Leupold vs. Vortex

[Rally1148]

Well, I've decided to invest in a new scope. When asked what I wanted for graduation by my grandma, I replied that a gift certificate to optics planet would help me be able to afford (or at least make the price a little less painful) a scope that will last the rest of my life.

What I need: quality, durability, dependability, and a lifetime warranty that I can count on.

I've always known that Leupold is a gold standard, but I am seriously thinking about Vortex, as I've heard nothing but good things about them, and their warranty rivals that of Leupold's.

I'm thinking about:
Vortex Viper HS 4-16x50mm
Leupold VX-3 4.5-14x50mm

I know that in the midwest whitetail woods, that seems like a lot of power, and it is. My thought is that if I'm ever lucky enough to do any traveling (out west or up to Canada), I don't want to have to buy a new scope. The farthest shot I have on my property currently is about 250 yards, so I need SOME magnification, but a 14 or 16 power isn't necessarily needed. I think that with a 4 or 4.5 power, I'll be right around where I keep my current scope on my shots under 100 yards (although maybe I creep up to 5x or 6x when they get closer to 100). It'll be sitting on a Ruger Mk II 30-06 (late 90's), so there is plenty of range in that gun provided that my shooting abilities are proficient.



So...
1. Do any of you have one, or both of these scopes? Which do you prefer?
2. Do any of you have negative experiences with these scopes (or similar models)
3. I can get the lower end Zeiss or Swarovski as well... but I figured that these were going to be of a lesser quality than those listed above.
4. Is there that big of a difference between the VX-2 and the VX-3?
5. Are there any other scopes that you can think of that I should look into?


Honestly, I don't think I can go wrong with either one of these scopes, so I am not too worried. I appreciate the help!


Chris

 

[Terrific_tom]

Chris, here is my take Vortex is a fairly new company in optics. Vortex has only been in business for 10 years and Leupold has been in business forever. As you said they are both quality scopes. If it would be me I would go with Leupold, I have 5 of them and I know they will be around if I ever have a problem with any of them. The difference between the VX-II and VX-III is very noticeable in light gathering abilities. I think that a 3.5-10 x 50mm power scope would be a little bit better choice for power for your deer hunting, but still be plenty for out west hunting.

 

[BJE80]

I'm just adding this as a FYI. The Zeiss Conquest is being phased out as they come out with the new cheaper line of Terra which I would not get. You can get a conquest here in 3x9-40 for $325 which is the equivalent of the VX3. To get a $450 scope for $325 in Zeiss was worth it for me.



http://www.eurooptic.com/zeiss-conquest-3-9x40-riflescopes.aspx

 

[wiscwhip]

That's a sweet deal, and the 3.5x10x44 for $499 is a good deal as well!

 

[scott44]

I have never tried Vortex and I use Leupold just about exclusively, I have both the VX-II and III and like Tom stated the III definely allows more light in on low light conditions. My oldest son really like the Vortex binos he bought but he got them at cost because a buddy of his worked at Gander Mtn. I have no experience with Vortex other than that, like you said I think you can't go wrong with either one IMO.

 

[Rally1148]

Thanks for the input!

I have the Leupold acadias, which only have a limited warranty, and I love them. The thing is I have $150 in gift certificates for opticsplanet.com.... (My gran said it was either this, or some fancy luggage like she got my sisters.... whatever I did, she wanted to get me something, not just give me money)

I'll search around their site and see what I can find, as far as the Zeiss goes.

 

[Rally1148]

Alright. I think I'm going with the 4.5-14x50mm... NOW I need a bit more advice...

I've found the 4.5-14x50 with Side focus for $100 LESS than the 4.5-14x50 without side focus....

From what I've gathered, side focus is just a way to adjust the parallax, which really isn't a big deal when dealing with under 300 yard shots. You give up a bit of clarity for the ability to keep your eye on the target while adjusting... For my purposes (all shots under 300 yards, and most under 250), I can just set the parallax on 100 or 150 and not have to mess with it and just focus through the eyepiece (I think).

Do I have this right? Am I getting the whole parallax /focusing thing correct? I never really messed with it on my current scope
Does anyone have a side focus? How is the quality compared to a normal adjustment?

I feel like if I am going to pay for clarity in good glass, the kind that will outlast my gun, I don't want the side focus. BUT $100 is enough of a difference to make me think twice about it.

 

[jwill1776]

VX3 less side focus for your situation.

