I completely "see" why glass quality is top concern for spotting optics, zero argument here. But with aiming devices is it that important? I honestly can not really say that the glass difference between say SWFA, Leupold, Nightforce SHV, Swaro or Maven is enough to even be a factor. I
Look thru them 15-30-45 minutes after sundown and see what you see. Should clear things up real quick.
Better glass shows details, color, depth of field, and will show animals in the shadows when other scopes have quit for the day.
Vx-3 was the standard for deer hunting scope back in the day. Still have banner scope on a rifle.
Bought an Alpha scope this year cause it’s time to quit screwing around. Getting too old to brush off loss of opportunity cause scope on gun aint working and it is legal time.
Edited a little. What does he want out of the "glass" if not for details, color, contrast, depth of field, and low light. Test the hardest or most desired variable first and work back to the least.
Used to be a SWFA forum, back when SWFA sold scopes. Those guys (from the industry - not "influencers") would split hairs about all aspects of scopes. Was informative. Shame they went out of business or whatever.
These days all we get is opinions. No place to go see what scope your eyes like. No place to see if the scope will show you crisp target lines and bullet holes or the details of a bucks rack or help you find a hole to thread a bullet to an animal in thicker woods. Sucks pretty much. So you ask questions and read reviews - most reviews are crap, the trick is finding the reviews that apply to what you want to know. In order to do that you need to define your wants.
The scope game has changed - dialing is big, so are high magnification ratios. Glass takes a back seat to those. Thus, aside from maybe better coatings, significant glass improvements seem to be on hold while they pursue the other aspects of scopes.