Author Topic: Help deciding on new scope! (Read 1569 times)

jedgreen · « **on:** December 11, 2002, 11:32:19 AM »

Its come down to two scopes for any christmas money and my own hard-earned cash: Burris Fullfield II 3-9X50 or Leupold 3-9X50 VX-II. It will be on my trusty Winchester .270 Mod 70 and used regularly for southern whitetail and western elk once or twice yearly. Any feedback on thses scopes and their respective companies will be greatly appreciated!

Zachary · « **Reply #1 on:** December 11, 2002, 12:23:35 PM »

Jedgreen,

If it has to be a choice between the two, then I would purchase the Leupold VX-II. Keep in mind that, with regards to Leupolds, I prefer the Vari-x IIIs, but if it has to be between these two, then I would pick the Leupold hands down and here's why:

1) The leupold VX-II comes with the best warranty in the business, which you probably may not need to worry about since it is a good scope to begin with. The Burris on the other hand, although claiming to have a forever warranty, I have been told by many that their actual warranty service is somewhat spotty.

2) The optics on the Leupold, and its construction, are, in my opinion, better.

Now, I really don't like the VXIIs because, from what I understand, they are built on 2-piece tubes. That notwithstanding, the VXIIs are really nothing more than the older Vari-X IIs with a new fancy name and box. However, many people who had the Vari-X IIs swear by them and love them. Then again, no one would argue against buying a Vari-x III over a VXII.

Get yourself the VXII - you will be happy with it.

Zachary

Graybeard · « **Reply #2 on:** December 11, 2002, 05:17:20 PM »

Uh I pick door C. None of the above!

Please listen and heed. Well listen anyway and if you still dead set march on. The 50 MM scope will do NOTHING good and LOTS bad for you. For both southern white tails (my main hunting target in Bama) and elk out west a scope with 40 MM objective will give you all the light you need for use during LEGAL shooting hours in any terrain you will encounter. If you buy quality optics that extra 10 mm of objective buys you only more weight and higher mounting.

Higher mounting means the scope isn't properly aligned with your eye when you bring the gun to shoulder and it takes you extra time to get it situated for accurate shooting. Time you may not have before that trophy of a life time disappears.

Now the power range you have selected is fine. It is a good compromise for such an all round use rifle.

SO what do I recommend? Well check out my post on the Optics Forum. I explained what my favorites are for such shooting and what is on the rifles I use most for it. HINT: On rifles for such use I have Leupold Vari-X III 2.5-8, Bushnell Elite 4200 1.5-6, Bushnell Elite 3200 2-7, and Leupold Vari-X II 3-9 scopes. None have more than a 40 mm objective and I've never felt the need for more.

GB

JBabcock · « **Reply #3 on:** December 12, 2002, 02:47:04 AM »

I'm with Greybeard on this one. The 50 mm objective lens makes the scope too high and too heavy. And they look goofy. For hunting in the real world, 40mm is plenty. All of my 3x9 scopes have 40mm and I've never wanted more, nor needed more. I own both B&L Elite and Leupold. B&L is clearer, Leupold has better eye relief. I also think Burris is good, but there too heavy for my tastes. I have a Burris 4X on my favorite rifle, FN 98 30-06, and the only time I've wanted more power than that is at the range.

KN · « **Reply #4 on:** December 12, 2002, 12:59:28 PM »

Goofy!! He just called my rifles Goofy!! Just kiddin, Actually I have to agree with ya, 50mm is to big for a hunting rig. I do like them on my P-dog guns though, I dont like losing sight of my target after the shot. KN

JBabcock · « **Reply #5 on:** December 12, 2002, 02:02:35 PM »

Well now I guess you know what I think when I see those guns with those scopes at the range, sorry if I offended anyone. Thats the only time I'd want one, for long range shooting. :grin:

jedgreen · « **Reply #6 on:** December 16, 2002, 06:49:37 AM »

Thanks for the input guys. Please check out my new thread on the optics forum (sorry Zachary:) about pros and cons of the 50mm scopes that everyone seems so ga-ga over lately. The extra light of the 50mm sounds good in the ads but I understand the idea of overkill just to have the biggest and baddest. Just trying to spend my money in the most effective manner (at least while still dealing with our toys!). My experience is limited to my current 40mm scope so any help would be appreciated.

