Oh, we do do we? I'll have to tell our winter league guys we're making a big mistake
Ahem, allow me:
Guys, you are making a big mistake. It is colder and darker in the winter, you know. Time to stay indoors, build rifles and load ammo for when shooting season comes again. (And no BC-philic gloating wisecracks about having to be careful not to step on the daffodils growing on the rifle range in February, please!! ;-)
...ever try and use a scope with schitty light transmission on a very bright day? You can have it.
To be honest, no I have not. I've looked through some of the very old Weaver target scopes. They are good, though the image is much darker; clearly their lens coatings are many generations out of date. But, I imagine I could probably shoot quite well with one, even though it might not be as pleasing as a modern scope with better coatings.
Color accuracy and chromatic abberation have little bearing on the human eye as this is a matter of perception (in fact I have contemplated experimenting with a Wratten viewing filter), but contrast is a different matter. Contrast and clarity seem to go hand-in-hand with glass optics manufacturing. Using optics with poor contrast and clarity is a strain. Poor contrast makes heavy mirage appear even worse.
I'm not suggesting that one should shoot with junk optics, far from it! (I've looked through some el-cheapo $100-class Chinese scopes lately, made out to look a lot like a Leupold Mk. IV, and oh my gosh is it distressing. So far I've held my tongue (they belong to various friends who are getting into the game), hopefully they'll upgrade to a good scope as soon as it fits their budget and they start to have an appreciation of the differences.
I think it makes sense for a serious shooter to get good optics. Going beyond "good" though, I think it is more of a treat for ones' self, rather than a particularly cost-effective means of improving your performance. (That said, I like treats ;-)
Maybe you should buy a better quality scope. In no-mirage conditions, I can see bullet holes out 400M and beyond with my 42X NF scope and 300 is a breeze with a 25X Leupold.
I actually use my rifle scope for viewing mirage by throwing it out of focus.... No need to change firing position at all.
I haven't shot a Nightforce, so I can't comment first-hand on them under actual shooting conditions (though having looked through several, they certainly look fine). I used to shoot a Leupold Mark 4 16X, ended up trading it for the Leupold 8.5-25X that I now shoot. They're good, but I would classify them simply as "adequately good". For a spotting scope I use a Unert HELR, which I find to be quite good. I've coached with, or otherwise used, most of the $1000+ big spotting scopes (Kowa TSN-821, Leica, Swarovski, 100mm Unertl, etc), they are all first-rate spotting scopes too.
With the various rifle scopes and spotting scopes I have used, I have not been able to reliably see bullet holes at 300m+ in the black portion of a target, except under unusually good optical conditions.
I once experienced some extraordinarily good light and atmospheric conditions at 500 yards late one afternoon, and was able to clearly see 1" square patches on the target face.
I have never, under any conditions, ever been able to see a bullet hole or patch on a target at 700m+.
I find the side focus adjust on my 25X Leupold to be too coarse, and uncalibrated, to be changing during a shoot. Perhaps I need to mark it more fancily that the two stuck-on pieces of masking tape that I have there now (labelled "125y", and "900m"). I find it quite quick to set up my spotting scope next to my rifle, and use it for "near" mirage reading.
