Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Long range sights


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#31 jordang

jordang

    Rookie Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 19 October 2009 - 03:22 pm

I have to disagree on leupolds and low light, imo they are certainly no better than nightforce ( in fact I would goes as far as to say i would rather use a nightforce than leupold any day of the week; although I havent looked through one of the new range) and certainly nowhere near the league of schmidts, swaro's and zeiss... hence its better to try a few to see how your eyes get on with them. :tongue2:

#32 SNAP SHOT

SNAP SHOT

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,826 posts
  • Location:FAR FAR AWAY...............I THINK

Posted 19 October 2009 - 05:03 pm

I have to disagree on leupolds and low light, imo they are certainly no better than nightforce ( in fact I would goes as far as to say i would rather use a nightforce than leupold any day of the week; although I havent looked through one of the new range) and certainly nowhere near the league of schmidts, swaro's and zeiss... hence its better to try a few to see how your eyes get on with them. http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/pub...



i had a mate buy a nightforce for stalking we went out one morning and he couldn't see the deer through his scope...

while i could clearly make them out with the leupold..... he sold it the following week............ :whistling:


Snap.

#33 RicW

RicW

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,247 posts
  • Location:Brighton

Posted 19 October 2009 - 05:45 pm

I have to disagree on leupolds and low light, imo they are certainly no better than nightforce ( in fact I would goes as far as to say i would rather use a nightforce than leupold any day of the week; although I havent looked through one of the new range) and certainly nowhere near the league of schmidts, swaro's and zeiss... hence its better to try a few to see how your eyes get on with them. http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/pub...



i had a mate buy a nightforce for stalking we went out one morning and he couldn't see the deer through his scope...

while i could clearly make them out with the leupold..... he sold it the following week............ http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/pub...


Snap.

Tho we're getting a bit off thread here I LURV this argument. I like the idea of Kahles as low light level scopes. They make a main point of using glass which transmits the wavelengths to which the human eye is most sensitive at low intensity. Don't like their reticles tho.

By the way, a "reticule" is a handbag . . .

Ric


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users