Rifle Scopes New tech vs. not so new tech?

[DPRoberts]

There's been a pile of great scopes released recently with great features like FFP, Mil/Mil, nifty reticules, etc (weaver tac, bushnell tac, vortex PST, etc). With the surge of new tech, earlier generation but slightly higher tier scopes have been plummeting in price. <span style="font-weight: bold">My question is where is the best bang for your buck right now?</span>

6-800$ can get you a Weaver Tactical or a vortex PST but could also net you a used Mark 4.

12-1500 could get you a SWFA HD 5-25 or a used Nightforce.

The older scopes might lack features but I wonder if being higher tier they might make up for it in other ways (build quality, durability, repeatability). If you can live without matched reticules and FFP are they a better buy?

Interested in your thoughts.

 

[Longshot38]

Re: New tech vs. not so new tech?

Every shooter has or will develop their own taste in optics. But you will generally find two trains of thought on this. The first being from the perspective of the BR/F-class/Known Distance crowd who aren't happy with a 1/2 moa group. And that is largely that FFP mil/mil optics are useful but over hyped. The other perspective is from the tactical/practical crowd who are generally happy with sub-moa preformance. This is the crowd that loves FFP mil/mil optics and will be exceedingly happy with such optics.

If you ask me I see no need for anything other then a FFP mil/mil optic but I don't compete in BR type comps either. Thus my answer to your question is no they are not a better buy and I would spend the extra cash and get the optic that fits my needs best.