Separating cheap from quality

N

Nutbar6

Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Location
SE manitoba
At what price range is the most noticeable improvement in quality of glass?

I've been looking at leupold bx-2 Acadia binoculars and vortex crossfire 2 scope, both are around $200 on sale.
I'm wondering if these are a massive improvement from bargain glass or if they're just brand names on bargain glass. How much more would you have to spend to get noticeable improvements? What products do you guys consider the best balance between cost and quality when it comes to optics.
 
Last edited:
I guess what I'm wondering is if this price range is basically just glorified versions of cheap optics like the weaver scopes that come with combo rifles or a Canadian tire brand of binoculars, with the added bonus of good warranties. What price range would be a significant improvement in quality.
 
The brand name is sometimes misleading in terms of quality. Lot's of companies will put out cheaper lines to appeal to those that don't want to spend as much and still offer great quality in their high end lines. Personally, I feel like the line of better quality is about the $500 mark. Then once you get over $1000, it increases quite drastically again. You can get good value on glass when you compare one brand to the other, but I have always found that in optics, you get what you pay for.
 
Good thread (at least until it gets killed then flogged :p). Need to define the application and expectations. Need to set a budget then try to get the most for the money.

Armed services generally use highest quality because of the criticality involved (and it's taxpayers money). Price reductions from there will result in compromises for sure. Not always a direct correlation between price and quality.
 
Last edited:
I was just imagining that the technology that increases the quality exponentially can be found at certain price ranges, where anything in between is just minor details like weight and colour. I suppose the better approach is to find an absolute limit to price I can cope with and narrow down best quality from there.
 
The level likely varies among manufacturers and wouldn't be defined. Too much subjectivity as demonstrated in how consumer products are marketed.

For consumer products the manufacturers decide what the consumers should need at affordable prices. In critical applications such as defense the manufacturers must conform to quality standards (i.e. MilSpec's) set by the users.
 
Last edited:
Clocked92 said:
You can get good value on glass when you compare one brand to the other, but I have always found that in optics, you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...

While it may be true that generally better stuff costs more, doubling the price may not give you double the performance. That is, doubling the price from $250 to $500 may bring significant improvements, and doubling again to $1000 may bring noticeable improvements, but the jump to $2000 may only give slight improvements, and the jump to $4000 likewise.

Just as an example, suppose I'm considering a Leupold hunting scope.

The VX-2 costs $390 or so.
Going from the VX-2 3-9x40 to the VX-3i 3.5-10x40 costs $130 more, and gets you better coatings, twin-spring erector, and locking eyepiece.
Going from the VX-3i to the VX-6HD 2-12x42 costs $1300 more, and gets you even better coatings, different eyepiece, 6x zoom range, in-scope cant indicator, magnification throw lever, side parallax adjust, more capable turrets, erector improvements, and included scope covers. (And it weighs 4oz more for the bare scope.)

Is the VX-6HD worth the extra? To some, sure. Probably not to me, though I can appreciate the engineering that went into it.
 
Cbf123 said:
While it may be true that generally better stuff costs more, doubling the price may not give you double the performance. That is, doubling the price from $250 to $500 may bring significant improvements, and doubling again to $1000 may bring noticeable improvements, but the jump to $2000 may only give slight improvements, and the jump to $4000 likewise.
Click to expand...

Very True, and I in no way meant to imply that $2000 glass is twice as good as $1000 glass. Heck to most people, it might not even be a noticeable difference, but there is a premium price for a reason generally. It's one of those things where you have to decide for yourself if that little bit extra in performance is worth the difference in cost.

To OP, the best thing you can do is set a budget for each optic you are looking for. Then look at the different options in that price range. Go to a store that has a couple of them and compare side by side outdoors, preferably right at sunset or slightly after. One optic that someone loves might not be the best for you, so let yourself decide which you prefer.
 
Slamfire said:
Aside from the extra cost are the additional bells and whistles really needed? Do they actually make a difference?
Click to expand...

Depends what you're doing, I think. If you're hunting near-to-mid range using the "max point blank range" method, you pretty much set the turrets and forget them, so fancy turrets don't really mean anything. For long-range shooting you pretty much need to use the turrets.
 
I don't see the need and wouldn't pay for needless features but that's just me. I seem to be getting by just fine with basic scopes on my hunting rifles - Leupold VX-2 1-4x20mm, VX-3 1.5-5x20mm or FX 2.5, 4 or 6x scopes.

I suppose then Leupold marketing for their more basic scopes really put the zap on my brain. ;)
 
Last edited:
When I bought my last pair of binos, I looked through all the ones in my price range and a few more expensive. I could see differences in more expensive models, but didn't feel the improvement was worth the price increase. I ended up buying just under my budget, but was happy with what I bought. I think the best thing you can do is set a budget and look through as many as you can back to back to compare.
 
Cbf123 said:
While it may be true that generally better stuff costs more, doubling the price may not give you double the performance. That is, doubling the price from $250 to $500 may bring significant improvements, and doubling again to $1000 may bring noticeable improvements, but the jump to $2000 may only give slight improvements, and the jump to $4000 likewise.

...
Click to expand...

The law of diminishing returns. The thing that can be sold profitably for $50 isn't very good at all. It's then not difficult to make something twice as good as that if you will be able to sell it for $100, but the better you make something the harder it is to improve upon.
 
I would stroll down the "it depends on what you are doing aisle" and go from there. Spot and stalk hunting, optic up! Everything else, start cheap and plan on replacing based on need. One of the worst/best things about quality optics is that, at times, you can flip them for a decent price, and put that towards the next pair.

For binoculars over 5 years I went from Nikon Monarch to Zeiss Conquest to Leica Ultravid HD's, based only on need of course
 
I would look at refurbished optics as an option. Sometimes one gets a good price on brand name optics.
I got Steiner binos that were police and military surplus that were refurbished by Steiner. Optics are great
and the rubber coating shows some use. Scopes are done the same way.
 
Nutbar6 said:
At what price range is the most noticeable improvement in quality of glass?

I've been looking at leupold bx-2 Acadia binoculars and vortex crossfire 2 scope, both are around $200 on sale.
I'm wondering if these are a massive improvement from bargain glass or if they're just brand names on bargain glass. How much more would you have to spend to get noticeable improvements? What products do you guys consider the best balance between cost and quality when it comes to optics.
Click to expand...

The Acadia are fine but the Cascades are noticeably sharper for a little more. I found stepping up to ED glass was also a noticeable improvement and ended up with the Bushnell Ultra Legend HDs. I found them crisper than both Leupold especially the 8x36 Legends.

Having said that, I hunt mostly bush and use binoculars to positively identify my target and enjoying other wildlife. I am not fussy and am only concerned with getting a mature animal, not scoring on the hoof at distance. If I were a spot and stock trophy hunter, I would go with better binoculars and a spotting scope.

I tried the Diamond Back scopes and no more cheap Vortex for me. Glass was fine but would not hold zero. Bushnell again for me on the inexpensive stuff (Legend or preferably Elite) or I would try Nikon as a second choice if I didn't want a Bushnell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom