Expensive scope/Diminishing returns?

[seafox]

At what point does more and more expensive scopes give less and less value for the buck? How much better can a Zeiss $2,942.90 scope be than a $150 Bushnell? At some point you must be spending money just because of brand name snobery.

[R.W.Dale]

First off  WELCOME TO GBO;

 I've thought about this before and I've come to the conclusion that your reasoning really only applies to hunting optics, with target optics you guenuinely seem to get what you pay for regaurdless.

 But with a hunting scope I'ed reason that you'ed be hard pressed to improve apoun a $500 scope with a more expensive model. HUNTIN Scopes seem to come in 3 price tiers.

1 The sub $100 CRAP

2 $100 to $300 price range seems to have a lot of overlaping offerings from the various mfgs

3 $300 + you're getting a top of the line scope that will give you a lifetime of top notch preformance

[victorcharlie]

I've got to agree with Krochus........For the most part.......

The following are very general statements........

Seems the point of diminishing returns starts at $200 in that I feel you need to double that to get a significantly better scope.  Again IMO, you would need to double that again to get a somewhat better scope.

$200 will get a good scope, and actually, the Nikon Prostaff is less than $200 and a real value.

$400 to $500 will get a great scope.........a fellow can be extravagant and spend more, but my eyes can't see a significant difference between a Leupold VX-III and a $1200 Swarvoski....or Kahles.......but hey,

Some fellows can see the difference and don't mind spending the money.....

After all, it's just money.....and they'll always print more......right?

[Catfish]

When it comes to rifle scopes I`m a Leupold fan. All of their scopes come with a Life Time warrentee. They are alittle more than the cheap scopes, but I`ve never had one fail me yet and I`ve had trouble with every other brand I`ve owned, and I started useing scopes in the early 1960`s. As for the higher dollar scopes, I have seen some that were alittle better in the field, not much, but they don`t have they warentee of the Leupolds and the advantage is only for a few min. in the early morn. and the last evenings lite.

[The Sodbuster]

There are factors other than quality of the optics that go in to a scope.  Catfish mentioned Leupold's guarantee and reputation for fixing/replacing scopes without a lot of hassle.  The VX-IIIs cost more than a Nikon Monarch or Bushnell 4200.  Are they better scopes?  I don't know.  Doubt I could tell a difference looking through them.  But the VX-IIIs are shorter and lighter than most competitors scopes of the same magnification and objective diameter.  That matters to some people.  They also tend to have longer eye relief than many other scopes in the same price range.  And there's a nifty assortment of accessories, including sunshades, filters, flip-up lens caps, etc.

Is a Kahles or Swarovski that costs nearly twice as much as a VX-III that much better?  I don't know.  To be honest, the priciest scope I own is a Burris Fullfield II.  But on a $1,000 scope, I would expect eye-relief and focus to to remain constant throughout the magnification range.  I know eye relief changes on my scopes as I magnify.  I don't know about the $400 - $1,200 scopes.

[Zachary]

Yes, the law of diminishing returns applies to optics, but it really doesn't start until you hit the $250 range.  There is huge difference between a $100 scope and a $500 scope.  However, once you get into the $400 to $500, there is not a $1,000 noticeable difference with a $1,500 scope.

Bushnell Elite 4200, Nikon Monarch, Zeiss Conquest, and Leupold VX-III.  Given a similar magnification, these scopes are comparable in price in the $400 to $500 range.  Now look at a $1,500 Schmit & Bender, or Upper End Swavorski or Zeiss.  Truthfully, the optics are better, but certainly not $1,000 worth!

With optics, it is true that the higher the price, the higher the quality.  However, to me, the law of diminishing returns, relatively speaking, really kicks in after the $500.

Let's talk about models:

Bushnell:  I buy from Elite 3200 to Elite 4200.
Nikon: I buy from Buckmaster to Monarch
Leupold: I buy from VX-II to VX-III.
Zeiss: only Conquest.

Anything lower than these ranges are crap and really not a point of diminishing returns.  Anything more and your are spending a lot of money, but do not get a dollar-for-dollar value.

Zachary