Best 3-9 for hunting? (Udate 6/16 with a surprising scope comparison.)

[mattri]

I agree that nightforce is a great scope, but their glass isn't quite as nice as its reputation would lead you to believe. My shooting buddy has one, and my weaver t36 was very similar in clarity, brightness etc.

[jmg8550]

Anybody compare scopes on an optical resolution chart. That would give a better idea of how good the glass is in a particular scope as far as clarity. Also, ones own vision contributes to that.

[bythebook]

Eye box is the left to right, up to down leeway one has behind a scope where you have a full view through the scope.
Some people include the fore and aft leeway as well but that is really eye relief.


That is one of my complaints about Leupold is you have to be exactly straight behind them to get a full view. I have several Vipers and Leupold VXIIIs and Sightron IIIs, and so far the only complaint with the Vipers is I wish they were a higher power.

[nsaqam]

Anybody compare scopes on an optical resolution chart. That would give a better idea of how good the glass is in a particular scope as far as clarity. Also, ones own vision contributes to that.


John Barsness ( Mule Deer on 24hourcampfire.com) does those comparisons.

I agree on the point about ones own vision having a lot to do with perceived clarity.

[308law]

I really like the Zeiss Conquest in that price point, and for a little more the Swarovski Z3 3x9x36 is an incredible scope.

[mattri]

Going to go this wknd and look through as many as I can. The Zeiss, Leupold, and Bushnell are leading the pack right now.

[mattri]

Just got back from looking through a number of scopes and to be honest I was pretty surprised.

Conditions were very cloudy and a bit dark, little rain spits from time to time. Thought that would be a good indicator of how the scopes did under adverse conditions. Looked through everything mid afternoon, then came back to see how they did at dusk.

Looked through the Zeiss, the Vortex, Leupold, Redfield and the Nikon, couldn't find a Bushnell Elite series. These were all 3-9 with a duplex reticle except the Vortex which had their dead hold bdc, looking through the window of a sporting goods store at known distances of 50 to 600 yards. Scopes were all secured on a tripod with a series of mounts so that you could compare them quickly.

The first thing that surprised me was that the Zeiss did not, in my opinion, distinguish itself from the crowd. I had high hopes for the conquest, was really leaning that way, but to my eye it was neck and neck with the others.

The Leupold impressed me the least, and was the first to be dismissed.

The Redfield and the Vortex were very similar, I could not tell a difference in clarity or brightness between the two. Once I started reading real estate signs at the longer ranges they both became a little fuzzy.

The scope that really took me by surprise was the Nikon. I hadn't really paid them much attention, and only looked through one because the salesman was being super cooperative and recommended it. I looked through it to humor him but was amazed that it was at least as bright as the others, and when trying to read small print on signs at various distances it was clearer than the others by a fair margin.

I realize that this was far from a scientific test but the Nikon is now in front of the pack.

[keeki]

Dollar for dollar, hard to beat

[jgerrington]

It is hard to tell the differences in these scopes. Try comparing the scopes in the evening while looking at something in the shadows. between the nikon, bushnell, and zeiss it will be very hard to find a clear winner. I say between these three choose the one that has the reticle you want. That is the deciding factor.

[mattri]

That's why I went back later in the day, to compare the low light resolution, and all the scopes mentioned had the same reticle except the Vortex as noted.

[nimrod1]

I have a Nikon 3x9 on my hunting rifle with no complaints. As I stated in a prevous post, glass is clear and no problems through about 6 soggy deer seasons.

[mattri]

Picked up a Nikon 3-9 from a member here, couldn't be happier with it so far.

One thing I think is worth mentioning: a lot of times you hear reviews saying this is "the best scope for the money". I was looking at scopes that cost 5x what this Nikon did. It was not in my opinion, the "best scope for the money". It was the clearest, brightest, sharpest scope period.

[Leonardo63]

Mattri, your making my heart go pitter patter! I just posted about my choice of the Nikon for exactly what you discovered. Feels nice to see I'm not the only one. I bought a Monarch 8/32-50 for my 6.5 Lapua build. I have never spent anywhere near that kind of money on a scope in my life! and never intended to, but I wanted something fairly high power in a level of quality I've never owned. I can't wait to get this gun shooting!
When I first came on here I posted a question about what rings I needed to mount a Nikon 50mmobj on my Sav- no response. So I assumed I might be the only poor bast... to buy a Nikon. BTW- since I didn't get any help, I ordered 3 sets of rings- and used them all remounting other guns- fwiw, it takes high rings :)

PS- In the box with my Monarch, I got an additional two sets of target turrets, turret caps and a sunshade. Pretty sweet package.

[MikeCTX]

I have a Nikon ProStaff on my AR build right now, 3x9x50 and have shot it at 500 yd with no issues. Will admit I had my doubts, but for the $ it is one heck of a scope. It is my new rifle scope, meaning each new rifle gets to wear it until I find a scope I want to mount, buddy of mine has borrowed it for 3-4 new rifles until the scope for the rifle shows up.