Gonna make the plunge and break down and buy a spotter. I either want a 12-40x60 or the new 20-60x80 mark 4!!! What is the better choice of the two? I shoot long range target shooting, I am starting to get into comp shooting and I do a lot of hunting.
- Thread starter Rowdyryno
- Start date
My vote is for the 12-40. It's a good compact scope, has a good FOV, and will serve you well for hunting and the precision rifle game.
AS
AS
The eye piece is really the deciding factor. I have the "Wind River" version of the Luepold, thinking it would really be a good buy. Truth is the eye piece is no better than my old Tasco. Get the one with the larger eye piece for quicker acquisition while on the firing line.
40xs I think both have the same eye piece the only difference is the larger 80mm objective and the increase in magnification
I think the Leupold glass really limits resolution in the upper mag range so going with the 20-60 would be kind of shooting yourself in the foot. Combine that with the fact I can't count the number of times I wish I had less than 12x to aid in finding targets under time constraints. If all you are doing is shooting on a range, a mk 4 or any leupold in that range is a not the best idea. For range use I prefer taking a Zeiss 65t or Vortex Razor HD or anything up in that level of glass. All of these are in the same price range fyi.
Vortex and Leupold MK4 are on par with each other re glass quality IMHO. Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski are on a different and higher level with a price tag to match. The MK4 is a very good and rugged "field scope" which is what the OP seems to be looking for. If you go to any comp where spotting scopes are used, the MK4 12-40x will be the predominant scope used.
