ok, are they really worth it? a $1000 scope better than a $50 scope

[Freezer]

    I've seen the term $1000 Scope toted a lot.  I don't remember anyone advocating them   Most of the posts were on scopes that fit in the $200 to $400 range.  There are a lot of good scopes for that price but I personally don't think Bushnell and Simons are among them.  I never paid more than $250 for my scopes and have a three older Redfields I paid less than $100 for. They are used and I have them for lesser rifles I wouldn't stake a hunt on. The Redfields are good scopes but where I hunt I'm always in dark woods looking into brush for elusive little deer (Blacktail).  I've looked through cheap (not inexpensive) scopes.  They just don't compare to Leupold, Nikon, Pentex and Redfield.  Sharpness, clearity, and no distortion anywhere in the scope is what I expect.  Reliability and made in America is what I demand. I prefer Leupold for their customer service and reputation. 
    There's 37 days of rifle deer hunting in this state.  Out of that I may get to hunt 16 of them.  I hunt pigs without dogs the remainder of the year.  I won't chance those hunts on a junk scope that will (you never know when) fail.  I'd rather use iron sights they're more reliable and did just that before I  could save $200 for a good scope.

[jasonprox700]

A question was asked, "...a $1000 scope better than a $50 scope". 

That's easy.  OF COURSE IT IS!!!  There is not a $50 scope out there that is better than a $1000 scope, anywhere.

I am not saying that you can't hunt with a $100 or even a $50 scope.  We are not asking anybody to deprive their family of basic needs to purchase the mystical $1000 scope!!!  I've hunted with cheap scopes.  I can't afford to go out and by a $1000 scope.  If I could, I would.  I do have one scope that is near $1000.  That was purchased before I was married and had kids.  If I want a scope now, I need to save up.  I will not purchase a cheap scope just to get by.  It just is not worth it in the long run.  I have seen the quality difference between the $50 scopes and the $1000 scopes, and between $50 and $300.  If I want a cheap scope, I will purchase a used Leupold (or similar quality scope).

So for those of you who enjoy quality scopes, as I do, purchase what you can afford, as I do.  For those of you who can not afford the "$1000" scopes, don't purchase one.  Purchase one in the $200 to $300 range.  Yes, it will take longer to save up for, but you WILL come out ahead in the long run.

I am not a wealthy person by any means.  I do work hard for my money, and I do value a dollar.  I try to purchase the best quality that I can afford.  In the long run, you do come out ahead.  This I have learned in my short 28 years of existence.  My family will never come second, my bills will always be paid before I make a personal purchase, and I will never purchase a "cheap quality" scope. 

Thank you.

BTW,
If a person has a couple of Jarrett rifles, they should not be flaming those that have expensive scopes.  That's kind of double standard.  And yes, I give to my church.

[bilmac]

Thanks Scoot for providing something useful in this discussion. I think the 1000 dollar scope guys are just eletists. If they can actually see the difference between a Ziess and a Leopold, they have better eyes than me. Years ago guys spent thousands on rooms full of stereo gear, but my ear couldn't tell the difference between their obsession and a simple good quality set.

There are sales people that know that if they charge exorbident prices for their stuff there is always someone ready to pay. Some folks equate price with quality. You've probably all heard the story of the store owner who had something sit in the shop gathering dust for years who finally ups the price five times and sells it the next day.

[Drilling Man]

Thanks Scoot for providing something useful in this discussion. I think the 1000 dollar scope guys are just eletists. If they can actually see the difference between a Ziess and a Leopold, they have better eyes than me. Years ago guys spent thousands on rooms full of stereo gear, but my ear couldn't tell the difference between their obsession and a simple good quality set.

There are sales people that know that if they charge exorbident prices for their stuff there is always someone ready to pay. Some folks equate price with quality. You've probably all heard the story of the store owner who had something sit in the shop gathering dust for years who finally ups the price five times and sells it the next day.

  I bought my Zeiss for less than the Leupolds i looked through would have cost me, so i'm not sure how owning a Zeiss makes anyone an "eletists", yet owning a Leupold wouldn't??

