Recomendations on Pentax glass

[monschman]

Well i hope to be scope shopping soon for a new cervidae population control/burger maker device. i have seen a few adverts for pentax who i know to make good glass for the camera and medical imaging world, how does this transfer to their scopes. if you have experience with them, let me know.
I am primarily looking for nothing more than mn purposes so no need for too extravagant. I like zeiss glass, it works for me, i do not like ; leupold, bushnell. ideally i would like to find one of the redfield wideview scopes, the were nice, but they command a huge premium now and i do have issues with buying used glass.
Pentax offer what seems to be reasonable prices, well built, and a no fault lifetime guarantee (just like loopys) so it seems to be good bang for the buck. i am open to all offers of coherently thought out replies, as to why i dont like the above mentioned brands, i dont and that is that, no amount of convincing and persuading will make me believe otherwise.

[JoeH]

Buy a Glock

[Stradawhovious]

Buy a Glock

I hear they are prone to stovepiping.

[justaguy]

Buy a Glock

+1

[selurcspi]

You guys are Cold Blooded.

[mmcnx2]

Look at a Sightron, I put one on my varmint rifle and it is every bit as good as my Leupold. They make great glass the the price is very attractive.

[Holland&Holland]

I have to reccomend Nikon. I think they have the best value out there. Quality optics at a reasonable price. Their Buckmasters series is very nice to the pocket book and if you want to step it up a bit the Monarch line is just great. I have 3 of their scopes presently in use, one for 5 seasons now and have been very impressed with every thing about them. They seem to hold up and hold zero, clear and crisp, fit well on my rifles and to my eyes.

[Stradawhovious]

Hey Munchie, you've looked through my nikon before...... If you can't remember, well then, I guess another range trip is in order. I would recommend the Nikon.

[usnret]

Check out a Swift.

[EJSG19]

0 for 8 so far Monschman! I'll add another post, and hopefully the worthlessness of mine will top the rest. (No offense intended, I value most if not all of everyone's input, but its 12:30am, and there it is.)

I have less than no clue about Pentax glass. In fact, your post is the first time I've heard of it.

I've thought about putting my $40 BSA 3-9 on my lever gun. That make you feel better? You almost can't possibly do any worse than that. Its that or a 6-24, and I'm not buying another scope, so there you have it.

I hear Carlos Hathcock made 2500 yard shots using an 8x Unertl mounted on an M2. Why don't you do that? Might want to hold pretty low on a 100 yard shot with that 2500 yard zero, but once you figure out the hold you'd be all set.

Simple. Why all the fuss?

[monschman]

I have been lookingh at some of the Nikon lineup, realisticly, anything in the monarch line is too expensive, and in my opinion they are only so so, there is much better out there for a less money. I do like the swifts, but i cannot find anyone local that sells their line and i would like to try before i buy.

[Pat]

Here's the thing about glass. There is good glass, and absolutely fricking amazing glass, and some crap well below both. I am very partial to the Swarovski brand, and here is a very recent example of why.

Last weekend I was poking around the Swarovski website, looking at the specifications of a particular scope I was interested in. I was hesitant about a couple of points, and sent a message through their online "contact" system. My question was fairly specific on the technical side, and I imagined that some dude at one one their US distributors would perhaps be saddled with my inquiry. I really only expected at most a somewhat delayed innocuous email response.

On Monday morning of this past week I received a call from Vienna, Austria, from the CEO of Swarovski personally. I was nonplussed. This guy knew his product line, up, down and sideways. Just wow!

I have a longer association with the Swarovski brand, having bought my Mom a Swarovski crystal swan on my first trip to Vienna in 1981, which I mentioned in a conversation at some depth with the CEO.

A good friend who is also a member on the forum, looked through my relatively small Swarovski binoculars and could only say, "Holy crap!" They are the only optics producer I know who publish the percent transmittance of there products. Let's just say that they begin at 90% and then get better.

If my good friend should like to drop in here, he is most welcome.

[Pinnacle]

If you have the means - buy Swarovski - simply amazing glass.

Way better than a Leupold - but also about the same price point.

I was impressed by Pats binos and some of the scopes that I have looked through in the past.

Pentax makes great stuff also at a much lower cost.

[monschman]

Pat if i could i probably would look at topping it with a swarovski, actually if i could afford it, i would put a zeiss victory diavari on it, its my personal all time all around favourite sope bar none. i agree that swarovski does indeed make effen amazing optics but the zeiss was what i first found to be perfect for me so it does edge the swarovski out slightly because of that and also the zeiss kicks everyones ass in eye relief (i need about four and a half to five inches). Everything i have seen of the pentax line seems that they are high quality well built with most of the features of other scopes costing much more. I do have a pentax SLR camera and the difference between their lenses and everyone elses ( with a couple of exceptions of course) is simply astounding, they are so bright it still makes me think that other manufacturers are missing something. Now i have also read some very negative stuff, but if you look there is negative stuff out there for every brand and scopes being a personal thing this will always happen. I basically don't want to spend $2/300 on a scope that i will find out in the future to be a well known dud, and all because i didn't ask first.

[Rogelk]

Maybe I missed it but I don't see the power you want. Fixed? Variable? Obj. Diam.?