Zachary · « **Reply #7 on:** December 16, 2002, 07:56:59 AM »

I don't know why all of you are so opposed to 50mm objectives. Yes, the are bigger and a little bulkier, but they don't seem to bother me, even for hunting big game. And I'm not sure that the 50mm stories from manufactuers in their ads is really propoganda. I have found that the 50mm objectives do in fact allow for more light during low light conditions. No, I don't hunt during illegal times, but when it is down to the last minute or so, or if it is very overcast, it's almost like night shooting. It also doesn't bother me that scope is set higher with those higher rings either.

I understand that things may bother some people. All I am saying is that they do not bother me at all. I would say that all of my scopes, except for two, have 50mm objectives (one is a 40mm objective, and the other is a 56mm objective on my Nightforce NXS).

Now, I agree that quality is better than quality. I think it was GB that said it would be better to go with a higher quality scope in 40mm than to get a cheaper one in 50mm. I agree with that totally! For example, I would much rather support you (or anyone else) getting an Elite 4200 with 40mm objectives, than an Elite 3200 with 50mm objective. Or, more specific to your question, to get a Vari-X III with 40mm objective, than to get the VXII with 50mm objectives.

Zachary

Graybeard · « **Reply #8 on:** December 16, 2002, 08:27:51 AM »

I believe if you will take two otherwise identical scopes, one with 40 mm and the other 50 mm lens and do a real scientific test on them to compare the light transmission and how well you can see objects using a proper chart made for the purpose you'll find you will gain a minute or less with the 50 mm. Without the 30 mm tube to make room for larger internal optics the scope can't really transmit more light just because of a larger objective. This applies even more to variables as they have the power ajustment lens system that there has to be room for. In a fixed power the erector lens don't have to be inside a moveable tube so the lens can be larger and thus come better use the light a 50 mm objective transmits.

We often hear folks speak of light gathering capability and some manufacturers even use the term. It merely confuses the issue. Scopes for that matter any optical instrument does not gather light they merely transmit the light that falls onto the objective lens thru the other lens to the eye piece and thus to your eye.

What determines image quality is the quality of the optics and their coatings first and foremost. All else is secondary. Next up is size of the objective and the internal lens. Increasing the size of the internal lens as SOME 30 mm tube scopes do means more than increasing objective size. Not all 30 mm tube scopes use lens larger than their 1" tube counter parts do. Some even use baffles inside that further limit the light transmission. I believe it is Burris that does this.

If the highest magnification you will use divided into the size of the objective lens equals 7 or more you can gain nothing more by increasing objective size no matter how large you make it. The human eye cannot dialate larger and as you age it gets even less. Generally speaking the number 5 is a good one to use. Divide scope power into objective size in MM and if it is 5 or more you have all the light your eye can use. From there it is strictly a matter of optical quality and coatings you havae to fall back on.

GB

jedgreen · « **Reply #9 on:** December 16, 2002, 11:37:13 AM »

Thanks for the input GB and Zach. Anybody out there with any other experience or feedback?

Doesniper · « **Reply #10 on:** December 31, 2002, 10:07:26 AM »

My favorite is the B&L Elite series but a close second for hunting is the Leupold Fixed 6X matte. Less moving parts, less chance for failure, and plenty of power for hunting.

Big Tom · « **Reply #11 on:** December 31, 2002, 05:24:55 PM »

:grin: I've had both scopes and I think that the light transmission/optics qualities of the new vari-XIIs are not what they used to be, whereas Burris seems to be about the same.

I have a 25yr old Vari-X II, 3X9X40 on my .300 Wby and had a new one on another rifle and the older was noticeably sharper and brighterwhen compared side by side. VariX IIIs are great but more $$$.

Don't overlook the Bushnell Elite 3200 for $179.95 at Wallyworld(mart), I think they are great scopes and you can bring em right back to that cute little blonde behind the counter and get a no hassle new replacement if need be.

CGSteve · « **Reply #12 on:** January 01, 2003, 03:03:41 PM »

I know you didn't mention the Nikon line...but, I'd give them a good look. I have two of them and they are very good scopes. My first one is a Buckmaster 4.5-14 x 40 and it performs very well. The other is a Monarch 6.5-20 x 42 and it performs very well. The Monarch is noticably brighter than the Buckmaster. The Buckmaster is a little more cost friendly though. Check out www.swfa.com they have a huge selection and are pretty reasonable. You can also check out their selection of used items. Usually one can find a VERY nice set of optics for a price that we otherwise couldn't afford...I know I'm always lookin' for a deal!
Good luck with your purchase,
Steve :-)