help in selecting a scope please

[Con]

zzsstt,
The other problem with warranty return figures for Leupold scopes is that I know quite a few that buy S/H Leupolds and immediately send them to the US for a check-up. I almost did it myself with a 6x36 that has been through the wars and really has no right to still be operating 100%. On the flip side I do know of a VX111 1.5-5x that failed almost immediately ... personally shits me that you have to wait for them to be sent back and returned rather than be given a new scope immediately when its as obvious as a reticle sitting at 45degrees. I also have my doubts about my VX1 2-7x ... sneeking suspicion it may be leaking its internal gas. Time will tell.
I like Leupold's if only for the fact they keep their eye-piece lenses slim and trim rather than the balloons being placed on scopes these days .
Cheers...
Con

[HiWall]

I like Leupold's if only for the fact they keep their eye-piece lenses slim and trim rather than the balloons being placed on scopes these days

That is one of the main selling points for me as well Con. Another feature I like is the lockable eye piece. Just set the reticle focus once and lock it up. One of my biggest piss offs with these 'modern' scopes is the constant need to jiggle the fast focus eyepiece. The bloody things move every time you put a scope cover on it. The high end Leupold seem to be going that way as well - market driven I am sure - sometimes the market is bloody stupid.

[zzsstt]

zzsstt,
The other problem with warranty return figures for Leupold scopes is that I know quite a few that buy S/H Leupolds and immediately send them to the US for a check-up. I almost did it myself with a 6x36 that has been through the wars and really has no right to still be operating 100%.
Cheers...
Con

That's exactly what I'm talking about. All you have to do is look at some of the posts on this (and other) shooting sites. "Buy the second hand Leupold and send it back under warranty". It's a common catch-cry, and when you offer a lifetime warranty including any and all subsequent owners, eventually pretty much every scope will be sent back for "repair". After all, such a warranty means that other than a scope being lost, they basically can be repaired and will live forever.

On the other hand, I'm quite sure Leupold factor this (and their reputation) in to their pricing....

As far as DOA scopes go, sadly the "repair not replace" approach is becoming the norm for everything. I moved in to a house I had renovated a week before Christmas. The first time I used the brand new F+P oven it failed. F+P wanted me to get a repairman to look at it and repair it. The week before Christmas when I had to cook Christmas lunch for the family? Yeah, right. Luckily the shop (Harvey Norman) replaced it without question. I'm building my new house now. Guess what - there will be no F+P appliances in it!

[Con]

HiWall,
The balloon eyepieces that house batteries and other you-beut gimmicks are a personal hate ... more so now that my primary varminter will be a Martini Cadet in 222RimmedAI. Fishing cases out from under the Mueller 8.5-25x isnt easy. Once load development ceases ... a straight 6x will go on it with a more compact eye-piece or if I can afford one a S/H 12x40AO Leupold.

zzsstt,
How about an Australian company of white goods that replaces faulty goods with refurbished stuff sent in for warranty which they'll tell you is "new" but with no plastic packing or warranty cards or instructions inside??? Been there seen that too!! Very unfortunate way to do business.
Cheers...
Con

[mozzie]

HEY I'd go for a Leupold either 2-7 or 3-9 . I have 5 Leupolds at the moment and I couldn't say a negative word about them . I have a old Mod 70 in 375 H&H with a 2-7 Leupold on top . The Rifle & Scope have got dents , sratches , gouges heaps of paint and blue missing . I sighted it in for my favourite load and after 10 years and a few thousand rounds later I still haven't had to adjust the scope .

[Dr G]

So many good scopes around making choice difficult

Not wrong there Tempo, still this a better situation than having to many crap ones

[Dr G]

As far as warranties go i have in writing from vortex au that their policy regarding waranty returns is to simply replace it.

Much better than waiting for a repair i think.

[Rinso]

zzsstt,

As I have said before, the VX-III is a far superior product to the Vari-X III which, for example, does not have index matched lenses. The VX-III scopes have "up to" (don't you love marketing!) 98% total light transmission which is significantly higher than the Vari-X III's and even the Vortex range which quote 95% on their web site. I know I keep saying this but I want to be sure, because the review started off saying Vari-X III (as the one you had for sale) and then changed to VX-III part way through

I have checked and re-checked so this is the definitive answer to the above .. (i will amend the new review to ensure that it is all correct)

A. The Leupold I am comparing against is a Leupold Vari-X III 6.5-20x40

B. The VXIII reference was my lazy typing

C. The difference between a VXIII and a Vari X III is that :

Vari X III has a lens system which provides 92% light transmission

VX III has an indexed lens system which provides between 94% - 98% light transmission.

