What Scope Would you Choose?

Demaiter · December 28, 2009, 03:08 PM

Regardless of price. I'm looking at getting a scope in this size range. I'm kind of partial to Leupold but depending on the poll results may change. Price is a consideration for me of course, but for you voters, please choose regardless of price.

Phoneguy · December 30, 2009, 04:28 PM

I am curious why you are looking at a smaller lens size?

5whiskey · December 30, 2009, 08:42 PM

If I think of optics and someone says "regardless of price", Schmidt & Bender get's the nod every time.

Demaiter · December 31, 2009, 09:56 PM

Why smaller lense size? Because I don't like the big and bulky scopes.

Scopes of this size, for the hunting I do 0-200 yards have plenty of magnification for far shots, yet have a nice like 1.5 or 2 or 2.5 power setting for the close shots.

Also I find I get better check weld and scope/eye alignment when I can mount the scope lower to the barrel.

CarterMccoy · December 31, 2009, 09:58 PM

I just got a Zeiss. I have never owned one. I cant say enough.
www.cameraland.com has several conquest models left, and some Victory models - with the integrated range finder.
Worth a look when you consider what "Nightforce" has, and how long they have been around compared to Carl Zeiss....
Doc.

swcr · December 31, 2009, 10:02 PM

I agree I think the 36mm objective is plenty big enough and really like how low it allows the scope to be mounted.
Eugene

Demaiter · January 19, 2010, 11:19 AM

Looking to get a few more votes.

BTT

Brian Pfleuger · January 19, 2010, 01:03 PM

If I were buying a scope today and price were not a consideration then I'd order one from USOptics and get EXACTLY what I wanted.

flight954 · January 19, 2010, 04:10 PM

Schmidt & Bender 3–12 x 50 PM II LP
That is if money was no object

Kreyzhorse · January 21, 2010, 09:23 PM

If I wasn't paying for it, I'd go Swarovski. If I was paying for it, I'd go Nikon Monarch.

In fact, my last scope purchase, I had planned on buying either a Leupold or a Zeiss but walked away with the Monarch. Compare them side by side, and you'll see that the Monarch compares pretty well within the same price point scopes.

View Poll Results: What scope would you choose regardless of price
Leupold VX3 2.5-8x36	8	17.78%
Zeiss Conquest 2.5-8x32	5	11.11%
Swarovski Z3 3-9x36	7	15.56%
Swarovski Habicht AV 3-9x36	3	6.67%
Khales Helia CL 2-7x36	1	2.22%
Bushnell 6500 1.25-8x32	3	6.67%
Nikon Monarch 2-8x32	2	4.44%
Nightforce NXS 2.5-10x32 - Covered Style Turrets	8	17.78%
Other - Keep in mind this magnfication range and objective lense size	8	17.78%
Voters: 45. You may not vote on this poll

December 28, 2009, 03:08 PM	#1
Demaiter Senior Member Join Date: October 27, 2008 Posts: 242	What Scope Would you Choose? Regardless of price. I'm looking at getting a scope in this size range. I'm kind of partial to Leupold but depending on the poll results may change. Price is a consideration for me of course, but for you voters, please choose regardless of price.

December 31, 2009, 09:58 PM	#5
CarterMccoy Member Join Date: December 31, 2009 Posts: 66	My Zeiss I just got a Zeiss. I have never owned one. I cant say enough. www.cameraland.com has several conquest models left, and some Victory models - with the integrated range finder. Worth a look when you consider what "Nightforce" has, and how long they have been around compared to Carl Zeiss.... Doc.

January 19, 2010, 01:03 PM	#8
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,578	If I were buying a scope today and price were not a consideration then I'd order one from USOptics and get EXACTLY what I wanted. __________________ Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley

January 21, 2010, 09:23 PM	#10
Kreyzhorse Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2006 Location: NKY Posts: 12,463	If I wasn't paying for it, I'd go Swarovski. If I was paying for it, I'd go Nikon Monarch. In fact, my last scope purchase, I had planned on buying either a Leupold or a Zeiss but walked away with the Monarch. Compare them side by side, and you'll see that the Monarch compares pretty well within the same price point scopes. __________________ "He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson

December 30, 2009, 04:28 PM	#2
Phoneguy Member Join Date: October 27, 2009 Posts: 25	I am curious why you are looking at a smaller lens size?

December 30, 2009, 08:42 PM	#3
5whiskey Senior Member Join Date: October 23, 2005 Location: US Posts: 3,657	If I think of optics and someone says "regardless of price", Schmidt & Bender get's the nod every time.

December 31, 2009, 09:56 PM	#4
Demaiter Senior Member Join Date: October 27, 2008 Posts: 242	Why smaller lense size? Because I don't like the big and bulky scopes. Scopes of this size, for the hunting I do 0-200 yards have plenty of magnification for far shots, yet have a nice like 1.5 or 2 or 2.5 power setting for the close shots. Also I find I get better check weld and scope/eye alignment when I can mount the scope lower to the barrel.

December 31, 2009, 10:02 PM	#6
swcr Member Join Date: December 31, 2009 Location: Sedro-Woolley, WA Posts: 64	I agree I think the 36mm objective is plenty big enough and really like how low it allows the scope to be mounted. Eugene

January 19, 2010, 11:19 AM	#7
Demaiter Senior Member Join Date: October 27, 2008 Posts: 242	Looking to get a few more votes. BTT

January 19, 2010, 04:10 PM	#9
flight954 Senior Member Join Date: November 1, 2006 Location: Cypress, Texas Posts: 933	Schmidt & Bender 3–12 x 50 PM II LP That is if money was no object