  DM

[ccoker]

test scopes in very low light, the last few moments of legal shooting time
that's when the better stuff shows it's worth

the best scope I have is a Kahles 3-10x50
I can read license plates at 300 yards at night with it
now, I didn't pay a grand for it... I paid 750

it's better than the Elite 4200s and Nikon Monarchs and Zeiss Conquests which to my eyes are better than VX3s
in very, very low light
at daytime.. they all work fine

I think you get a few extra minutes of hunting time and can resolve antlers better, more detail

I also hunt hogs at night (legal in Texas) and better, brighter glass is definitely beneficial

is it worth a few hundred more?
that's a value judgement only you can make

[v-man]

But when I look out the window of WalMart during my lunch break I can see real good through the $50 scopes. They must be as good as the $500 ones. I'm glad I'm not an elitist.

[no guns here]

Dang... lot's of post here.  Didn't read them all.

I've killed a bunch of deer with a Tasco that cost about 100 bucks back in 1993.  It still works fine.  BUT... it is nowhere NEAR the scope that my (now old) Vari x III 3.5x10 is.  My Leupold is NOT in the same class as the Swarovski's, Schmidt and Bender's and such that I occasionaly get to use here in Germany.  I'm still saving for one of those...  The Nikon's that I have are serviceable but I don't have the top end ones either.

Any $200-$300 scope is serviceable for 90% of the hunting that 90% of Americans do.  For hunting at night you WILL notice a difference if you can use a high end Euro scope or maybe the very best American and Jap scopes but I haven't tried them.  Where I hunt there are two stands that I can hunt at night with my Nikons... but there are street lights near by.  For the other stands, I MUST use my Leupold but can't on a really cloudy nights.  I borrowed a friends Blaser with a Swarovski 50mm (I think it was a 2.5 x 10 if I remember correctly) for a try at pigs one night in a deep, forested ravine.  I could see acceptably to shoot but with a lesser scope I would have been home in bed.  Put some snow on the ground and a full moon and you could hunt open fields with a Tasco...  great pig killing nights!!!


Getting an extra few minutes of hunting in the US may make your shot illegal.  Usually you have 30 minutes before official dawn and 30 minutes past official dusk.  Predators and pigs (where you can shoot at night) will be easier with a really good scope.

I guess you just have to evaluate your needs and decide based on those.  No one scope is perfect.  The euro's may be close BUT in price they are just too much unless you NEED one.  If you aren't shooting at night you can save a LOT of money by going with a lesser but entirely adequate scope.  If you are planning on heading for an expensive guided hunt somewhere, you might as well spend a few hundred more and upgrade your scope "just in case".


NGH

[Hairtrigger]

When looking through scopes at a store do yourself a favor and make sure the power is turned all the way up. Maybe not in wally world but in gunshops a good salesman will have the power set at the lowest setting for the best clairity (however that is spelled).

[v-man]

But honest, I was looking right out the store window through a $59.95 3-9X Simmons on a bright sunny day and the trees and cars were real clear. I could even see the people real good, too. Why shouldn't I save money and take that scope with me on my "Alaskan hunt of a lifetime?" Like I said I could see real clear.
(if I knew how to do the little faces there would be a "wink" in this spot.)

[SHOOTALL]

you should take it ! nothing is a better teacher than experince !

[scootrd]

Duplicate entry

[scootrd]

But honest, I was looking right out the store window through a $59.95 3-9X Simmons on a bright sunny day and the trees and cars were real clear. I could even see the people real good, too. Why shouldn't I save money and take that scope with me on my "Alaskan hunt of a lifetime?" Like I said I could see real clear.
(if I knew how to do the little faces there would be a "wink" in this spot.)

No one is advocating taking a $59.95 3-9X Simmons on the hunt of a lifetime..
Course if you own a 1k scope , you probably have brought along another high end custom rifle and 1k scope combo as backup. And should that so much higher quality 1k scope ever fail (which I'm sure is ... well ... the odds must be astronomical to calculate due to the super superiority of quality . Now all you have to do is walk all the way back to your base camp to fetch it , or hey Maybe your Sherpa guide has carried it for you.

For me under normal every day hunt circumstances,
My rifles are fitted with Weaver steel bases and Weaver lever lok rings. I see no problem zero-ing in two quality lower priced ($200.00 - $300.00 ) Scopes each from reputable companies and bringing the additional scope along as backup in case for some reason the first scope failed (which for me has never happened in 30 years) . And hey since I don't have a Sherpa on retainer to carry my back-up combo , I don't even have to drudge all the way back to camp ( or in my case my truck) for that other backup rifle and scope combo.  All I have to do is reach into my daypack , pull out my pre-zeroed "cheepie" scope (unwrapping it from my used T-shirt of course),  unlock and attach my other non 1k "cheepie" backup and Back in business.

