Jan 16, 2016 4 min read

John Dino and I were punching little holes in paper at the bench rest range when I thought I’d heckle him a bit and ask him a question. His equipment was top of the line and consisted of a heavy-barreled Remington chambered for the Swift, but it was the scope he was using that was the center of my commentary.

“Hey John, can you see the .22-sized holes on your target?” I questioned.

“Of course,” he answered as he looked through the Leopold 24-powered scope.

His outfit was close to being as good as it gets, but I told him I could see the rough edges around the bullet holes with my 15-power Unertl Ultra Varmint Scope.

“Let me see,” he retorted, as he came over to where I was sitting.

“You’re right,” he mumbled. “You can see the tiny rough edges where the bullet had passed through the target.”

There was little doubt that the Unertl was the sharper. No, I don’t mean to hint that scope technology has stood still since this Pittsburgh-based company went under, and had to admit the clarity of their optics was all but unparalleled.

There are reasons for the sharpness of images seen by the Unertl. First, the scope is large. This is no secret in the world of optics. It is easier to build a quality instrument of a large size than it is to shrink the same quality into a manageable size.

Since it would be awkward to carry a set of binoculars the size of a watermelon, there is some compromise just to keep them small. We have made tremendous gains in the quality of the optics we use every day we hunt and do it keeping the size reasonable.

While clarity of the image is important, it is foolish to judge a scope sight by this criteria alone. It is rare to see a fogged scope today, but fogging does occur. A clear scope that fogs is a hunt destroyer.

That is a major attribute of Leupold scopes – they just don’t fog, even under the worst conditions. No matter the conditions, look through one and it is still clear. You can’t say that about many other makes. If I were going to Alaska to hunt I would prefer a Leupold over the others.

The trip is expensive, why take a chance?

Another important feature falls under the guise of dependent adjustment. There is little more frustrating than sighting in a scope with unreliable adjustments.

It also is a waste of ammo, which means a waste of money. I have shot a group at the range and decided to refine the point of impact. Needing ¼-inch of horizontal movement, I turned the adjustment knob two clicks. Since the adjustments were advertised as ¼ minute that should do it.

A couple more shots proved how wrong I was. The bullets were now hitting a full inch to the left.

Those two clicks had moved the point of impact not ½ inch, but 1½ inches.

I knew this was not going to be an easy sight in. That scope, although high in quality, had an unreliable adjustment. After a box of ammo sent downrange, I accidentally got it hitting where I wanted.

Once sighted in, the problem of inaccurate adjustments is not that bad a problem if – and this is a big if – the rifle scope holds zero.

Another thing to watch out for is a scope that changes point of impact as the power ring is turned.

Always remember that the outfit is sighted in at high power and then used in the woods at low power.

Have you shot it on paper at both powers?

Whatever your experience in optics, remember there is more to it than clarity when judging them.

Clarity is important, but so is reliability. A clear scope that fails mechanically is worthless. But, remember drastic temperature changes are hard on the scope and never get oil on a lens. It is all but impossible to remove.

George H. Block writes a Sunday Outdoors column for the Observer-Reporter.