# leopold scopes



## rifleman2 (Feb 3, 2008)

i have been thinking about getting a leopold rifleman scope or a vari-x 1. the rifleman scope does not have the multi layer coatings as the higher priced scopes have. i wonder is it a worthy scope or should i get a higher end one? the rifleman sells for $200.00 at wal-mart. it looks like a good scope. of course i dont want it to frost over on me anytime. what about it? should i spend a bit more or would it be well enough for a hunter that goes just a few times a year?


----------



## Bernie P. (Sep 25, 2008)

I don't have any experience with that one but I've never had any trouble with my VXI or VXII.A VXIII goes on a new gun later today.You cant go wrong with Leupold.Good luck!


----------



## tabes (Apr 11, 2006)

i have a rifleman sope on a .260 that doesnt get used much but when i have used it it works just fine ive had it whitetail hunting here in wisconsin and it gets cold here it worked like a champ so if yore not going to hunt much that scope will more than what you need no sense spending the extra money just my .02


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

Leupold makes great scopes if you have plenty of light. If you are hunting in dim or dark conditions, make the upgrade to Swarovski, Kahles, Zeiss, Schmidt & Bender... :sniper:


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

The Leupolds I own have been great, although they are all VXIII's so I am not sure about the quality difference from the rifleman.

I have never noticed they are lacking during low light times. If it is too dark to see through even my cheapo Barska scope it is too dark to be pulling the trigger. The only way I could see there being a difference might be when hunting coyotes or other animals in the dead of night. I have not had the chance to try this yet, but I know a lot of people that do, and they use scopes that are in the same class or lower than the Rifleman. They never seem to have problems.

If you like the scope features and are comfortable with the price go for it. You will be glad you did.


----------



## beartooth (Feb 18, 2007)

The riflemen is not worth it. If you want a good Leupold you need to go to a VX II or VX III and if you want good low light results you will need in a Leupold to go to a VX III 50mm. Now real good low light results will be in a Zeiss Conquest, Kahles, Swarovski, Zeiss (upper end models) or Schmidt & Bender...

If money is an issue and you just got to have Leupold then make it the VX III with in 50mm.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

I've got all types of Leupolds _except_ their rifleman model, and I can't find anything to be unhappy about. They're small and lightweight, very rugged and dependable, made in America (not sure about the rifleman) and guaranteed forever. And every one I have provides a sight picture brighter than the naked eye regardless of the light conditions. In fact, with my 2.5-8X's I can shoot coyotes with no moon at all with the slightest of snow cover.

As to 50mm objectives, remember before adding weight to your rifle that reducing power accomplishes the same thing as adding objective diameter, and most people use more magnification than needed anyway. I think I read somewhere that a 40mm objective @ 6X lets more light into the scope than the human eye can use. Google "exit pupil" to verify.

I'm sure the European scopes are nice, but for the price difference they should come with a guided hunt! :wink:

I suggest the used market. Leupold will repair any problems for free and you can always get most, if not all of your money back if you change your mind.

I would probably agree with Beartooth and suggest a VX-II (not to be confused with the vari-x II). As far as I'm concerned it's the best combination of quality, features, and value...especially if you buy 'em used! :wink:


----------



## beartooth (Feb 18, 2007)

Leupold VXIII are not as good as Zeiss Conquest and the cost is in the same range.

I own 5 Leupold VX III's all late model indexed versions and they are not in the low light league of my three Zeiss conquests. Now on my 257Wby I have a VX III 4.5-14x50mm and it is a great scope and competes with the 40mm objective on my Zeiss Rapid Z but does not compete with the 44mm and 50mm Zeiss and I do not believe it is the objective size as much as it is the Shott glass that the Zeiss uses.

Now I like the weight and low light quality I get from my 50mm Leupold enough to keep it on my 257wby as it was what I first put on my 257Wby and I am happy with it. I have my Zeiss on three Custom rifles I have and I don't want to take them off those rifles.

Leupold is a fair value but Zeiss Conquest is the best value for the money and their warranty is a good one also. I have never had a Leupold, Zeiss, go bad on me yet. I guess that speaks well of them. The difference is the glass and the stronger inner parts of the Zeiss scope.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

I may be wrong on this but I am pretty sure I read that if you have a 40mm objective and and 50mm objective both with a 1" tube and the same size exit pupil, they will allow the exact same amount of light through to the eye. I read that "light gathering" of a larger objective is a myth. Does any one know for sure??


----------



## VagabondSouth (Dec 16, 2008)

I recently had to make the same decision you're facing and I opted for the VX-I 3-9X40 Leupold (a little better coating I think than the Rifleman model). I think there many great scopes out there now, especially in this age of CAD/CAM. I went with my choice because I wanted a Lifetime Guarantee, bright clear optics and consistant POI at any power. Again, many great scope still qualify.

I used my scope on a stand last Friday and as the sun rose, looking through the scope was like turning up the brightness on what you saw with your naked eye. I had never looked through a scope and experienced that. A close friend purchased the Nikon Buckmaster 3-9X40 and his appears to be the equal in every way, but I didn't hunt with it or see it in low light. The Leupold VX-I with the LRD reticle was about $40 more than the Rifleman or the Nikon, and I can't tell you it's worth it because I don't own the others, but it's a very good scope. Besides, I wanted my entry level scope to be a Leupold based on the reputation of the brand. I do not believe they make anything that is "junk", so if you are inclined to try the Rifleman, let us know how it works out for you.

I have a BSA Platinum Target model that works well for punching paper in daylight on a range with my AR, and it was $80 or so. But it isn't the right tool for hunting anything, and it was never more apparent than in that low light last weekend. "Right tool for the job" comes to mind.

VagabondSouth


----------



## VagabondSouth (Dec 16, 2008)

*laite319 *asked about Exit Pupil and you can calculate it easily at any power. According to Shooting Times web article at
http://www.shootingtimes.com/optics/opticpupil_061907/ 
"You can calculate the size of a scope's exit pupil by dividing the effective objective diameter in millimeters by the magnification. "
So the exit pupil IS directly related to Objective diameter!
My 3-9 X 40 has an exit pupil of 13.33 (40/3) to 4.44MM (40/9).
A 3-9 X 50 would be 16.66 to 5.55MM.
Human eye is 5-7MM approx.

Good info in the article on this topic. I don't profess to be an expert, but I'm learning.

VagabondSouth


----------



## The Norseman (Jan 8, 2005)

Good morning all,

Say, latch onto the November issue of (NRA) American Rifleman,
there is a very good article in there about Lens Coatings.

See yeaw


----------



## alleyyooper (Jul 6, 2007)

Rifleman, sold in a bubble pack at Wally world nuff said.

Some one suggested used. I agree. 
http://www.williamsgunsight.com/gunsigh ... scopes.htm
1-800-530-9028
Shipping on a scope isn't all that much.

Personally I like the Pentex Light Seekers, but I never did march to the same drummer as the masses.

 Al


----------



## VagabondSouth (Dec 16, 2008)

If you think about it, the cheapest scope discussed here is probably better than the average scope at twice the price in the 70's. The Rifleman is probably better than many name brand scopes of yester-year. Computer design and manufacturing control has been a real cost cutter in many things.

If price is no object the opinions STILL vary. When the object is the most bang for entry level optics, it's no different. Maybe harder as many say "spend more" when you can't. Is "no scope" better than an entry level Nikon or Leupold?

I'll not knock a scope I haven't tried, that's not fair. Besides, with the Walmart return policy, you could probably test drive it!

VagabondSouth


----------



## Bernie P. (Sep 25, 2008)

I've never looked through a Zeiss but I guarantee if there's not enough light for any of my Leupolds it's WAY past legal hunting time.Here in NY that's sunrise to sunset.Heading for home I've looked through them up to an hour or so after legal hours and could see quite well unless there's zero moonlight.


----------



## beartooth (Feb 18, 2007)

I will admit that as of late the new VX III 4.5-14x50mm with the indexed technology has really impressed me and as I said I have not had any trouble out of a Leupold that was VX-II or VX-III, but you will find that the rifleman is not of the quality of the rest of Leupold line and they have had some trouble with the scope. I do not believe all the nay saying about Leupold and some has been exaggerated on forums. I have for 30yrs now used them and I like them, I like Zeiss and I like Weaver V series. Leupold as of late has had to step up to the plate and deliver and at the moment they are doing so. Not like everybody wants them to but you can't please everybody anyway.


----------

