lots of good scope deals out there right now

[Lloyd Smale]

just picked up a new 4x12 vx2 for 400 bucks from optics planet and from natchez i got a vx2 3x9 for under 300 with free mount and rings and both places have free shipping. Optics planet and cabelas were also blowing out nikon monarch 4x16 side focus scopes for around 300 bucks. Heck of a scope for that much money. Must be comming out with the new models and trying to get rid of the old stock. In these case the old stock is plenty good enough for me.

[spruce]

I wonder if the guns and ammo buying craze is having a reverse effect on other products like scopes.
 
With everyone spending all their money on guns and ammo maybe it's hurting scope sales and they're trying to move some inventory for cash flow?

[Lloyd Smale]

could be but i do know that leupold just again upgraded the vx2 and the one i got wasnt one of the upgraded ones but for a 100 bucks less ill take it and ive got a few of the vx2s before the upgrade and there good enough scopes for anything i do with them. For the most part vx2 leupolds and nikon monarchs are about all i buy anymore.

[quickdtoo]

The Natchez scopes are the old version VX-II,  not the new version which are VX-2, not the same.

Tim

http://www.natchezss.com/Optics.cfm?contentID=productDetail&brand=LU&prodID=LU56760&prodTitle=Leupold VX-II 3-9x40mm Riflescope Duplex Reticle 1

http://www.natchezss.com/Optics.cfm?contentID=productDetail&brand=LU&prodID=LU56780&prodTitle=Leupold VX-II 3-9x40mm Riflescope Duplex Reticle 1

http://www.natchezss.com/Optics.cfm?contentID=productDetail&brand=LU&prodID=LU56850&prodTitle=Leupold VX-II 3-9x40mm Riflescope Duplex Reticle 1

[tobster]

My understanding is there is a BIG difference betwen the new VX-2 3-9 and the VX-ll 3-9, not only in optics but in weight as well.

[Lloyd Smale]

this is the 4x12 i ordered http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold-vx-ii-4-12x40mm-rifle-scope.html. I also ordered a 3x9. Im sure there the older ones but the price was sure right. The newer model 4x12 is a 100 bucks more unless you want it without the ajust. objec. then there the same price. I looked at both and the weight is the same. Im sure they upgraded there optics a bit but ive got quite a few of the current (older) vx2s and ive found them to be great scopes and every bit as good as my two ziess conquests in low light situations. I guess a guys got to pinch pennys once in a while even if it hurts. I see they have the first generation minox 3x9s for 200 bucks too. Heck of a deal but i heard some of those first ones werent to reliable and it kind of scares me off on the minoxs. I think too if i was going to buy a minox id get it from cameraland because of the great service i have gotten from them. Just wish they would have been a bit faster in getting leupolds and i would have proably bought these from them too.

[pastorp]

Lloyd, I know everyone's eyes are different but it surprises me to hear you say the vx2 leupolds are as good as the conquests in low light. You the first person I've heard make that comment.

Based on other people I trust, I've heard just the opposite observation. I guess we all see different but your alone on this one I believe.

Regards,

[Lloyd Smale]

ive tested them myself and in my opinion the vx2s are as good and the vx3s are a step up. I think alot of it is when they get compared the old varix 2s get thrown into the mix and they dont hold a candle to the newer vx leupolds. Ive compared 3x9 vx2s, conquests and the 2x10 monarch, and my newer 3.5x10 vx3 and to my eyes the vx3 is hands down the best. Followed by the monarch which edges out the conquest and vx2 by a bit and the vx2 and conquest are about a toss up. Think of it this way. My results about mirror what those scopes cost. theres nothing magic about a zeiss. there 400 dollar scopes sure arent comparable to there 2000 dollar scopes. they had to make compromises somewhere to sell a scope for 400 bucks. the steal tube sure isnt what you pay for when you buy a scope, its the lenses. Id say that if leupold did actually make the vx2 even better with even better lenses it will not only be the most popular scopes sold but those vx2s will be the best bang for the dollar of any scope made anywhere. Personaly i love my vx3s but just cant afford to pay that much for scopes for all my guns and truth be told most of them are used for crop damage shooting anyway and low light performance doesnt really come into play for that. For that i look more at the ruggedness of scope and NOBODY has a better reputation for building rugged scopes then leupold.

