First foray into ‘premium’ scopes? What would be good?

[TringSaint]

Did anyone ever suggest that a £2.5k scope is 7 times better? What a strange thing to say. I can guarantee that it will be 7 minutes better though! As for suggesting that anyone shooting deer later than you do is unsafe, well that really is silly talk!

Ok, so if I am going to spend 7x as much money one something then I want it to be 7x better. If it’s not then what am I paying the exaggerated price tag for?

An extra 7 minutes doesn’t make up for £2,150!!! Plus how can you be sure that it’s 7 minutes unless you put both scopes to the same test conditions? It’s all a guess and tbh your eyes are likely to have more of an impact on performance than the glass, and no money will change that.

There has to be a cost /benefit consideration here and I don’t think that any 2.5k scope performs 7x better than a £350 scope, so how can you justify spending so much more money when it makes only marginal difference?

Yes, I am a tight arse!!

 

[25 Sharps]

Ok, so if I am going to spend 7x as much money one something then I want it to be 7x better. If it’s not then what am I paying the exaggerated price tag for?

An extra 7 minutes doesn’t make up for £2,150!!! Plus how can you be sure that it’s 7 minutes unless you put both scopes to the same test conditions? It’s all a guess and tbh your eyes are likely to have more of an impact on performance than the glass, and no money will change that.

There has to be a cost /benefit consideration here and I don’t think that any 2.5k scope performs 7x better than a £350 scope, so how can you justify spending so much more money when it makes only marginal difference?

Yes, I am a tight arse!!

Ask the people who do it for a living, what they are using and whether the price tags are worth it. That will tell you whether it’s needed or worth more.

 

[TringSaint]

Ask the people who do it for a living, what they are using and whether the price tags are worth it. That will tell you whether it’s needed or worth more.

Ah, but I am a hobby stalker, just like most on here.
If I was a professional deer manager then I would have top notch kit as I would need to be able to do my job to the required standard, hence justifying the cost.

But as a hobby stalker, taking 30-40 deer a year, I don’t need to push the limits of available light, so to pay £2500 on a scope (my 6.5x55 rig cost me about £2900 and that was for a new Steyr, Rudolph scope, ASE ultra jet Z, rings, etc) seems somewhat excessive to say the least.

 

[Namman]

Hi All,

At the moment most of my hunting is with air rifles, but looking to move to fac in the future…

Up until now I’ve used scopes at the more budget end of their spectrum, bought new. I was wondering if I was to invest in some proper glass which would last me (leupold, S&B, Zeiss, Swarovski etc) what would be good to look out for in terms of particular models?

Nothing too big, budget around £300 so will obviously have to be second hand and of a certain vintage.

Where would be somewhere good to start?

Any tips or advice appreciated!

Patrick

Just get a 6x42 by swarovski or similar quality make. Absolutely dependable and all you really need.
These scopes are bright and crystal clear and don't unbalance your rifle.

 

[Heym SR20]

6x42 from Zeiss, Schmidt or Swarovski. 1” tube will go for £300 or less these days. I have a 1974 built zeiss on my 7x65 in claw mounts. It’s the original scope. I am getting first round hits on the 5” gong at 300. And I have shot many deer, foxes, boar and vermin at ranges out to 250.

Yes a variable is supposedly more flexible. I have variables on a couple of rifles. I, along with friends who I hunt with tend just to turn their scopes to 6x and leave them there.

So much so that my 243 now has gone back to a S&B 6x42. I had a Swarovski Variable 4-12x50 on it fir a while. It started wandering so sent it off for service, but don’t seem to want to swap it back.

 

[baguio]

Just get a 6x42 by swarovski or similar quality make. Absolutely dependable and all you really need.
These scopes are bright and crystal clear and don't unbalance your rifle.

Try shooting rats at 10 yards with 6 power. The saying "all you really need" breaks me. It might be 'all you really need' but it doesn't fit what the OP describes that he wants from a scope!

 

[25 Sharps]

Ah, but I am a hobby stalker, just like most on here.
If I was a professional deer manager then I would have top notch kit as I would need to be able to do my job to the required standard, hence justifying the cost.

But as a hobby stalker, taking 30-40 deer a year, I don’t need to push the limits of available light, so to pay £2500 on a scope (my 6.5x55 rig cost me about £2900 and that was for a new Steyr, Rudolph scope, ASE ultra jet Z, rings, etc) seems somewhat excessive to say the least.

You asked ‘how can you justify spending so much more money’ I suggested you ask those who do it professionally I didn’t say you needed to be a professional to appreciate it.

Fair enough, you don’t want to spend more money and get the kit that allows you to make the most of every opportunity, but you don’t seem to grasp the fact that others do.

And you don’t need to spend 7 times as much, 3 times as much as your £350 red nosed reindeer, would get a premium second hand scope.

As for ‘rig’ cost, my CZ/sl5 swede set up cost me £1500 and wears a Schmidt 3-12x50 my 25-45 tikka 595/jet z setup cost me about the same and and wears a zeiss 8x56.

Both of which will give me more time at last light and cost significantly less than your set up so, you don’t need to spend loads to get a decent set up!

 

[Namman]

Try shooting rats at 10 yards with 6 power. The saying "all you really need" breaks me. It might be 'all you really need' but it doesn't fit what the OP describes that he wants from a scope!

Sorry I broke you !
Actually, I have gone back to 6x42 scopes on several of my hunting rifles and on one air rifle.. My .22 RF carries such a scope, perfect !
Most shooters I know keep thelir variables on 6 most of the time. Real world experience with variables by myself and my friends tells of missed opportuities with variables set on too high a power for example.

 

[TringSaint]

You asked ‘how can you justify spending so much more money’ I suggested you ask those who do it professionally I didn’t say you needed to be a professional to appreciate it.

Fair enough, you don’t want to spend more money and get the kit that allows you to make the most of every opportunity, but you don’t seem to grasp the fact that others do.

And you don’t need to spend 7 times as much, 3 times as much as your £350 red nosed reindeer, would get a premium second hand scope.

As for ‘rig’ cost, my CZ/sl5 swede set up cost me £1500 and wears a Schmidt 3-12x50 my 25-45 tikka 595/jet z setup cost me about the same and and wears a zeiss 8x56.

Both of which will give me more time at last light and cost significantly less than your set up so, you don’t need to spend loads to get a decent set up!

You make some wild statements there. Have you ever shot with a Rudolph scope? Have you even looked through one?

I have had mine for 3 years and have never struggled to see deer in very low light.
I also never (or almost never) have any blank stalks, usually taking 2 deer at a time, so why do I need to use a ‘better’ scope?

Maybe you need to adjust your approach to stalking so that you aren’t desperately hanging on in failing light hoping to shoot deer!

If I can head shoot cwd at 150-200m without issue at low light then how much better do I need to make it?

I, personally, would put extra into the rifle, as that’s the bit doing the work, and less into the glass, as my own limitations kick in way before the equipment’s does!

Either way, I will still shoot a lot of deer (I tend to be out first light as I prefer am stalking) and will hit the cull numbers required on my perms without issue, even with my ‘crappy’ scope!

 

[Rural Management Services]

Ok, so if I am going to spend 7x as much money one something then I want it to be 7x better. If it’s not then what am I paying the exaggerated price tag for?

An extra 7 minutes doesn’t make up for £2,150!!! Plus how can you be sure that it’s 7 minutes unless you put both scopes to the same test conditions? It’s all a guess and tbh your eyes are likely to have more of an impact on performance than the glass, and no money will change that.

There has to be a cost /benefit consideration here and I don’t think that any 2.5k scope performs 7x better than a £350 scope, so how can you justify spending so much more money when it makes only marginal difference?

Yes, I am a tight arse!!

Might not be 7 times better but a top end scope will be better and some people are able to spend the extra so why shouldn’t they.

 

[kenbro]

To the OP, keep your money in your pocket, thinking of going to F A C and getting there is two different things, and even if you get started on F A C your likely to take 18 months to 5 years before your will be granted a deer caliber.
High end scope are at their best on low light deer shooting, lots of other scopes and n/v are better options for all round hunting.

Dave (warbucks)

18 months to 5 years to get a deer calibre?
I don’t think so.
Cheers, Ken.

 

[baguio]

Ok, so if I am going to spend 7x as much money one something then I want it to be 7x better. If it’s not then what am I paying the exaggerated price tag for?

An extra 7 minutes doesn’t make up for £2,150!!! Plus how can you be sure that it’s 7 minutes unless you put both scopes to the same test conditions? It’s all a guess and tbh your eyes are likely to have more of an impact on performance than the glass, and no money will change that.

Your 7x thing could be said about anything. Emberleaf v Mora, Purdey v Baikal, Range Rover v Nissan Patrol, Rolex v Timex. The fact remains that you can only be using one at a time and those high end items usually have long waiting times so whilst you may not be iterested, someone is buying and enjoying them. Your low light is still my day light through my scope. I first realised my limitations when I had a Swaro Habicht 3-12x50 scope on my first stalking rifle and compared it side by side to a guy who had a small Zeiss Victory at last light. Chalk and cheese. I realised then why he always stayed in his seat far longer than I did. During day time shooting it will make little difference but it's very noticeable at first and last legal shot time.

 

[Donkey Basher]

@Navarone

Not read through all the dick swinging posts to see if anyone has already suggested this or not so apologies if it has been said already.

I started stalking on a budget using a £125 Parker Hale 308 fitted with a £60 Pecar 4-10 (I got some money knocked off it because the caps were missing off the turrets).

As funds became available I upgraded to a new Tikka M595 Stainless Laminate & bought a Leupold 6.5-20x50 scope. OK the scope was new not s/h but it was at the lower end of the price range for 'premium' scopes - I was effectively doing what you're doing but buying new not s/h.

I kept with Leupold scopes for a long time, they have a lifetime warranty that isn't limited to original owner & they work very well.

In later years I've 'graduated' to German/Austrian scopes simply because I've been able to purchase them at sensible prices s/h. The Swarovski scopes I've got are undoubtedly better than the Leupold ones & I'd say the Zeiss ones are better still & that's why that, now 20 plus years old, M595 Tikka has a Zeiss on it.

For my money, I'd take the £300 & go looking for a good condition Leupold. You can't go wrong doing that imo.

 

[25 Sharps]

You make some wild statements there. Have you ever shot with a Rudolph scope? Have you even looked through one?

I have had mine for 3 years and have never struggled to see deer in very low light.
I also never (or almost never) have any blank stalks, usually taking 2 deer at a time, so why do I need to use a ‘better’ scope?

Maybe you need to adjust your approach to stalking so that you aren’t desperately hanging on in failing light hoping to shoot deer!

If I can head shoot cwd at 150-200m without issue at low light then how much better do I need to make it?

I, personally, would put extra into the rifle, as that’s the bit doing the work, and less into the glass, as my own limitations kick in way before the equipment’s does!

Either way, I will still shoot a lot of deer (I tend to be out first light as I prefer am stalking) and will hit the cull numbers required on my perms without issue, even with my ‘crappy’ scope!

No, I haven't seen through a rudolph and I've never looked through one at low light but, what is the light transmission quoted by the manufacturer? My polar T96 has 96% light transmission, does it match that or come close?

So you stalk CWD in the morning at 1-200 yards presumably out in the open, as the light is improving , that's no real test for a scope but its great that it is working for you! That's different than sitting out for fallow in the new forest that only appear as the sun is just giving up or sika that are emerging just as its getting dark. Don't get me wrong, most of my ground is roe with the odd muntjac, all arable or dairy so fairly comparable to your CWD in the open at 1-200 yards and for that a hawke did me proud for a good few years but I can now see deer a good 5-10 minutes past my buddy with his bushnell elite 4-16x50 with my schmidt, that translates to more opportunities which is worth it to me, particularly if I've treated myself to a paid stalk. If shooting in low light you also need to be able to sex the deer and get the shot accurately placed, not just see it.

As for paying more for the rifle because 'that's the bit that does the work' I, and many others, would disagree - most people say spend more on the scope for the rifle, for all of the reasons above.

You have to work hard to find an inaccurate factory rifle now, my first creedmoor was silly accurate, everything was sub moa through it, first load test it put 5x rounds at 0.5 grain increments into a touching group at 100 yards all test rounds (20 odd) inside an inch - the best load hovered around 0.3 moa, sometimes better, that cost £675.00 new and I sold it to a friend for £350.00. The CZ 6.5x55 mentioned above was a 550 bought new for £600.00, again stupidly accurate 3/4 MOA at 200 yards is easily doable with nosler BTs and the accuracy with yew tree 114 gr bullets is the best i've ever seen, single hole at 100. The Tikka 595 25-45 cost a little more being a rebarrelled action, £150 for the donor, £1200 for the barrel and cerakote, but again properly accurate, does 1/2 moa with 80 gr barnes or 90 gr sierras.

Moral of the story, you don't need to spend lots of money to have a very accurate rifle, 'the bit that does the work,' you are better off spending money on the equally important part of the set up that sits on top because if you can't see the deer you can't shoot it.....

Ultimately the OP asked about 'PREMIUM' scopes, these come at a premium price which by definition means they cost a premium or, more than normal, so recommending middle of the road scopes isn't answering the question!!

 

[nun_hunter]

Sorry I broke you !
Actually, I have gone back to 6x42 scopes on several of my hunting rifles and on one air rifle.. My .22 RF carries such a scope, perfect !
Most shooters I know keep thelir variables on 6 most of the time. Real world experience with variables by myself and my friends tells of missed opportuities with variables set on too high a power for example.

You've made the right choice for you by going back to a fixed power scope. But otherwise this is no different to someone who buys a decent car and never uses sports mode, or sets the dual climate control, or home safe lights, complains about how bright the instrument cluster is but never adjusts the brightness etc.

Just shows plenty of people are willing to spend more money than they need on something they'll never use, be willing to understand or get any benefit from. There is nothing wrong with that, but blaming the tool they're using isn't fair when it's their own unfamiliarity or ability to use it properly that's leading to missed opportunities.

Buying a variable scope and leaving it on 6 power is just an increase in cost, weight, size and a reduction in light transmission for zero gain. Not the scope's fault but 100% the user.

 

[kenbro]

Only problem I ever had with Leupold scopes was finding the eye box unfriendly regards head position.
Might just be me and my eyes?
Ken.

 

[VSS]

For my money, I'd take the £300 & go looking for a good condition Leupold. You can't go wrong doing that imo.

This ^^^

(You can always upgrade by the addition of a relatively inexpensive torch )

 

[John Gryphon]

Ah, but I am a hobby stalker, just like most on here.

There will come a time when you wished that you had a top line scope in twilight for the mind bender that steps out of the scrub.

Not read through all the dick swinging posts to see if anyone has already suggested this or not so apologies if it has been said already.

Personally have swaro/diavaris blah blah they are very good too but an effing heap of deer have fallen to rifles that I have Zeiss conquests on,308 NM/300 WM/7mmRM,noted they are magnum rifles and those three conquests have been on top for circa 16 years through thick and thin....shot a deer with both the 300wm and 7mm in the last two weeks. I havent touched the turrets for YEARS. They are a ripping value scope and if you can find a second hand one it will fit your budget and do you for a lifetime.

 

[TringSaint]

No, I haven't seen through a rudolph and I've never looked through one at low light but, what is the light transmission quoted by the manufacturer? My polar T96 has 96% light transmission, does it match that or come close?