I again state that I have an arm load of Leupolds in the safe but I find that 94% - 98% spread a bit hard to swallow ... maybe I am cynical but I would read that to be 94% for the bulk and up to 98% if you fluke a better one ... (my interpretation of advertising speak)

I would rather they gave just a single figure ie 94% as its obviously the minimum. Rather than a broad guess type range. I have looked through everything from March scopes to chinese copies of copies and have found you always get one thats a bit better than the general run of that model here and there. Anyway thats just me..

The Vortex Viper has a 95% light transmission

So we are looking at a small difference each way but a difference none the less.

Hope this resolves that for you zzsstt.

cheers
Rinso

[zzsstt]

Cynical is good!

I would suggest that the reality is that rather than variation between scopes, where I agree a 94%-98% range would indicate appalling quality control, it is more likely that within the VXIII range some models have higher transmission than others. Thus, for example, the lower power scopes, or those with fewer discrete lenses, may transmit a higher percentage of light than perhaps the higher power ones. As you say, it is likely that the 98% figure is for the best model in the range, with everything else "up to" that figure...... that's advertising for you!

Thanks for clearing that up anyway.

[Nixneuer]

Hi Rinso very interested on your thoughts on the Vortex scopes , was looking at the Diamondback 4-12x40 for a .204 Tikka .

Had an email from Antony from Cortex this model currently on special at $271.95 including shipping

What are you're thoughts ?


Thanks

Nick

[Rinso]

Nixneuer,

I have been reveiwing the Viper series but have had the chance to have a look at the Diamondback as well ...

I think you would be hard pressed to do better in a value for money sense. Everything I have seen of Vortex equipment is quality ... I think we will hear a lot more of Vortex as time goes by.

A good quality 4-12 for well under $300 is hard to pass up.

cheers
Rinso

[Nixneuer]

Fantastic thanks Rinso , i think ill be getting one , good to support a local product as well

[Con]

Can someone explain what "light transmission" means??? Does it mean that if I put a scope in a light proof box and shone a beam of white light through it then I'd measure 94% exiting ... or is it 94% exits EACH lens leading to a total transmission much lower than the "great sounding" 94%????
Cheers...
Con

[Rinso]

taken from the Leupold web site

How often have you heard someone say " I want the scope that 'gathers' the most light." Chances are fairly often. Many people seem to think that large objective scopes "gather" more light and therefore provide a brighter image of the target to the shooter. Logical? Yes. Correct? No. The key to a scope providing a bright image to the shooter is not how much light it "gathers" but how much useable light it transmits. "Gathers, transmits, what's the difference?" Quite a lot, actually. First of all, rifle scope do not "gather" light, they transmit it. Yes, large objective scopes allow more light to enter the scope, but that by itself does not guarantee that the image will be any brighter than a smaller objective scope's. What happens to light while it is being transmitted through the scope is what determines the brightness of the image. So, just what makes one rifle scope transmit more useable light than another? Basically, the lenses focus the light into a beam. Light transmission is how well this beam travels from one end of the scope to the other. Three things determine how well this is done: the glass used in the lenses, anti-reflective lens coatings, and the use of the lenses in the scope. Glass is a tricky substance. It can do a variety of things to light, including reflect it and absorb it. It can also distort images when you look through it. You might think that glass is just glass, but there are many different things that can go into glass when it is made, all of which cause it to affect light in different ways. The trick is for an optical engineer to choose the right type of glass for each lens in the scope that will allow the most light to pass through without reflecting or absorbing too much of it. Next is lens coating. It is simply a rule of physics that any time light passes through any glass lens, regardless of how perfectly chosen it is, some of that light will not make it out the other side. Some light is simply reflected off the surface, some more is scattered within the lens and comes out at odd angles. A high quality, anti-reflective lens coating, such as Multicoat 4, helps to ensure that as much light passes through as possible without being lost. Finally, there is the use of the lenses in the scope. There are many internal lenses in a single scope. Each has a different purpose. Some magnify while others clarify and correct the image. Just as in life, everything is a trade-off. You can use a great number of lenses and get a terrific image but it will not be that bright. You can also use only a few lenses and have an incredibly bright image that is very unclear. As we said earlier, every lens through which light passes decreases its brightness. But if you have too few lenses, the image will not be clear. The solution is for the engineers to determine the minimum number of lenses nessessary to ensure a bright and clear image. So let's review: Scopes do not "gather" light they transmit it. Light transmission is very important to obtaining a bright image. To ensure a high light transmission, the scope needs the correct type of glass, an anti-reflective lens coating and ideal lens usage. Of course, there are many more complex aspects to the matter, but without these three elements, further efforts to increase light transmission will be useless.

Hope that helps
cheers
Rinso

[Con]

Thanks Rinso,
Now my head hurts ... from that blurb I take it transmission is through the entire scope ... now I wonder if I test it usinga light meter whether it'll hold true
Cheers...
Con