Course now I'm sure I've opened a can of worms and the debates can now shift to how often rifles can fail in the field. BLAH BLAH BLAH .. Thank god I learned from watching old Daniel Boone shows as a boy how to grin a bear to death should my Cheep rifle fail .....

Additionally come that last remaining moment of light at the end of the long day where supposedly high end super magnificent unsurpassed quality cost 1k scopes make all the difference in the world (where we also all know is the only time trophy bucks are allowed to present themselves providing hundreds of stories of missed opportunities due to cheep scope tales) , I've already hiked enough ridges in the light that day that I'm exhausted  and headed back to the truck for a cup of coffee from my thermos to warm myself before climbing behind the wheel to head to the diner to get some dinner.  BTW I have been caught a time or two coming out after dark in northern woods and can attest its no fun having small tree limbs whip you in the cold frozen face because its so darn dark you can barely see them.. Why the heck anyone would stay in so late just to marvel at how clear a image they have through their 1k scope in the last 20 seconds of light is beyond me.   

But hey whatever it takes to justify that 1k scope purchase. And please don't forget to tip the Sherpa. I always leave a good tip for the waitress at the diner we all frequent who serves us after a long day hunting.

 I would love to see some hard MFG stats on how many times 200.00-400.00 dollar "cheep" scopes fail each year due to MFG defects from reputable MFGR's such as Bushnell, Burris , Meuller etc.. vs the carelessness of the owner dropping their rifle etc.  Just MHO but I would wager the numbers are truly quite small ... and in my 30 years never of hunting with obviously lesser quality potentially ready at any moment for catastrophic failure 200.00 cheep scopes..... Never.
 

[Drilling Man]

But honest, I was looking right out the store window through a $59.95 3-9X Simmons on a bright sunny day and the trees and cars were real clear. I could even see the people real good, too. Why shouldn't I save money and take that scope with me on my "Alaskan hunt of a lifetime?" Like I said I could see real clear.
(if I knew how to do the little faces there would be a "wink" in this spot.)

No one is advocating taking a $59.95 3-9X Simmons on the hunt of a lifetime..
Course if you own a 1k scope , you probably have brought along another high end custom rifle and 1k scope combo as backup. And should that so much higher quality 1k scope ever fail (which I'm sure is ... well ... the odds must be astronomical to calculate due to the super superiority of quality . Now all you have to do is walk all the way back to your base camp to fetch it , or hey Maybe your Sherpa guide has carried it for you.

For me under normal every day hunt circumstances,
My rifles are fitted with Weaver steel bases and Weaver lever lok rings. I see no problem zero-ing in two quality lower priced ($200.00 - $300.00 ) Scopes each from reputable companies and bringing the additional scope along as backup in case for some reason the first scope failed (which for me has never happened in 30 years) . And hey since I don't have a Sherpa on retainer to carry my back-up combo , I don't even have to drudge all the way back to camp ( or in my case my truck) for that other backup rifle and scope combo.  All I have to do is reach into my daypack , pull out my pre-zeroed "cheepie" scope (unwrapping it from my used T-shirt of course),  unlock and attach my other non 1k "cheepie" backup and Back in business.

Course now I'm sure I've opened a can of worms and the debates can now shift to how often rifles can fail in the field. BLAH BLAH BLAH .. Thank god I learned from watching old Daniel Boone shows as a boy how to grin a bear to death should my Cheep rifle fail .....

Additionally come that last remaining moment of light at the end of the long day where supposedly high end super magnificent unsurpassed quality cost 1k scopes make all the difference in the world (where we also all know is the only time trophy bucks are allowed to present themselves providing hundreds of stories of missed opportunities due to cheep scope tales) , I've already hiked enough ridges in the light that day that I'm exhausted  and headed back to the truck for a cup of coffee from my thermos to warm myself before climbing behind the wheel to head to the diner to get some dinner.  BTW I have been caught a time or two coming out after dark in northern woods and can attest its no fun having small tree limbs whip you in the cold frozen face because its so darn dark you can barely see them.. Why the heck anyone would stay in so late just to marvel at how clear a image they have through their 1k scope in the last 20 seconds of light is beyond me.   

