Originally Posted by
Muskett
Optimas are very period, but often do need reparallaxing. They did change a bit over the years. I have a few and at best think they are pretty average performance wise.
Kasnar scopes are over rated IMHO. Had the big 56 in the day and what a disappointment. The reticules break too easily too.
I still think Tasco made some of the best early scopes. If without PA then they can be reparallaxed. Nikko a mixed bag and so many out there to wade through finding a good one.
A true branded Hakko should be terrific.
Some B&L are very good. Some Weaver and Bushnell not bad. Leupold did some of the best, though always expensive.
Interestingly I never found the big objectives from the less expensive brands actually worked at getting any better a picture or grabbing light. Build quality let the whole side down and the glass. The Tasco 50s were horrid. 56's a brick and I have nothing good to say about any of them from all the branded cheaper scopes. Better to get a smaller objective with better glass, design, and coatings.
Most BDCs weren't repeatable enough to rely on. Turret build quality wasn't ever very good; so zero and leave alone was best.
I've had some fun over the years finding out not many scopes meet their hype.