So you stalk CWD in the morning at 1-200 yards presumably out in the open, as the light is improving , that's no real test for a scope but its great that it is working for you! That's different than sitting out for fallow in the new forest that only appear as the sun is just giving up or sika that are emerging just as its getting dark. Don't get me wrong, most of my ground is roe with the odd muntjac, all arable or dairy so fairly comparable to your CWD in the open at 1-200 yards and for that a hawke did me proud for a good few years but I can now see deer a good 5-10 minutes past my buddy with his bushnell elite 4-16x50 with my schmidt, that translates to more opportunities which is worth it to me, particularly if I've treated myself to a paid stalk. If shooting in low light you also need to be able to sex the deer and get the shot accurately placed, not just see it.

As for paying more for the rifle because 'that's the bit that does the work' I, and many others, would disagree - most people say spend more on the scope for the rifle, for all of the reasons above.

You have to work hard to find an inaccurate factory rifle now, my first creedmoor was silly accurate, everything was sub moa through it, first load test it put 5x rounds at 0.5 grain increments into a touching group at 100 yards all test rounds (20 odd) inside an inch - the best load hovered around 0.3 moa, sometimes better, that cost £675.00 new and I sold it to a friend for £350.00. The CZ 6.5x55 mentioned above was a 550 bought new for £600.00, again stupidly accurate 3/4 MOA at 200 yards is easily doable with nosler BTs and the accuracy with yew tree 114 gr bullets is the best i've ever seen, single hole at 100. The Tikka 595 25-45 cost a little more being a rebarrelled action, £150 for the donor, £1200 for the barrel and cerakote, but again properly accurate, does 1/2 moa with 80 gr barnes or 90 gr sierras.

Moral of the story, you don't need to spend lots of money to have a very accurate rifle, 'the bit that does the work,' you are better off spending money on the equally important part of the set up that sits on top because if you can't see the deer you can't shoot it.....

Ultimately the OP asked about 'PREMIUM' scopes, these come at a premium price which by definition means they cost a premium or, more than normal, so recommending middle of the road scopes isn't answering the question!!

So, and I’m going to tug at this one a bit more, if the vast majority of your shots are taken in such poor light conditions then why not save yourself a load of cash and simply fit a NV attachment or an NV scope to your rifle?

If you need those extra 7 minutes then why not give yourself the whole hour post sunset by using a scope system that allows you to see in very low light?

Surely that would be the best bit of kit for the job?

As for premium, that is very subjective! If you wanted a sports car, you could buy an MX5 or a GT86 and it would likely be all the car you need. If you had a bit more dosh then maybe a boxster or a cayman, and one of those would definitely out perform you.
So buying a lambo or a Ferrari or a McLaren isn’t going to make you any faster (well maybe a bit along the straight) but your inability to extract any more than 30% of the potential out of the vehicle makes the cost you pay not about performance, but about how it makes you feel.

If you want to spank 2.5k on a top scope then go for it. It won’t make you stalk any better and if conditions are your main issue then there are better bits of kit to use than a very expensive standard scope.

So premium doesn’t have to mean big brand - it can just mean better quality and that doesn’t have to cost a lot of money (all of my scopes added up cost less than £2.5k and they all work to a point that I have never not been able to shoot something due to poor light).
Fog, yes, light, no.

 

[TringSaint]

There will come a time when you wished that you had a top line scope in twilight for the mind bender that steps out of the scrub.

Personally have swaro/diavaris blah blah they are very good too but an effing heap of deer have fallen to rifles that I have Zeiss conquests on,308 NM/300 WM/7mmRM,noted they are magnum rifles and those three conquests have been on top for circa 16 years through thick and thin....shot a deer with both the 300wm and 7mm in the last two weeks. I havent touched the turrets for YEARS. They are a ripping value scope and if you can find a second hand one it will fit your budget and do you for a lifetime.

Always there for another day. And I don’t shoot for trophies so I wouldn’t be that bothered if I couldn’t shoot a ‘mind bender’ (assuming than means a big stag or buck!)