Thread: Picking an entry level ~600m scope

Hey folks – I’m in the market for an entry level mid distance scope (600m max). If you don't feel like reading, the short question is: What fits this list of criteria?

1) FFP preferred
2) Variable Magnification
a. Min magnification 3-6x
b. Max magnification 14-20+
3) Objective 40-50mm
4) Price???? I don’t know if that’s realistic entering this field I would love to spend under $700, but I have no idea if that's realistic
5) New or used

Optional:
6) Covered or lockable turrets; a lot of my hunting involves pushing through thick bush at some point
7) Parallax adjustment; not strictly necessary, but a nice to have



If you feel like reading, the background to my question is:

Until now I’ve mainly used iron sights, diopter, or lower magnification (1-10x) old scopes and shot to 300 yards max, however a move in location means that I not only am able to shoot out further, but am routinely encountering cross valley and cross slope shots in steep terrain where sight lines start at 100 yards and very easily extend to 300-400 and no easy method of stalking through the open to close the range. I’ve been reading about a number of brands and scopes but practically don’t have much experience with any of them, so am hoping to mine the collective input on options, and pros/cons.
My main aim is a simple, no frills, reliable, solid good quality scope. I’d rather less features and more reliability/better glass.


Leupold seem great and have good history and track record, but it seems there’s a certain premium attached to the name that might no longer be unique in the optics world. I’m wondering if other companies competing for the same niche make similar quality scopes but don’t demand the same premiums?
Pros- established, good quality, good warranty
Cons- high price tag; possibly end up with a knockoff by accident


Nikon seem to have a good line of scopes. Seems those that use them really like them and they’re a well-established optics company. Haven’t heard a ton about them, possibly because they don’t advertise as much? I’m having a hard time figuring out the differences in generations (IE 3, 5, 7 etc)
- Specifically considering the Prostaff or Monarch lines
Pros – Prostaff seems like a good entry line, Monarch seems to have a dedicated following
Cons – they never seem to really stand out in any particular field. Their reticle styles leave a lot to be desired. Unknown warranty?


Vortex have a lot of marketing, but seem to fall down in terms of quality. On paper they seem to offer a competitive product in terms of price and content, but really mixed reviews in terms of actual use.
- Specifically considering something in the Viper range. I don't think I'm prepared to spend into the Razor range.
Pros – great warranty, affordable with features I want
Cons – very mixed reviews in terms of quality, poorer glass. Stepping up to the Vipers and Razors means I may as well buy Leupold or Nikon


Bushnell, specifically their engage line, seems to have made headway in terms of a good entry level optic that ticks the boxes and also apparently is reasonably good quality.
- Specifically the Bushnell Engage FFP models
Pros – Great warranty, apparently reliable and meet requirements
Cons – Beginning to edge into price brackets occupied by Leupold and Nikon