But hey whatever it takes to justify that 1k scope purchase. And please don't forget to tip the Sherpa. I always leave a good tip for the waitress at the diner we all frequent who serves us after a long day hunting.

 I would love to see some hard MFG stats on how many times 200.00-400.00 dollar "cheep" scopes fail each year due to MFG defects from reputable MFGR's such as Bushnell, Burris , Meuller etc.. vs the carelessness of the owner dropping their rifle etc.  Just MHO but I would wager the numbers are truly quite small ... and in my 30 years never of hunting with obviously lesser quality potentially ready at any moment for catastrophic failure 200.00 cheep scopes..... Never.
 

  Did you get some help with that?  OR did your "cheapo" puter fail, and you had to re-write it on a "quality" puter...     I think i read about three versions of it, before you got done editing it...  HA HA HA

  DM

[scootrd]

had to keep saving while typing  cause we were having power interruptions here this evening.

[jack j]

Right now I own 6 scopes.  3-- Leupolds VXIII 3.5 X 10s X 50  and 3- Nikon Monarchs 2,( 3 X 12s X 40 ) and 1-( 4.5 X 16 X 42 ).
All are great but the Nikons to me,seem to have a clearer glass.
3 of these scopes I purchased from Cabelas bargain cave and saved a lot of money,they were all brand new,never used,just store demo models.This is one way to buy quality scopes without emptying your savings account.

[Graybeard]

I've got more scopes than that setting around in drawers and cabinets not in use. Some of them are VX-III and/or Vari-X III.

[tturner53]

A little side track here; who knows where the lenses are made, by whom? Some information about the lenses and which companies use what would be interesting. Among my cheap scopes is a BSA that includes the designation "SP" in the model name. I called BSA and they said it was a special run of fully multi coated lenses, something they don't usually offer.  Also, if you can find one, those NRA scopes are pretty good for the money.

[Brithunter]

It's like the old saying:-

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink 

Now if you too blind, tight or even just plain stupid to be able to tell the difference between quality glass and mediorce glass then really there is no helping you  but please don't try to tell me and everyone else that your bargin basement scope transmits light as well as a top grade scope.

You don't have to be wealthy to buy the best optics, heck if that was the case I wouldn't have any of them  , you don't even have to buy new. There are good deals of top grade used scopes. In fact I have only brought a few scopes new the majoritiy of them were used  .

 As for budget scopes failing well when I was not so informed and just starting buying rifles and stuff I put a brand new Budget scope on my new BSA CF2 Stutzen in 270 Winchester, the scope was a Nikko Sterling 4-12x40 Silver Crown and it took about 60 shots for the scope to shake apart. It was sent back under warrenty but came back still no good so the dealer who was disgusted about it changed it for an upgraded scope and I paid the difference. It was again a Nikko Sterling but a Gold Crown but I was not happy with it so put it onto a sporterised 303 Enfield where it worked OK. I picked up a used 3-7x35 Pecar Berlin for slightly more than the Nikko Gold cost and put that on the rifle and it's still on it to this day.

Now I do own a one of "custom" built rifle that I picked up used and at first I had a 6x42 scope on it, it's a sort of budget scope but has excellent optics as it's claimed to have German glass but was assembled in the far east, it was on the rifle for about a year when a friend suggested it really should have a top grade scope and let me have one at cost. He works for a gunshop and had got it for a rifle of his but due to failing health he sold it to me for my rifle so it now wears that 6x42 Schmidt & Bender. The only thing I didn't do was get the box with it. He has now sold all his rifles as he cannot shoot them anymore  .

The only budget scope I now buy are classic ones and have just brought another from the early 60's. An original Nikko  "Special" 4x32 this is about the 4th of these that I have brought, all are slightly different in markings of turret design, one has a German post and cross hair reticle the others have fine cross hairs. Now my original one of these which came on a sporterised LE No1 Mk111 in 303 has broken a cross hair and I will be getting it repaired so that's 5 of them along with a Bushnell Scope Chief 3x, Weaver K3W, Leupold M8 Compact 4x, Leupold Vari X 111 2.5-8, Khales 4L2, Pecar Champion 4x36, another Pecar 3-7x35, Meopta Prepov 3x ( for a Brno .22 R/F) and a Lisenfeld 3-9x42.

