Rifle Scopes Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

A

acidone

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 24, 2010
243
0
46
Chicago, Il
#1
I'm looking at getting a really good spotting scope :) I can get 5% above dealer cost on leupold scopes and was wondering if any had any experience with them? I'm also wondering if there are better cheaper options! I don't need a reticle for tactical use, although it would be pretty cool :) Please help!!!

John
 
#3
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually the reticle is great when you are spotting, especially if you start to reach out there. </div></div>

How exactly does the reticle help?
 
#5
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I have one for 5 or 6 years now it's great for hard field use spotting for working as team its robust it can stand abuse and the reticle is very usefull but once at the shooting range it's not eassy to see hits on target from 300 meter away for that I use a zeiss
 
#6
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

Outstanding optic.
There is a reason that has become the standard spotting scope for the .mil

The only one I would rather have is the Hendsoldt.
But with a $5k price tag the Mark 4 will have to do.

The TMR reticle or the P4 are good options if you are using the scope as a spotting scope. (Calling shots, range estimation, etc.)
If it is only for observation than the HD version without a reticle might be a better option for you.
 
#7
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

Whatever you get, go with one that has a reticle. I have a Nikon Tactical spotter that I bought several years back and it's a wonderful scope, but the lack of a reticle cripples it for tactical shooting and matches when you are trying to call corrections for someone else. If you have no intention of using the scope for that purpose and don't see one in the future (e.g. benchrest shooting or shooting alone all the time) no reticle would be needed. However, if you're serious about the type of shooting that is discussed here, get the reticle. The Leupold spotter is very good - you can't go wrong there. There are a few others that have reticles as well, but I don't have any expereince with them (e.g. USO, Vortex makes a small one...).
 
#8
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

My tactical spotting scope is great out to 350yds, maybe 400 on a great day, beyond that you need something $$$$ to see impacts. Not a bad piece of glass at retail, but it would be great at cost + 5. Mine has the TMR reticle, glad I have it.
 
#9
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I have used about 5 different mk4's extensively. It is very rugged with the case protecting it. I have dropped them and they have held up just fine. The glass is clear and bright. The best thing about it is the ability to range targets at a much higher magnification.
 
#10
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

Thanks for all the good info guys! It seems like I have to consider getting their 60x to get some extra range out it :) I think I'll go with the reticle too. Never know what you'll use something like this for.

John
 
#11
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?


What they should do is offer the HD version with a reticle , that would be a very good option .

The std glass has been rated by a lot a so so , ie not great .

Seems stupid they are not available with HD glass .

Later Chris
 
#12
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

Leupold spotting scopes aren't bad at all but a little expensive (I don't think they have a 60x version either, just 15-45). If you're just looking for a regular spotting scope I would check out something mid-priced and Japanese like Kowa.
 
#15
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I have a GR 12-40x60. It was sent back to Leupold by the previous owner and had a TMR reticle added. I really like it as an overall package (size / weight / reticle / decent glass). I had a Kowa 664 before that which had way better glass. I wanted the reticle so I sold the Kowa and bought the Leupold, but if you don't care about the reticle... I would buy a Kowa. I am happy with my Leupold though. The glass is sufficient, but man that Kowa was sharp.
 
#16
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I recenly picked up a new MK4 with the smaller Horus ret. It replaced an old MK 4 Spotter with TMR. The glass is better on new one. Its as good as anyone could need. The smaller Horus is finally the right size. Sorry forgot the number Horus but it is the smaller of he two current ones

Very happy with it
 
#17
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I have the Leupold HD better glass and a slight bit cheaper but not reticle. I think you can have them add it if you want through the pro shop. For the $$$ it top notch next level is Lieca at mega $$$$
 
#18
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

got off the phone with leupold a few days ago. what they had to say was pretty interesting.
first off, they are working on being able to put a reticle in the gold ring hd's. they told me they are just waiting on the reticles to come in.
also, the reason they dont have the mark 4 scopes with HD glass is that the HD coating seems to interfere with IR capabilities. Since the Army has contracted the mark 4 as its primary spotting scope now, they went without the HD coating for this reason.
however, for those of you waiting to get a Horus reticle, or any other reticle in a gold ring HD, it should be comming very soon. However, I wasnt able to get a date on when they should be doing that for the gold ring HD's.
 
#19
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dcshoo11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">got off the phone with leupold a few days ago. what they had to say was pretty interesting.
first off, they are working on being able to put a reticle in the gold ring hd's. they told me they are just waiting on the reticles to come in.
also, the reason they dont have the mark 4 scopes with HD glass is that the HD coating seems to interfere with IR capabilities. Since the Army has contracted the mark 4 as its primary spotting scope now, they went without the HD coating for this reason.
however, for those of you waiting to get a Horus reticle, or any other reticle in a gold ring HD, it should be comming very soon. However, I wasnt able to get a date on when they should be doing that for the gold ring HD's.
</div></div>
Thats good to hear, I have an HD version, and would like to have a reticle put in it, so it will be more usefull for calling corrections for a shooter.
SScott
 
#20
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I don't have the HD version and originally mine did not have a reticle. I sent mine in to add the TMR reticle. It took them 2 weeks and works great. Leupold Did a great job.
 
#21
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I have the P4 reticle MK4 Spotter, and it has the heavy stadia lines @ 9, 12, and 3 O'Clock.
But the reticle is extended down to the limit of the FOV.

LEUPOLD-Mark-4-12-40x60-Spotting-Scope-P4-Reticle-Matte-Black-65145-Pic2.jpg
 
#22
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

I put a web camera in the eye-cup of my mark-4 spotting scope and it takes great video. Everyone can spot at the same time, and instant replay is awesome. I would like to have the reticle changed to the Horus. Does anyone know what the price range for the reticle change is?
 
#23
Re: Leupold mark 4 spotting scopes. Good/bad?

Update for anyone that is interested; Leupold wants $800.00 to change to a Horus reticle. They said Horus charges them a lot to use it, and they can't do it for a few months because of government contracts...
 
#25
ChrisF said:
What they should do is offer the HD version with a reticle , that would be a very good option .

The std glass has been rated by a lot a so so , ie not great .

Seems stupid they are not available with HD glass .

Later Chris
Click to expand...

I recently asked them about this and they said that they'd tried it but found that the HD glass coatings interfered with the ability to use the scope with night vision equipment and thus for their tactical models they will remain non HD until they find another method of improving them.

~Brett
 
#26
PLeighton said:
Outstanding optic.
There is a reason that has become the standard spotting scope for the .mil

The only one I would rather have is the Hendsoldt.
But with a $5k price tag the Mark 4 will have to do.

The TMR reticle or the P4 are good options if you are using the scope as a spotting scope. (Calling shots, range estimation, etc.)
If it is only for observation than the HD version without a reticle might be a better option for you.
Click to expand...

Great scope, very clear and well worth the money IMO
BTW Phil makes a "killer" cover for it!!!
Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Leupold spotting scope
Replies
11
Views
351
LR1845
L
M
Spotting Scope with or without reticle
Replies
13
Views
541
Varmint-Hunter
V
F
Spotters Leupold Mark 4 Spotting Scope
Replies
0
Views
199
farwest
F
F
Leupold Mark 4 HD 6-24 vs Mark 4 HD Magnification Range Sweet Spot
Replies
0
Views
158
fvotava
F
C
  • Poll
Leupold Mark 4 vs Vortex LHT
Replies
19
Views
2K
Chukwithak
C
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts