Leupold vxIII-LPS-Ziess

[Jet]

In the market for a new scope.  Tired of watching bucks walk in binoculars and not being able to pick them up in the scope.  While I don't mind spending the money on a LPS, is it really worth it.  It will go on a Rem 700 .270.  Am I off base spending 4 times as much on the scope as the rifle?  Also been reading about Ziess, any comparison and what model sounds right.  Low light performance is a must!  Any help will be greatly appreciated.

[Zachary]

Jet,

First off WELCOME ABOARD!

To answer your question, is it foolish to buy a scope that is 4x more expensive than a rifle?  NO!  Unlike rifles, where you can get a relatively inexpensive rifle that shoots great and is reliable - like your Remington M700, with scopes, and other optics, you generally get what you pay for.

Does that mean that a $1000 scope is 4x better than a $250 scope?  Well, yes and no.  Keep in mind the economic law of diminishing returns.  In this case, you may be spending, say, $500 more for only a 50% improvement.  If you would spend $1000 more, then you would get, say, a 60% improvement.  But for some people, who want the best, then it may be worth it.

You mention that low light is a must for you.  Okay, I can tell you that the LPS is worth the extra money over the Vari-X III.  An LPS will cost you about a little under a grand (if you want the 50mm version).  A comparable Zeiss will cost you about $250 to $500 more, depending on model.  In my opinion, if you want to spend over $1,000, then get a Swarovski with the 30mm tube (a must for low light conditions).

Many people will tell you that an Elite 4200 is more than enough for most legal hunting in the US.  Well, yes, that's true, but there is nothing wrong with having more light transmission to make an even better shot.

Another option you have is to take a look at the new Nikon Gold 2.5x-10x-56mm with 30mm tube.  They are more expensive than the Monarchs and Vari-X IIIs, but they are less expensive than the LPS, and I think the best buy.  In fact, Outdoor Life magazine rated it as the best for low light conditions.  I think that the Nikon Gold would be perfect for your .270, and with those HUGE 56mm objectives and 30mm tube, you will probably be able to see the nose hairs of a buck 100 yards away in the middle of the night.

Zachary

[tominboise]

Among others, I have vari-x II, Varix-III, B&L elites and Zeiss conquest.   I highly recommend the Zeiss and the VXIII.  IF I had to choose one, it would be the Zeiss.  $400 air shipped to your door is hard to beat, and the optics are great.   I don't care for objectives bigger then 40mm or so, as they get mounted on the rifle too high for my taste.  Check out a Zeiss Conquest, you won't be disappointed.

[bigdaddytacp]

In the market for a new scope.  Tired of watching bucks walk in binoculars and not being able to pick them up in the scope.  While I don't mind spending the money on a LPS, is it really worth it.  It will go on a Rem 700 .270.  Am I off base spending 4 times as much on the scope as the rifle?  Also been reading about Ziess, any comparison and what model sounds right.  Low light performance is a must!  Any help will be greatly appreciated.

.......It will be hard to go wrong with any of the three you named.......the LPS and regular Zeiss scopes are the upper end of fantastic and are overkill for 98% of the shooting done under normal conditions.........the Vari x III is a great scope and a 2.5x8 40mm will give you all the light your eye can use and will withstand any recoil you can stand and has good eye relief.....the Zeiss Conquest line is the smaller tube...normal 1 in. scope like the Vari X III and has a 44mm objective........the 1 inch scope tubes are easier and cheaper to mount usually and are lighter in weight......as to spending 4x as much for the scope as the gun....not a bad thing but unnecessary unless you are going to shoot in the dark/almost dark and the money above the Vari X III price can be spent on bedding,good solid steel mounts and rings and pratice ammo-working up a load and scouting.......I prefer the 40-44mm objective on non varmint scopes and the larger tube 30mm scopes give you more adjustment range and a 4x power range over the 1in. 3x range usually......they aren't any brighter given equal coatings and lens quality and power.....again it will be hard to go wrong with any of the scopes mentioned from performance and durrability and quality......I haven't owned a LPS but have had/have several Vari X III's and Zeiss and new Zeiss Conquest versions and others with 30mm tubes.....good luck and good shooting with crystal clear bright glass....and something real nice to see thru the great glass!!!!!

[BruceP]

My vote would be for a Leupold VXIII 2.5X8 It is the scope I have on my .270 and I have never had to turn down a shot during legal shooting hours because I could not see. As a matter of fact I can still see well past legal shooting hours.
BruceP

[socagee]

I found a line of optics called MEOPTA. They are made in the Checz Republic. I purchased a 3x9x42mm with 30mm tube. I have compared this to Schmidt & Bender, and Swarovski and the only diference I can find is several hundred dollars. I also have a Meopta spotting scope in 20 x 45 power with a 70mm objective. I sold my Leupold after using this scope. There is another brand called I.O.R., made in Romania. This may be a better rifle scope than the Meopta but it costs about $150 more.
Check out www.valdada.com for both lines of optics and www.meopta.com.