Lloyd, I know everyone's eyes are different but it surprises me to hear you say the vx2 leupolds are as good as the conquests in low light. You the first person I've heard make that comment.

Based on other people I trust, I've heard just the opposite observation. I guess we all see different but your alone on this one I believe.

Regards,

[tobster]

I think whoever coined the phrase "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" must have had scopes in mind. I believe if it looks good to a shooter's eyes it doesn't really matter what category the experts place the scope in. I'm pretty content with Leupolds in the VX-l range and the few I have above that grade were bought at discount prices when newer models were introduced. I wanted a 2.5 x 8 for a long time and was finally able to buy one when the newer version came out. I'm pretty sure some buyers on E-Bay are unaware that a Leupold VX-lll and a VX-3 are not the same riflescope.

[quickdtoo]

I'm pretty sure some buyers on E-Bay are unaware that a Leupold VX-lll and a VX-3 are not the same riflescope.

Not sure everyone here knows they're different since many seem to use the VX-II or VX-III interchangably for VX-2 or VX-3.  We can thank Leupold for making the model change names a bit confusing, at least when they went from Vari-X to VX is was obvious.

Tim

[Lloyd Smale]

has anyone gotten one of the newest versions yet? Id be curious as to what kind of real world improvement they make. Im in need of a 2x7 and now that the vx1 has click ajustments and supposidly the glass of the last generation vx2 or vxII whatever the **** it is   I could easily settle for the I instead of the II or 2 or two   if that really is the case.

[quickdtoo]

Here are some explanations of the changes to the VX scope line.

Tim

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/leupold-improves-vx-i-and-ii-to-vx-1-and-2/

Leupold Improves VX-I and II to VX-1 and 2

by Administrator on January 18, 2012




The new VX-1 replaces the VX-I. Light transmission is improved from 85% to 92%, which is a significant increase. Leupold was able to “hold the line” on pricing even though the VX-1 is brighter and a new model.

Leupold
 http://www.leupold.com/

 by Scott Mayer

One of the most common questions I get is “What’s a good value-priced riflescope?” Well, that depends on your budget. If your budget is a few hundred dollars, then I don’t see anything wrong with one of Leupold’s VX-I scopes. Add a couple hundred bucks more to your budget, and the VX-II line is a step up without breaking the bank. This year though, Leupold is replacing those lines with improved VX-1 and VX-2 lines, respectively. Typically a manufacturer uses a change like this to implement a price increase, but Leupold’s Pat Mundy says the company was able to “hold the line on price,” and that’s good news for the consumer.

So what’s new other than replacing the Roman numeral designation with Arabic? Well, they’re brighter. Of course every scope maker claims the next iteration of a scope line is brighter, but the magnitude is frequently on the order of split hairs. Not this time. While the VX-I claimed about 85% light transmission, the new VX-1 boasts 92%–and that’s a significant increase. On the VX-2, the brightness increase to 94% is not so much over the VX-II’s 92%, but it’s still an improvement and the VX-II had good light transmission for a scope in its price range to begin with.


The new VX-2 is slightly brighter than the VX-II that it replaces. The new line of VX scopes are already in the distribution pipeline.

Optically, both are using what Leupold calls its Quantum Optical System, and the specific system is unique to each scope line. The system in the VX-1 line includes lenses with Leupold’s basic Multicoat 4 coating while the lenses on the VX-2 have Leupold’s Index Matched lens coating. VX-2 glass also gets a blackened edge treatment and the exterior lenses have DiamondCoat to resist abrasion.

Mechanically, both lines have click-adjustable dials in 1/4-minute increments, and some models of the VX-2 are available with Leupold’s Custom Dial System (CDS). I have a CDS-equipped scope on my .22-250 and the darn thing works great. If you’re not familiar with a CDS, it’s simply a replacement scope turret dial that is calibrated for your specific load. You provide Leupold with your bullet and velocity information, and they custom-design the dial with elevation marks for your load. Just dial in the distance, aim dead on the target, and shoot. It’s a great system if you’re in a stationary position and have the time to range your target and adjust a dial before tripping the trigger. For me, that means groundhogs.

Both scope lines have fast-focus eyepieces and low-profile lock rings. The VX-1 has Leupold’s traditional nitrogen purge to water-and fog-proof the scope while the VX-2 uses a second-generation argon/krypton blend.

Something I really like about this line of scopes is that they look how I think scopes ought to look. There’s no beer can-size eyepiece and instead of curves, the body has clean angles that, to me at least, make a scope look more svelte. The new VX-1 and VX-2 scopes are already in the distribution pipeline, so they may be on your dealer’s shelves as you read this. The older VX-I and II were good values even before the introduction of these new scopes, but if there are still any left, I imagine you’ll find some smoking deals on them as dealers move them off the shelf to make way for the new VX-1 and VX-2.

[Lloyd Smale]

thanks quickdtoo. It solves some question i have. You look one place and they say the vx1 is now click adjustable and others say its still friction. thats a deal breaker for me as i detest those friction ajustments. Ive got one old vari x 2 left that will some be replaced and they all my leupolds will be click ajustable. tell you what for the asking price its going to be hard to justify even stepping up over a vx1 now. It will be a hell of a scope for the money. It looks like its basicaly the old vxII that is one of my favorite scopes.

[drdougrx]

I've bought 3 VX-1 scopes recently...the new ones...for whatever scope replacement I needed.  I have old model VX II and III and find the VX1 to be quite good or the money.  I primarily buy 4x12s.  I think they are clear and rugged and look good.  I'm very happy with them.  I till want another VX1 with the Long Range Dot system.  It has 2  mildots on the lower vertical stadia wire.  Supposedly you sight in for 200 yards, and use the next 2 dots for 300 and 400.  A 200 yard zero is what I normally use anyway there may be something to this.

[JonnyReb]

 Just picked up a deal from Cameraland, Minox 3x9x40, the Z3 I think it is. They had em for 249.00 shipped and I couldn't pass up the deal. Hopefully they've corrected the issue with the early ones and it'll turn out to be a heck of a bargain. Online comparisons of the Minox against the V7 and Conquest lineup were pretty close. That it was assembled in the U.S., at least, a nice plus. Look forward to trying it out. J

[Lloyd Smale]

just got another good deal. A 4x16 side focus nikon monarch, new not a reconditioned unit, from swfa for 300 bucks. the same deal was elsewhere but this was the only place they werent sold out. Heck of a deal at near half what they retail for.

[Lloyd Smale]

one thing with cameraland is they sure stand behind what they sell!! I mostly buy nikon monarchs and leupolds anymore. I see cameraland is getting luepolds now. Sure wish they could get around nikons red tape and carry them too. If they did i wouldnt buy anywhere else.

Just picked up a deal from Cameraland, Minox 3x9x40, the Z3 I think it is. They had em for 249.00 shipped and I couldn't pass up the deal. Hopefully they've corrected the issue with the early ones and it'll turn out to be a heck of a bargain. Online comparisons of the Minox against the V7 and Conquest lineup were pretty close. That it was assembled in the U.S., at least, a nice plus. Look forward to trying it out. J

[Lloyd Smale]

I was supprised today when the new leupolds showed up. they were the newest model vx2 with the blackened lenses and quick ajust focus.

[tobster]

Good deal! Can you tell a big difference between it and the older models?

[Lloyd Smale]

looked through them side by side and really couldnt see a differnce. It wasnt in low light so i cant comment on that though. I guess the only thing i really dont care for is the fast focus. I may be a bit old school but i still like a locking focus ring on a scope.

Good deal! Can you tell a big difference between it and the older models?

[sweetwyominghome]

The difference betwen the VX-II and VX-2 is significant if optical performance is important to you. From image contrast to edge-to-edge clarity, the newer models win hands-down. In low light, the VX-II could not resolve detail as well the VX-2, which to me is more important than many other aspects. Light transmission may be close and the sight pictures nearly equally bright, but that doesn't mean anything if you can't discern what you are looking at.

Regarding the comparison of Conquests and Leupold VX-II and VX-2s, if performed in unbiased fashion and in such a way as to render usable and valid test results, the Conquests grade out much higher. In fact, in many areas, the Conquests are ahead of the VX-IIIs The NEW VX-3 and the Conquests are pretty evenly matched.

[Lloyd Smale]

I guess my eyes are just differnt then you. I own two conquest to compare and many leupolds vari x 2s vxII and now vx2s. Looking at a target at a 100 yards with both the vxII and the conquest i can see lettering on the target equaly well with both and putting them side by side in low light id give the nod to the leupold. Like i said i have both and dont have anything to gain by giving anything but a subjective opinion. Ive also now looked at targets with both the vxII and vx2 and if theres a differnce its so small my eyes dont see it. Ziess fans are a funny bunch. Somehow they thing that there 400 bucks buys them a scope comparable to a 1000 dollar scope because it says zeiss on it. Where do you think they cut corners to go from a 2k scope to a 3-400 dollar scope. Isnt the tube and isnt the ajustments. The only place to save money like that in constructing a scope is lense quality. Like i said i have two and there decent scopes but for 400 bucks id take a nikon monarch or a vx2 over one any day and a vx3 even faster but in that case a guy is going to pay more then 400 bucks. Talk zeiss high end scopes and ill sing a differnt tune. there as good as ANTHING made.. Another reason would be that NOBODY stands behind there optics like leupold and nikon. Id have to think that differnt eyes see differntly because when it comes to scope quality there sure are arguments. Like i said though my comparison is sure free of predudice. I DO OWN them all and have done SIDE BY SIDE comparisons. I DO NOT post results ive gotten from someone elses tests on the internet. best advice i can give is if its possible take both home and try them on a target and try them in low light with an option to return the one you dont find better.

[sweetwyominghome]

Lloyd-You are right: everyone's eyes are different. And far too many put personal prejudices into the equation and also rely on second-hand information to make up their minds. I am glad you have taken it upon yourself to make up your own mind by virtue of YOUR OWN conclusions and find what works best for you. I applaud that.
I spent more than a quarter-century in which I relied upon good optics to put bread on the table, and my technical curiosity led to pursue eperimentation/testing even farther. So my comparisons come from not only years of daily use but critical and unbiased evaluations as well.
And for those reasons, I can tell you that the Nikon Monarch has been the best bang for the buck out there and has been for some time. Zeiss has slightly -- and I do mean SLIGHTLY -- better glass, but chances are you will not notice it in the field. Leupold represents a good, solid line of scopes, but until the very last improvements to their line, the gold-ringers rated a distant third behind both Zeiss & Nikon.
The gap has closed with the latest VX3 models, and the three aforementioned brands are now virtually peas in a pod, so to speak.  Nikon's strength lies in both resolution and anti-reflection/anti-glare technology. Zeiss is the clear winner (pardon the pun) in light transmission and desired contrast levels. And Leupold's edge-to-edge clarity -- with minimal falloff at the extremes -- is as good as you will find under $1K.
The new VX2s are good and much-improved in many areas. And the gap between the VX2 and VX3 is now significantly closed. But it is still an apples and oranges comparison to put the VX2 alongside the Monarch and Conquest.

[sweetwyominghome]

One more thing to add and to keep in mind if you are in the market for a new scope: If you'll closely evaluate recent-production Conquest 3-9x40s with the same from a few years ago, you'll see that the OLDER scopes are actually optically superior. This phenomenon is only notable in the 3-9x40 line and stems from both high production demands and the use of Meopta glass. Unless you've been accustomed to the quality of the lineup from years past, you'll not likely note a difference as it remains a terrific scope -- just not quite in the same league as past production (I.E.,  enter the Terra series...)