I did make the mistake of buying a new Nikko Sterling 4.5-14x50AO to go on one of my rifles and to be honest it's rubbish. Very poor field of view and the fast focus eyepiece is such a sloppy fit that you have to jam the eyepice into the eyebell or else the reticle jumps about. It cannot be used to anything with recoil or else the POI jumps about so it's on a rimfire. The importers say this is normal 

[bilmac]

Sometimes the most expensive is not even the best. We did duck surveys where I worked in Alaska. Lots of hard all day walking. They only had Ziess binos when I transferred there, they were nice, but man, they felt like they were made out of lead, had a sore neck after a days work. I talked the boss into getting me a pair of Nicons and never looked back. Pretty soon everyone was using lighter binos, and the Ziesses gathered dust on the shelf.

At another Refuge in Nebraska, we did a project with the local Audiboners, something about showing the locals about the joys of birdwatching. I went by one of the stations they had set up before the crowd arrived and they had a whole line of spotting scopes set up on tripods all aimed at the same bird nest. I walked down the line and took a peek through each one. The Audibon folks had brought some of the best stuff money could buy, but the best scope to my eye was an old Bushnell scope chief.

Paying the most doesn't necessarily mean you are getting the best. When I want a new scope I start by looking at spec sheets. These days I am frequently looking for the smallest lightest scope that will do the job. Often times I will even choose fixed power. A lot of the big money makers often don't even make what I want.

[anweis]

The Audibon folks had brought some of the best stuff money could buy, but the best scope to my eye was an old Bushnell scope chief.

bilmac, i can see that heavy binoculars were not preferred for long hikes. Which model were they? I am guessing Zeiss Classic 10x40? I am quite surprised of this, because very few if any state wildlife agencies allow that kind of expense on premium optics. Anyway, your problem was not the binoculars, but the strap. Annyway, hiking 10-20 miles per day would make anything feel heavy.

However, your story about Bushnell scopechief being the best compared to "the best that money can buy" stinks. I don't remember a "scopechief" model of spotting scope (Fieldmaster maybe?), and certainly Bushnell has never had anything even remotely close to the best of Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, Kowa, or Leica.

[anweis]

We did duck surveys where I worked in Alaska. Lots of hard all day walking.

They do waterfowl surveys from airplanes. This is standard for the entire continent and all waterfowl; one survey during breeding season and one in mid-winter. I have never heard of walking surveys for ducks. Were you after some sort of survival rate on marked individuals? If they were marked, they would have had radio transmittters and you would have flown to locate them.

[anweis]

When I want a new scope I start by looking at spec sheets. These days I am frequently looking for the smallest lightest scope that will do the job. Often times I will even choose fixed power. A lot of the big money makers often don't even make what I want.

Yes they do. The Zeiss Conquest 4x32 is absolutely awesome - but not very small, and it costs only $299.

[bilmac]

The duck surveys were pair brood surveys. We walked the same route three times a summer once to count pairs and twice more to count the broods. Yup the waterfowl people in the Service fly transects to set seasons ect, but we were Refugees trying to get a handle on how well we were doing at managing the refuge. Refuges in Alaska had big budgets so no one paid much attention to how much we paid for binocs.

I'm not sure what model the bushnell spotting scope was It was a kind of standard a long time ago, it was old when I looked through it, and all I know is what my eyes told me. It was a fixed power probably with a 20X eyepiece. May be that the others in the lineup were variables that had the magnification turned up too high, a common practice that ruins the view.

[Drilling Man]

Sometimes the most expensive is not even the best. We did duck surveys where I worked in Alaska. Lots of hard all day walking. They only had Ziess binos when I transferred there, they were nice, but man, they felt like they were made out of lead, had a sore neck after a days work. I talked the boss into getting me a pair of Nicons and never looked back. Pretty soon everyone was using lighter binos, and the Ziesses gathered dust on the shelf.

At another Refuge in Nebraska, we did a project with the local Audiboners, something about showing the locals about the joys of birdwatching. I went by one of the stations they had set up before the crowd arrived and they had a whole line of spotting scopes set up on tripods all aimed at the same bird nest. I walked down the line and took a peek through each one. The Audibon folks had brought some of the best stuff money could buy, but the best scope to my eye was an old Bushnell scope chief.

