In that case, I’d steer clear of anything too basic. When I first started stalking, I went for a simple scope thinking it would be enough—but as my knowledge and enthusiasm grew, I quickly found myself wanting more features. I ended up replacing it sooner than expected, which was a waste of money in hindsight. If I’d just gone for a slightly more advanced model from the start—something with parallax adjustment, illumination, and a clean but capable reticule—I’d have saved myself the hassle and expense. It’s worth getting a scope that gives you room to grow, even if you don’t use all the features straight away. Your budget is plenty big enough to have all the toys! I have never been a fan of digital scopes, just not for me!
I was the complete opposite.
When I started stalking I thought I needed a scope with lots of features, but as my experience grew I realised that the majority were, at best, unnecessary, and at worst just expensive gimmicks.
I have since learned to spend more for less features, which means that for your money you're getting better quality glass and construction.
Things I did have, but now don't bother with as I found them totally unnecessary in stalking scenarios:
Ballistic turrets: I now zero once only, to mpbr principles, then leave well alone. Only time I need to do any zeroing, or make any scope adjustments, is if I've just fitted a new one.
Multiple aiming point reticles: Caused nothing but confusion. A simple fine crosshair is infinitely more useful.
Adjustable parallax: Never used it. Can't see any point in having it for shooting at normal stalking distances.
Large diameter objective: Nothing to be gained by going bigger than 50mm.
High magnification: Never adjusted it higher than 7.5× for stalking, so a scope that only goes up to 9× is more than adequate. So why was I paying for 25× magnification?
Illuminated reticle: Anything more than a tiny centre dot is a hindrance, not a help. As for multi-colour Illumination options (eg, red/green), why was I stupid enough to pay for that???