[Lloyd Smale]

well this old cogger still belives in what his eyes see. thankfully we live in a day when theres lots of good mid priced scopes out there but for me if i have 400 bucks or less to spend it will be on a monarch or vx2 everytime. Brand names on a scope dont mean much to me. If tasco made something that my eyes told me worked id surely give them a run. Id have to ask that why if those 400 dollar conquest are so darned good that ziess could even sell a scope that cost 5 times that much. your still going to have to tell me what corners they cut to make a scope that is one fift the price. I relate this to something like the cadilac cimmeron. take a chev cavalier and slap some caddy badges on it  and someone will buy them thinking buying something thats better then the chev. It says ziess on it but your still getting the cheverolet.

[pastorp]

Lloyd, Bobby made his living as a professional photographer until his health failed. I believe he is pretty qualified to grade good glass. He is one that I listen to about riflescopes. But he's not the only one that puts the conquest up there with Nikon & leupolds. DM bought the conquest and he could have anything he wanted. Even old Swampy likes them.

It's fine if you don't but no need to make it a issue with a find gentleman like sweetwyominghome.

JMO, regards,

[Lloyd Smale]

surely no need to get pantys in a wad about a scope. I sure wasnt challanging anyone elses opinion or considered mine the only one. Like i said i have them and never said they werent a decent scope. Just my opinion theres better bang for the buck out there in that price range. I dont think sweetwyominghome asked for a needed anyone to come to his defense. His opinion is worth just as much as mine or yours or anyone elses here. because I was an electrical lineman doesnt make me an electrical engineer or an expert on what makes a good transformer. Not that im doubting his honesty on this. Its his opinion and hes welcome to it as am I. I think its comical myself how zeiss owners are so defensive about there purchases. Youd think i was bashing there first born child. i sure dont think i was stepping on someone elses post as i started it and sure dont think i was making anything an issue with anyone. Sorry if he took it that way if he even did   I know what my own eyes have seen comparing them and thats what i posted. If your eyes see differnt then so be it. Id bet youd get a pretty varied opinion if you poled every photographer in the country as to what he thought were the best cameras and lenses too.

[longwinters]

I too have had the Leupolds and Monarchs.  I have mostly Conquests but would say the biggest reason over the Leupy is constant eye relief. To me the monarchs are over all a notch down.  But my conquests are all 5years old or so, perhaps things have changed.
 
Long

[pastorp]

Lloyd, let me see now you have 13 posts on this to my 2. Now whose panties would you say was in a wad.
I just didn't know if you knew who sweetwyominghome was. He's really well though of on several forums that deal a lot with TC firearms. Very knowledgable about optics & reloading. I've sought his opinion a few times. Always got a lot of good advise without all the chest beating.  a very gracious gentleman. 

Regards,

[BruceP]

I'm going to throw out a thought that I have had in the past when considering that some people view scope "A" as better optically than scope "B" and others view them the other way around. I have no way to prove this but I have wondered If like was stated above everyones eyes really are different. I seem to remember years ago when having to take a test for color blindness, (everyone at work had to take it) that even those not testing as positive for any degree of color blindness still see colors in slightly different shades. I know that over the years I have noticed when dealing with clothes that my wife and I see colors a little different. She may see a shirt as a shade of blue while I may see it as more green. Now as I think it may apply to optics. The various lens coatings used by the manufacturer are of differing shades, some amber some at least to me a very slight green some more clear. As those of us who differ slightly in the way we view colors look through each scope the image our brain sees is different. Lets go to extreams. Lets say you are color blind in the red spectrum and the coating used is red then to you it looks like a clear coating. Now lets look at it as it is just slight differences in viewing color and lets say you have what would be considered a very slight color blindness in a certain shade but can still see some color in the full spectrum. Then certain shaded coatings for you will look better than they will for someone who views all shades but more toward the opposite side of the spectrum.
Maybe all of this is wrong and has nothing to do with our optic preference but is something I have wondered about for a while especially when dealing with optics in the same general price or quality range.

Bruce