Paying the most doesn't necessarily mean you are getting the best. When I want a new scope I start by looking at spec sheets. These days I am frequently looking for the smallest lightest scope that will do the job. Often times I will even choose fixed power. A lot of the big money makers often don't even make what I want.

  "Assumeing" that every Zeiss bino model is heavy, just because the pair you used is heavy, is the same as saying every (put your brand of rifle here) is heavy because you owned that brand of rifle in a heavy bbl. varmit model.

  DM

[Mongrelcat]

I have used many scopes over he years....

My answer is yes, a good 100.00 piece of glass is very good. I see many folks buy high end rifles and put a scope chief on it to hunt with. I think anyone doing this is asking for an optic's failure.

I have turned into a bit of a scope snob over the years, but even when I had to put scopes on layaway I bought excellent 30mm scopes, and better than average 1" ers.

I use Swarovski on a couple of long range rifles, and even when compared with a Leupold (a fine scope by most standards) A 1500 dollar Swarovski will make you wan to slit your throat if you have to go back to the Leupold afterward.

I use Kahles and Leupold on shorter rifles, with a smattering of old redfields and Nikon to boot.

From my experience I would rather have a cheap rifle that will shoot and a good scope than the other way around.

If you buy the higher quality scopes, you will move them from rifle to rifle instead of trading them with the gun.

I have one swarovski that I have never adjusted the zero on from year to year. It shoots the same every time, and if I need to move up or down a few clicks for distance changes while in the field, I can do so with confidence that I will hit where I aim.

ymmv..but I doubt it

Mongrel

[anweis]

It was a fixed power probably with a 20X eyepiece. May be that the others in the lineup were variables that had the magnification turned up too high, a common practice that ruins the view.

That is possible, and it does happen. People often think that more magnification means that they will see better. Oh, how wrong they are.  Regards.

[anweis]

From my experience I would rather have a cheap rifle that will shoot and a good scope than the other way around.

Yep. Same here. Whether the rifle shoots 1" or 2" groups of the bench really is not important, i can't shoot quite like that in the field anyway. However, i need to trust the scope no matter what, come hell or high water, and i need to see the target regardless of light, angle, weather, or anything.

[hunt-m-up]

From my experience I would rather have a cheap rifle that will shoot and a good scope than the other way around.

Yep. Same here. Whether the rifle shoots 1" or 2" groups of the bench really is not important, i can't shoot quite like that in the field anyway. However, i need to trust the scope no matter what, come hell or high water, and i need to see the target regardless of light, angle, weather, or anything.

You rail on about the need for high quality optics and then make a statement like this that absolutely runs counter to the point you've been trying to make. Groups off the bench do matter immensely if you intend to shoot out to several hundred yards. Put a $1000 scope on your run-of-the-mill Ruger Mini-14 and see where that gets you on 200 yard shots at coyotes. Better get the hi-cap mag for that one. I can't shoot 1-2" in the field very well either, that's why I try hard at the bench to limit the variable of how tightly the firearm will place my shots. I know the groups will open up under hunting conditions,but I would like that to be 3-4" and not 7-8". You work hard to control the optics variable,but are not concerned with the accuracy of the firearm itself?

[anweis]

Groups off the bench do matter immensely if you intend to shoot out to several hundred yards.

I don't intend to shoot out to several hundred yards. I also wrote "one or two inches", i did not write "crappy innacurate piece of junk is ok as long as it has a Zeiss on it". I am not a sniper. I am hunter. If i cannot get within 200 yards of game, i try again and i have a lot of fun doing it. Week-end "snipers" shooting animals at 800 yards with $100 "56 mm tactical scopes" are not ethical, in my opinion. Alas, it's their choice.

Just to let you know, i have a 36mm Swarovski scope waiting for a Sako 30-06. It may be a year before the Sako comes home. That also is fun, waiting, and then developing a handload that it likes, and all the rest. Or maybe it will be a 6.5x55? That also is fun, thinking about it while saving money for a good toy, rather than settling for mediocrity. But someone like you, with instant gratification hardwired into their brains, will probably not understand that.

If you have such difficulty accepting other people's opinions, why do you frequent internet chat rooms? I guess some people need to argue all the time.
 

[anweis]

Why stop with the Zeiss? If you had saved your money you could have had better.

Because i also bought a pair Zeiss FL 7x42 binoculars for hunting, and also want to replace my old water heater with a solar system pretty soon.