Another FWIW scope comparison.....

[n4ue]

Ok, I have to explain the following dialog.
When I refer to "we", I am referring to a buddy and my part time employer. He is NOT a gun guy, but likes to buy new toys. He is very wealthy. So, I order the guns and he pays for them and picks them up. All legal.
Also, being his 'gun guy', I build his shooting ranges, buy his ammo, scopes, reload his ammo, etc.

Now getting to the scope comparison part..... I own 42 scopes, most mounted on my beloved Savage rifles. Not boasting, just wanted to state, I've looked through a few. Most of mine are 'lower, middle cost' models. I DON'T shoot at 1000 yards. Don't shoot prairie dogs, there are no such varmints here in Florida.
I have had excellent results with Vortex Vipers, Milletts and scopes in this price range.

Last month we acquired a new Barrett M107A1 (50 BMG) with Barrett rings. The LGS mounted a new Leupold Mk4 4.5-14X50 LR/T scope. I sighted in the rifle at 130 yards and was VERY, VERY disappointed in the scope. There was nothing 'wrong' with it, I just expected much better.
We had a couple of guests at the range the other day, and I broke out one of his rifles I enjoy. It's a M12 BVSS 22-250, fluted bbl, etc. The ladies shoot it easily because it has almost no recoil. It has a Weaver Kaspa scope. This rifle deserves a better scope. My buddy told me to get one.

So, the other day, I put several different, colorful targets out at 100 yards. A co-worker and I put the Barrett and the M12 side-by-side. I also brought several spare scopes to check the clarity. The day was slightly overcast, which I thought might be better than bright/sunny.
We spent a long time looking through the Mk4 which had a towel on it to protect it! We put several spare scopes, one at a time directly on top, that way we could instantly compare A=B. All scopes were properly focused, etc.
One conclusion we reached was that although the Kaspa is el-cheapo looking, it's probably not worth replacing. (I own 2 of these myself), and like/dislike them. They work, but are really, really cheap looking.
There is NO way I would pay that much $ for the Mk4. I expected it to blow all the others away, it didn't.
Maybe it will last forever, be easily repaired, be more repeatable, be more weather proof, etc. Even the clicks were not that great.

For the limited amount of shooting 'we' do, it's a waste. I wish we would have purchased a NightForce.

Here's another dilemma, this week I was going to purchase a Sightron SIII 6-24X50 for my own use. If the Mk4 underwhelmed me, how will a $800 model do? I know the the SIII has great reviews.

Once, I purchased a new Nikon Monarch and had 4 guys look through it, before I even mounted it, and compared it to 4 other 'budget' scopes. One model that everyone kept going back to and liking, was a $70 Wal Mart Centerpoint! I know, doesn't make sense. The Nikon was returned the next day. This was another case of "nothing really wrong" with the Nikon, just wasn't worth the cost (in our opinion)......I did not reveal the price of any of the scopes being tested, until the end.

Comments welcome and don't worry, I have my flame suit handy.

ha ha

ron

[Boudin]

I don't doubt it.
I stopped asking anybody for advice about scopes because here is what you get:

Hey, I'm thinking about buying brand x scope. What do you guys think?

Answer A. Save up longer and buy a Nightforce. Anything less is not worthy of burning ants on the sidewalk.

Answer B. It's awesome!! I have it mounted on a howitzer and I have 4 million rounds through I have never touched it since sight-in. Even when I dropped it from a plane into an active volcano.

Answer C. It may be ok for an average shooter like you, but for somebody like me who is training to be a sniper for the Seals even though I'm a 52 year old fat guy, it's not nearly awesome enough.

[D.ID]

I don't doubt it.
I stopped asking anybody for advice about scopes because here is what you get:

Hey, I'm thinking about buying brand x scope. What do you guys think?

Answer A. Save up longer and buy a Nightforce. Anything less is not worthy of burning ants on the sidewalk.

Answer B. It's awesome!! I have it mounted on a howitzer and I have 4 million rounds through I have never touched it since sight-in. Even when I dropped it from a plane into an active volcano.

Answer C. It may be ok for an average shooter like you, but for somebody like me who is training to be a sniper for the Seals even though I'm a 52 year old fat guy, it's not nearly awesome enough.

SOOOOO TRUE.
Glass is such a subjective topic but there are many more important components to optics such as durability etc. I do not even ask about glass anymore.
It also depends a great deal on someones own eyesight in order to pick up on subtle differences in glass.
If the cheep stuff satisfies you: be thankful.
If you need an $800 sightron: can't blame you, I would.

[Jamie]

With the MK4 you are buying the double walled, overbuilt durability. Glass is pretty good but not outstanding. SAME is true for the NF scopes. They are unbelievably durable but will not have the utmost in glass.

The VX-3 and higher models will have better glass as some of the coatings and processes did not allow the tracking system in the MK4 to track correctly, so they did not add it to that line up.

Now, I have good experience with the Vipers but for really big boomers, durability is the most important factor. I was extremely disappointed with my NXS glass.