is kind of blown that Hensoldt/Zeiss isn't included in here.

 

[Faine]

Gotcha! So the clarity of the USO scope to me may not translate to say the Vortex, it's less a matter of preference and more a matter of each persons physical eye and what it's capable of in combination with the scope itself and its capabilities. Basically meaning that there's probably one scope for each person that's "the right scope" for them, while others may do the job or be sufficient.

 

[42769vette]

My mind is kind of blown that Hensoldt/Zeiss isn't included in here.

It absolutly should be. As I was typing I knew I was forgetting someone, but I couldn't for the life of me think of who.

On my list that is actually #2, and USO moves to 3.

 

[Faine]

I was just looking at Zeiss' optics. They have a massive jump in magnification from one to the next. Which, of course comes with a massive jump in price.

 

[42769vette]

Gotcha! So the clarity of the USO scope to me may not translate to say the Vortex, it's less a matter of preference and more a matter of each persons physical eye and what it's capable of in combination with the scope itself and its capabilities. Basically meaning that there's probably one scope for each person that's "the right scope" for them, while others may do the job or be sufficient.

Yes sir, once you get to the top few, 99% of shooters should base their decision on features, specs, etc because they wont be able to tell the difference. I have experience behind every scope we have talked about, and lots of experience behind some, and there are a lot of times even I have a tough time telling the difference.

Its kind of like driving a 10 second car vs a 9.9 second car. Its hard to tell the difference when driving, but you change the track temperature, or have a driver that shifts diffrently and you might have a new winner. (Im going of what I watched on "street outlaws" It would be impossible for anyone on this site to know less about car racing than me)

 

[Tombs]

Gotcha! So the clarity of the USO scope to me may not translate to say the Vortex, it's less a matter of preference and more a matter of each persons physical eye and what it's capable of in combination with the scope itself and its capabilities. Basically meaning that there's probably one scope for each person that's "the right scope" for them, while others may do the job or be sufficient.

USO is more oriented towards durability and mechanical precision than optical clarity, but it is one of the only brands I know of that has even its glass made in the USA.(It's a true 100% US made product.) That said the glass is still close enough to everything in its price range.

They are some brutally tough heavy optics. I know quite a few people who would sell their first born before they'd sell their SR8c.

 

[Faine]

You've been absolutely awesome with covering this rather off the beaten track topic that kind of stole the thread. Thanks for that. Hopefully when I get out there to get my spotter there will be some time to really run through some of this and maybe get some lens time in, opening up my diversity of knowledge and experience.

 

[42769vette]

USO is more oriented towards durability and mechanical precision than optical clarity, but it is one of the only brands I know of that has even its glass made in the USA.(It's a true 100% US made product.) That said the glass is still close enough to everything in its price range.

They are some brutally tough heavy optics. I know quite a few people who would sell their first born before they'd sell their SR8c.

I've heard a few different versions of where USO glass is ground. Some say Germany, some say USA, some say Japan. I've never heard USO come right out and say where it was made. If you have a link Id like to see it, just for my own knowledge.

 

[42769vette]

You've been absolutely awesome with covering this rather off the beaten track topic that kind of stole the thread. Thanks for that. Hopefully when I get out there to get my spotter there will be some time to really run through some of this and maybe get some lens time in, opening up my diversity of knowledge and experience.

We will plan on it sir.

 

[Number9xd]

Don't overlook SWFA's line of scopes. DANG good scopes for the money!!