I’ll admit I’m real tempted to try Vortex glass but I have always been happy with Leupolds

 

[jwill1776]

I should mention that I have side focus on one of my Leupold Mark 4 scopes that I use for long range paper punching, I really only used it when shooting 400+ yards.

 

[Rally1148]

VX3 less side focus for your situation.

I’ll admit I’m real tempted to try Vortex glass but I have always been happy with Leupolds

So the VX3 with the side focus for less?
No difference in the clarity?

 

[foggy]

I own about 20 Luepold scopes from 2x7 to 6.5x20 and most in-between. Problably another 12 or so other brands. I really like the 4-14x40 (or 50) for most hunting situations. I have a few other brands too....but the Luepold does most everything in a GP scope. I was able to buy and "write off" many of my guns, scopes and ammo.....so it gets a bit easier to accumulate some of the better brands. :D

Having said that......I don't think you buy an optic for a "lifetime" anymore. Tech is changing fast.....and no-doubt you will be looking thru a different optic in 10 or 20 years. Likely you will have some range compensation and a few other nifty features for long-range shooting. I know I'm not too keen on 30 or 40 year old optics these days......and I doubt you will be either.

Stay with main-stream, good quality stuff at affordable prices IMO. There are simply too many good choices out there today to prevent one from paying a high price for an optic (or firearm). i have 3 or 4 scopes laying in wait of a firearm right now....so I am not in the market for another. But things have changed allot in the past 10 years......and I'm sure they will change more in the next ten. Keep your options open. ;)

OH. For many years I thought the better Tasco scopes were about the most I could afford for general hunting purposes. Those scopes worked fine for big-game hunting. Today.....almost any scope is better than those low-priced scopes of 20 years ago. I'd say find a bargain priced scope and buy something else you may need too - unless your shooting in competition or extreme ranges, etc. My .02 cents.

 

[Rally1148]

Well, I've been looking, and I'm not deciding between the 40mm and the 50mm. There is about a $50 difference between the two. I can get the 4-14x40 without side focus for $549, and the 4-14x50mm WITH side focus for $599.

At my ranges (50-250 yards) I'd assume that the 50mm wouldn't make that big of a difference, since I'll usually be under a lower power. My one reservation is that for $50 more, I can get a scope that is more versatile.

Which would you all do?

 

[wiscwhip]

The 50mm objective is really just going to give you a light gathering advantage at dawn and dusk, or in heavy, dark conifer type cover. I am not familiar with the side focus, but it just seems like it would be unnecessary for ranges under 300 yards. I wonder if it is one of those gizmos that would cause a failure at the worst possible time? Sure it has a lifetime warranty, but that doesn't mean squat when the buck of a lifetime is 200 yards out and your focus adjustment knob fails. I like simple and fail-safe when it comes to hunting optics, especially when it comes to big game. The focus adjustment option wouldn't be so bad on a varmint or target rifle, but bulletproof always seems better when hunts are on the line.

 

[Terrific_tom]

Well, I've been looking, and I'm not deciding between the 40mm and the 50mm. There is about a $50 difference between the two. I can get the 4-14x40 without side focus for $549, and the 4-14x50mm WITH side focus for $599.

At my ranges (50-250 yards) I'd assume that the 50mm wouldn't make that big of a difference, since I'll usually be under a lower power. My one reservation is that for $50 more, I can get a scope that is more versatile.

Which would you all do?

The difference between 40mm and 50mm is light gathering ability. With that said some say that your eye can only gather so much light, I can't tell the difference. Another thing to think about is that you will need higher scope rings with the 50mm scope. Some people have problems with the larger objectives because they have to raise their head up slightly.

 

[Rally1148]

The 50mm objective is really just going to give you a light gathering advantage at dawn and dusk, or in heavy, dark conifer type cover. I am not familiar with the side focus, but it just seems like it would be unnecessary for ranges under 300 yards. I wonder if it is one of those gizmos that would cause a failure at the worst possible time? Sure it has a lifetime warranty, but that doesn't mean squat when the buck of a lifetime is 200 yards out and your focus adjustment knob fails. I like simple and fail-safe when it comes to hunting optics, especially when it comes to big game. The focus adjustment option wouldn't be so bad on a varmint or target rifle, but bulletproof always seems better when hunts are on the line.

As far as it being an extra gizmo, that's kind of what I'm thinking. I just wasn't sure! I've got a few spots where I'm in some heavier timber with mixed conifer, but I've got equally as many of open field shots.

The difference between 40mm and 50mm is light gathering ability. With that said some say that your eye can only gather so much light, I can't tell the difference. Another thing to think about is that you will need higher scope rings with the 50mm scope. Some people have problems with the larger objectives because they have to raise their head up slightly.

From what I've read, the extra 10mm makes a difference of 1x in low light. I think that for ranges less than 200, I won't be dialing it up past 7-9 other than for looking at specific deer.


Well! It looks like I'm going with the 40mm!

 

[wiscwhip]

As far as it being an extra gizmo, that's kind of what I'm thinking. I just wasn't sure!

Take my reply with a grain of salt, as I said, I am not personally familiar with the side focus, as I have never had a scope with that option. I'm just speaking from my personal experience with Murphy's Law, and the fact that the less things I have that could potentially fail, the better off I am.:eek::oops::D

 

[Rally1148]

Take my reply with a grain of salt, as I said, I am not personally familiar with the side focus, as I have never had a scope with that option. I'm just speaking from my personal experience with Murphy's Law, and the fact that the less things I have that could potentially fail, the better off I am.:eek::oops::D

I agree for the most part. Right now I've got an early 2000's Bushell banner, but after looking through my leupold binos and my neighbors 1990's leupold scope, I know that better optics will make a difference in my situation. As for the NEED for the extra's... I have never been one to stretch my range... I still stand by the 20-25 yard max on my bow, even though I can put 5 of 6 arrows in a 4 inch circle at 60 yards. It's just a limit that was set on me when I was hunting my first year, my neighbor/mentor told me that on my land there is no reason to shoot past that. It's just kind of stuck, but if I had a great buck at 35 yards, I'd take him because I KNOW I can put it where it needs to be, but in general, I don't see harvesting an animal as something that yields that much importance. I know lots of guys that'll hunt "all night" if there is a full moon, yet 2 years ago I let a 2.5 yo 6 point go (biggest buck I've ever had a shot at) because I wasn't 100% confident in the shot, as I could only see his general figure/outline. I guess for me, letting a deer go isn't the worst thing you can do, it just adds some motivation to work to get him out 10 minutes earlier next time! It kind of sucks, as I've never gotten a buck and I found that one gutshot this year, but I see no good in taking a spike, as a nice doe is a lot harder to hunt!

I'm taking this same approach with the scope. I don't want to shoot past 150-200, but if I get a bruiser walking through at 250, I want to have the equipment that allows me to be confident that I can drop him. If I wasn't getting a high end scope, I'd figure that it would be just something extra to break or for human error to mess up, but since it's Leupold, I kind of see it as possibly and extra +.

 

[foggy]

So much of the "focus knob" depends on the magnification being used with variable power scopes. With low power I doubt that you will need to adjust it for most hunting scenarios. Its mostly useful for target shooting and varmint hunting at high magnification and at various ranges.....IMO. The higher magnification and the longer the distance the more parallax or focus adjustment is needed. Personally for a hunting scope at reasonable ranges.....I'd prefer a 40 mm objective to get the scope mounted lower.....and I don't see much use for the side parallax adjustment under normal field conditions. At day's end.....I doubt if the bigger 50mm objective would add 2 minutes to your shooting light.

If time permits......I have no objection to adjusting the parallax with the ring on the objective lens on the front of the scope. No biggie.

I also own a fixed power 36x bench rest Leupold scope. And that magnification REQUIRES that you adjust it to gain some focus due to the high magnification. Pretty fuzzy when not dialed in.

 

[Rally1148]

I also own a fixed power 36x bench rest Leupold scope. And that magnification REQUIRES that you adjust it to gain some focus due to the high magnification. Pretty fuzzy when not dialed in.

That's a heck of a scope right there! I've always wanted to try fixed power, but for a do-it-all scope I've figured that variable is the way to go.

 

[foggy]

That's a heck of a scope right there! I've always wanted to try fixed power, but for a do-it-all scope I've figured that variable is the way to go.

It's only use is for bench rest shooting. Pretty nifty rig. The scope is perched atop a custom built Stolle Panda benchrest rifle chamberd in 6PPC. All custom built and smithed by reputable folks. The gun can make 5-shot groups as small as .087" when I put good loads together and I touch the trigger under similar wind conditions. I like to show folks what a 2 oz trigger feels like. (you barely feel it press your finger when it lets off :D) I've shot it at the Super Shoot in Ohio a few times and regional bench-rest competition.