Is glass quality and clarity not linear and logical?

the cost to get very good mechanical operation AND glass is falling... and has been for the last 6+ yrs. Some brands have realised that having a different spec for every layer they make actually costs them money. So they are embracing using the 'good' stuff is more and more products... even if the retail pricing is far apart.

you can also see that some scopes from different brands look the same and have identical specs... because they are, essential, the same scope ... .just with a few exterior embelishments to make them brand specific.

The manfs are also understanding that economies of scale make them more money too... returns are incredibly expensive in the long run so better to use the good stuff which cost a little more at the factory but save a ton down the road. Design a few very good chassis and let the brands add a few bells and whistles... call it whatever they want and you can make lots and lots of the 'same' thing.

Some historical brands still hold to the pinch here and there to make the price point... and why you can have a 'cheap' NEW scope from one brand outshine a more expensive bigger brand product. There are currently way too many scopes and that will start to ween down as consumers figure out the good from the bad.

Jerry
 
And there are horses for different courses. Good hunting, tactical, PRS, or F-Class scopes are not the same beast so different manufacturers have the chance to focus on a particular market and be "the" scope for that niche.
 
Like most things the quality/price correlation is not linear but parabolic. You generally can get 90% functionality and quality for the first 20% of cost or so. Getting the remaining quality is going to get progressively more expensive and you will experience diminishing returns. Its like wine, the second cheapest bottle on the menu is usually the best deal over all. Very few people need the top shelf products, but if you want them more power to you they are top shelf for a reason.
 
I look as scopes very similar to how I look at a lens for my camera. While two lenses can do the same thing at vastly different prices most everyday users wouldn't notice it when someone who knows how to use the camera to its fullest is doing their job. However the more expensive option can create a better image if used effectively however again the everyday user wont actually pick up on it.

Also in the world of glass as the price increases its not linear to performance its more of an exponential increase. As you get into the more expensive optic ranges the increase in performance isn't as vast a jump as it is in the lower brackets. You will see a difference from say $500 to $1000 dollar optics and even then from 1k to 2k you will likely see a difference but as you get into things over 2k or 3k the differences are smaller and mostly not noticed by the average user. I mean all of us have different eyes that will notice different things but if someone has 15/20 vs 20/20 vision they likely will notice different things.

B
 
Jahnj0584 said:
- I have just unfortunately bumped my Leupold somehow on the muzzleloader to be off to the left by 4moa though. All it did was fall over from being leaned against a car.

Turns out a deer neck is about 3moa if you aim on center....don't ask me how I know
Click to expand...
Knowing it fell over, did you check zero before hunting?
 
Another variable to consider are the differences between people's eyes and their vision.

Cheap optics and cheap guitars are way better then they were 25 years ago.... likely due to modern manufacturing techniques.
 
Can-down said:
Another variable to consider are the differences between people's eyes and their vision.

Cheap optics and cheap guitars are way better then they were 25 years ago.... likely due to modern manufacturing techniques.
Click to expand...
is it possible that vortex+bushnell glass is just made for my eyes? I find even their cheap scopes to look good, and cant say the same for every other company.
SuperCub said:
Knowing it fell over, did you check zero before hunting?
Click to expand...
no, i caught it with my foot and didnt think it was that far off. I then missed cleanly and drove immediately to the range to find I was off 6moa to the left. I think this is all because I started to trust a Chinese torque wrench more then my own hands...I went over everything again at "20" and then did my own pinky test and things aren't behaving odd. I think that 15-18 recomendation is either just on the cusp of being too loose, or that wrench is off by enough to matter.
 
Jahnj0584 said:
is it possible that vortex+bushnell glass is just made for my eyes? I find even their cheap scopes to look good, and cant say the same for every other company.

no, i caught it with my foot and didnt think it was that far off. I then missed cleanly and drove immediately to the range to find I was off 6moa to the left. I think this is all because I started to trust a Chinese torque wrench more then my own hands...I went over everything again at "20" and then did my own pinky test and things aren't behaving odd. I think that 15-18 recomendation is either just on the cusp of being too loose, or that wrench is off by enough to matter.
Click to expand...
I've noticed the same and clearly(or not) we all see the world differently through our unique eyes.
 
adamg said:
With Leupolds, you are mostly paying for the importer and the name.
Click to expand...
made in USA with higher paid labour vs made in china/philippines or japan. can't argue vortex's warranty.....leupold has a lifetime warranty also - not as good as vortex's but good nonetheless. I was curious and searched up some reviews of vortex and many crapped on them saying that you would likely need that great warranty. I personally haven't seen it, but there must be something to the complaints. can't argue with the name and importer slice of the pie though. everyone needs to make 30-100% to keep the lights on - regardless if it is killing it for not as wealthy shooters.
 
