I couldn’t tell you as I haven’t ever compared them. Most decent scopes have good enough glass that you have a good picture during normal hunting light. Scopes are not like binos. You won’t be spending hours behind them. Top notch clarity is not needed. You need to be able to identify the animal you want and identify where you need to aim.
Good point.
It’s important to note that the testing done in those threads isn’t just to see if a scope can stand up to drops. It is a way to expedite the process of seeing how a scope holds up to long term normal use. A scope that passes the drops has almost no chance of losing zero from normal use such as riding in a truck, being strapped to a pack animal, airline travel, or simply sitting in a gun safe. The scopes that don’t pass on the other hand lose zero from these activities very often.
Here's how big a grain of salt I take with internet scope evaluations:Homie! Have you read the eval on the Mark 5 yet? If not, you will be shocked by the results of many top shelf optics and their repeated failures to hold zero, even just riding in the truck. Mark 5 being up there on the list for constant issues.
Cmon man!Here's how big a grain of salt I take with internet scope evaluations:
Scope Problems?: Never heard of her ...
this isnt your average internet scope evals. These are from a scope killin professional. Do yourself a favor and look them over. Dont think you will find any better evals out there. Eye opening for sure.The review shows that the Mark 5 cant even hold a zero riding around in a truck. Is that abusive in your opinion? Surprised you would choose the Mark 5 out of all mentioned, even after it is clear that scope had some of the worst results of any. You seem like a guy I know that was on an SF team in the Army for 12 years. They used Leupold on his teams precision rifles. No matter what you tell him, or show him, nothing will beat Leupold since he went to war with it. But, he also still uses peep tubing on his bow.
If you think Wyoming mule deer numbers are doing good after last winter you have pretty low standards
Where in Wyoming are you talking about? You clearly don’t spend any time in the field where I hunted and scouted in Wyoming last September or you’d be laughing at yourself instead of me.If you think Wyoming mule deer numbers are doing good after last winter you have pretty low standards
Apologies if I’ve already asked you, but would you send one in for testing?
No you don’t.
What's just as funny are the guys that claim your scope doesn't work, in spite of it actually working. Cracks me up.
You’re correct, I didn’t spend any time with you in the field. But anyone with any sense of herd quality knows the western half of Wyoming was absolutely decimated from last winter. Your original comment was generic that Wyoming mule deer numbers are doing well. As a whole, that is far from the truth. I guess I’m more of a big picture kind of guy, rather than base an opinion on an isolated area/person. My comment on herd health is based on factual conversations with a Wyoming biologist and multiple hunters from different areas of the state, as well as personal experience.
I don't recall you being with me, ever. I've culled and killed more big game animals than you will in 10 lifetimes. No, it's not "thousands, plural", but several hundred. Guess again though mxg, you're doing good.
