I wasent saying that Leupolds were bad scopes I was wondering why people were allways recomending them. There lower pricepoint offerings do not seem to be any better than offerings by bushnell, nikon ect... From what people are saying around hear is that at an equal price the only advantage seems to be the service when a scope needs to be repaired. I will admit that Leupold makes some good scopes in the price range $550 and up. But in the $400 and below market they same to be the same quality that is being offerd by the compatition. I dont like when people compare scopes by saying that I once oned a bushnell and it was crap so i switched to leupold. The thing that some of these people tend to leave out is that the bushnell that they had was a $150 scope and they spent $600 on their leupold. At that difference in price you should expect a siginifiant differnce in quality. And I am not a bushnell lover I just wanted to know why some people have this obcession with Leupold. I will admit that they do make some very nice higer end scopes but the guys who buy the higest end of Lepold for some reason will bash scopes of equivalat price made by some of the higher end manufactuers like swarski ect..
I don't believe there are any great differences in scopes up to the $400 mark, regardless of manufacturer.
Most if not all of these scopes will work quite well within the hours of legal hunting times in Canada.
Is a $2100 Zeiss/Swarovski 3 times better than a $700 Leupold? Not likely.
Is a $700 Leupold 3 times better than a $225 Bushnell? Probably not.
The differences from a good scope to a great scope are clarity under low light and high magnification, consistent adjustment, and durability. The fellows who do long range shooting certainly benefit from high end optics, but most of these scopes are too bulky for hunting,IMO. In countries where night hunting without artificial light is allowed, the large objective lense scopes are a bonus, hence the 56mm objective used to only be found on euro scopes. It's really not needed in North America.
As for warranty, I've had experiences with 3 scopes of different manufacture:
Zeiss 1.5-6x42 Diavari- Fogged up-Had to go back to Germany, old scope from mid 70's, cost $850 to fix, no warranty. Granted, it looked like hell, it had been there and back several times.
Bushnell-1.5-4.5x32 Elite 3200-Fogged up- 7 months turnaround, no charge. it's on my 22 now.
Leupold- 3.5-10x40 Vari X-III- Double vision - 2 weeks turnaround, no charge. Mount broke on gun and I didn't notice until I fired several rounds after, no doubt damaging what turned out to be the erector.
Most hunters would be better served with a good scope and a great set of binoculars, than vice versa. I see many with a $1000+ scope and a set of Tasco "opera" binocs.
The only thing Leupold I won't buy are their scope mounts.