Even scopes within the same line of a manufacturer are different. I had a Vortex Diamondback Tactical 6-24 and it did not fit me but I really like the 3-9. I posted a link in general discussion last week as how to hold a rifle for long range shooting so you don't cant it. I hope it helped some people. Sure, you expect a more expensive scope to be better and a cheap 6-24 or even higher magnification is a waste of money. As to country of manufacturing, Chinese does not equal Chinese, they can do anything you require and the glass etching machines today are not comparable to those 20 years ago. This also means that if you want a Japanese/US glass on your scope, you pay for it. Leupold has huge margins from factory to end user and they are spending quite a bit of money on marketing and advertising. You as end user pay for it,
 
scianna54 said:
Even scopes within the same line of a manufacturer are different. I had a Vortex Diamondback Tactical 6-24 and it did not fit me but I really like the 3-9.
Click to expand...
From what I understand, the diamondback line would all use the same glass quality - and as such, it's gonna show its flaws at 24x and could be fine at 9. Only way to tell is have both side by side set to the same power and test it there. I had a 6-24 $100 chinese scope that had illumination and after 20 it did get pretty dark. For the price it was fun to see your 22 at 100y though.

Boltgun said:
can't argue vortex's warranty.....leupold has a lifetime warranty also - not as good as vortex's but good nonetheless. I was curious and searched up some reviews of vortex and many crapped on them saying that you would likely need that great warranty. I personally haven't seen it, but there must be something to the complaints.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of it is fuddlore who think a Leupold VX2 is the pinnacle of optics and anything from overseas is trash.
 
Each to make their own choice what is important to them - I found myself on a mountain side, North West of Grande Cache, Alberta a few years ago - I was about 2 hour walk back to the truck - then about a 45 minute drive to nearest town that had a Post Office - at that point I realized, right there, that there is NO "warranty" that was going to be of any use to me - not scope, rifle, rings, hunting knife, boots, jacket, etc. - everything HAD TO WORK or I was screwed - right there. Would be even more apparent if two or three days away from a road by canoe. Is why I mostly go hunting with stuff I have used many years already - a scope is not likely to "break" on the 627th shot - not like it has to me on its second shot. But, if you never get back into those kinds of places, if most of your experience is "in town", then maybe the "warranty" is most important to you. I prefer to break stuff at the range or at home - gets used a lot and gets "broken in" before I depend on it.
 
Jahnj0584 said:
I think a lot of it is fuddlore who think a Leupold VX2 is the pinnacle of optics and anything from overseas is trash.
Click to expand...
"Fuddlore" .... I like that. :)

To be fair, a lot of the older guys would have been using a Tasco or Bushnell back in the day and a move up to a Leupold would be a big leap forward in quality. There wasn't the LR shooting there is now so a VXII certainly would have been a pinnacle for them and for their shooting needs, rightly so.
 
Jahnj0584 said:
From what I understand, the diamondback line would all use the same glass quality - and as such, it's gonna show its flaws at 24x and could be fine at 9. Only way to tell is have both side by side set to the same power and test it there. I had a 6-24 $100 chinese scope that had illumination and after 20 it did get pretty dark. For the price it was fun to see your 22 at 100y though.


I think a lot of it is fuddlore who think a Leupold VX2 is the pinnacle of optics and anything from overseas is trash.
Click to expand...

The problem I have with Leupold is the lack of features at a certain price point. And if you think a Leupold does not break, just do an online search. Personally I never had a scope break on me.

I think many of the older guys never go online and see videos of scope comparisons. The assumption that a cheap scope always breaks and an expensive one doesn't is not true.
 
Sometimes not. The glass of my $4500 Vortex 6-36 is a disappointment compared to a discontinued $600 Bushnell 8-32x40A0 on sunny days, fog, rain, snowfall and when there’s heavy mirage. The Vortex is excellent on cloudy days, twilight, and into a setting sun. The $1200 Bushnell Tactical 4.5-30 is out of focus when the parallax is dialed in. The $700 Sightron 36xBRD is definitely on the dark side but it tracks and shoots as good as the others.
 
Last edited:
I once had a Leupold test spec sheet that gave the amount of impacts measured in G forces and repetitions that the VX1 through 3s and Mark 4s were designed for and expected to endure. It was an in-house thing I should never have seen. I can’t remember the numbers anymore, but the difference just between just a 1 and 2 were huge, the jump to the 3 series was insane and the Mark 4s may as well been from a different universe. This is within the product lines of the same manufacturer.

After seeing that, the comparative differences in perceived optical quality; though real just didn’t seem that important anymore. You’re paying the bigger bucks for what you can’t see.
 
You get what you paid for.
For under $1500, the difference is mainly labor cost and components, quality outstanding in terms of tracking and possibly glass clarity. Most likely all OEM from Asia.
The 1500 to 2500 range is unclear, most scopes have same or better glass/coating and quality control. Many are still OEM or assembled in locally.
For scope around 3000-4500, it's a different level, better coating, features and details on glass. Mostly using good Japanese or European glass and assembled in US or Europe.

Until now I believe glass quality and clarity is still linear vs price.

For anything $5500 plus, the glass quality is much better and with some of its own unique features you don't see in lower tiers, but you end up paying few times more for the last 10-20% functions and quality.
 
I didn't even know there was a category over $5500.... I guess if it's 20% better then the "cheaper" glass in the $2000 range that's not nothing and some people spend thousands on a bottle of wine.... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom