meopta?
- Thread starter HSB
- Start date
Win Mod 70
Well-Known Member
Have two Fitted to both my 243 and 308 as does my mate on his 243 and 30.06. Fantastic scopes and value for money wise and after sales service I can't fault them...
Win Mod 70
Win Mod 70
+ 1
Hales Smut
Well-Known Member
Many years ago a friend and myself compared in low light a Meopta 7x50 and a Swarovski 3-9x42AV. Both 1" tubes. The Meopta has a 8 mm bigger front lens bus was A LOT cheaper. The Meopta won hands down and I became a Meopta man from that day.
I also consider buying a Meopro 6-18x50 to put on a 223 range/fox rifle. I just don't know if they are as good as the others in low light.
I also consider buying a Meopro 6-18x50 to put on a 223 range/fox rifle. I just don't know if they are as good as the others in low light.
Win Mod 70
Well-Known Member
I suppose it all depends on what you get used to. I didn't have a problem yesturday at last light taking a dark Fallow against a dark background. I might plump for the 2100 with the illuminated reticle if i decide to change one of the ones I've already got or buy another on. (Thats an idea i could get another rifle then I'll need to buy a new scope).......
Win Mod 70
garyb
Well-Known Member
I've got a 3000 3-12x56 on my 308, and used to have a 7x50 on my 22lr... In fact I've just lent the 3-12x56 to a local keeper for his 243, and he is in love with it! (hoping I get it back!)
Both have been fantastic, and I often struggle to understand why my Zeiss and Swarovski's are worth cira £1000 more than the meopta on image quality and light gathering alone. The swaro and zeiss are better built, with better turrets but the meopta's have never let me down.
Both have been fantastic, and I often struggle to understand why my Zeiss and Swarovski's are worth cira £1000 more than the meopta on image quality and light gathering alone. The swaro and zeiss are better built, with better turrets but the meopta's have never let me down.
jthyttin
Well-Known Member
Since there seems to be some ambiguous statemens:
Meopta 2000, 2100 (illuminated) were steel tube models, Meopta 3000, 3100 (illuminated) were the contemporary aluminum tube models. Meopta MeoStar R1 is the current equivalent. I guess they're all aluminum tubes. The low light performance is in the same category as German/Austrian manufacturers for hunting purposes. Mechanical construction is adequate but not comparable, like garyb said.
Meopta MeoPro is different product series, launched primarily for US market. I've handled a few but haven't had a chance to compare in low light. Mechanical construction etc. seemed comparable to MeoStar series.
Meopta 2000, 2100 (illuminated) were steel tube models, Meopta 3000, 3100 (illuminated) were the contemporary aluminum tube models. Meopta MeoStar R1 is the current equivalent. I guess they're all aluminum tubes. The low light performance is in the same category as German/Austrian manufacturers for hunting purposes. Mechanical construction is adequate but not comparable, like garyb said.
Meopta MeoPro is different product series, launched primarily for US market. I've handled a few but haven't had a chance to compare in low light. Mechanical construction etc. seemed comparable to MeoStar series.
Used artemis 2000 models for years-Used alongside every top make and I can shoot into dusk for as long if not longer than most absolutely rock solid scopes-I have never had any problem with them and my local rfd/keeper has sold loads of them over the years and has never had to return one whereas he has sent back more than a few of the big 3 especially in the last few years since everyone has started using moderators havent used a meopro though so cant comment on them directly
Jgguinness
Active Member
I have a Meopta 7x50 on my .22lr and its great. Top quality glass and amazing low light capture, would definately have another one when required.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
My mate had a new Meopta on his rifle,he loved it until he found the eye relief was short and the 300 WM kissed him good!
Similar threads
