PSA on Leica ER5

[Saltydog235]

Got an email from EuroOptic today on Leica ER5 closeout specials. Priced from $499 to $649 depending on magnification and reticle.

https://www.eurooptic.com/Leica-ER5-...ular-Sale.aspx

[nitro5x6's]

Damn.... that 3-15 x56 4A is making me twitchy....

Never looked through one of their scopes, but Leica Binos are top shelf quality..

[britton40]

Thanks mark. I bought a 2-10x50 4a

[Saltydog235]

I bought a 3-15X56 4A just for the hell of it.

[Saltydog235]

Damn.... that 3-15 x56 4A is making me twitchy....

Never looked through one of their scopes, but Leica Binos are top shelf quality..

A couple of those optics gurus on Opticstalk give anything Leica serious props.

[WoodieSC]

A couple of those optics gurus on Opticstalk give anything Leica serious props.

Question... I was just looking through the specs as I'm interested in upgrading. I just noted that the description on a few of them say "Light Transmission - 90%". How can that be right? Does that makes sense?

https://www.eurooptic.com/51054-Leic...c-reticle.aspx

[Saltydog235]

Because they publish actual light transmission, not some skewed cooked up numbers like Nikon and others do.

[WoodieSC]

Because they publish actual light transmission, not some skewed cooked up numbers like Nikon and others do.

So all those that claim 92-95% are cooking their numbers? What's your estimate of what those numbers really should be?

My best references are a Swarovski Habicht A 2.5-10x42, a Bushnell Elite 4200 3-10x40, and a Nikon Monarch 2-8x32, with the Swaro obviously being the best, but it doesn't surpass the Elite 4200 by much.

Thanks.

[Saltydog235]

So all those that claim 92-95% are cooking their numbers? What's your estimate of what those numbers really should be?

My best references are a Swarovski Habicht A 2.5-10x42, a Bushnell Elite 4200 3-10x40, and a Nikon Monarch 2-8x32, with the Swaro obviously being the best, but it doesn't surpass the Elite 4200 by much.

Thanks.

The guy that goes by Koskin on OT and does the Opticthoughts blog/review had an article on how some companies come up with their LT numbers, FOV, relief, and a few other performance numbers. Most of it was more technical than I could care to understand. However, the gist was that the published LT numbers weren't always indicative of the capabilities or brightness of a scope.

Nikon will tell you their Prostaff has 98% LT but, would you rather have it when the light fades or a Swarovski, Ziess, S&B, Leica, Kahles etc. and the big boy pops out.

I've never had a Leica, only heard good things on their scopes and have looked through their Geovid binos. I bought this one to top my Ruger No.1 and see if I like it.

[britton40]

Numbers are like whores, you can do pretty much anything with them...

[Strick9]

Salty nailed it Leica doesn't spoof. If I needed one I wouldn't be beyond trying that 56. Let us know how it shakes out Salty.

[WoodieSC]

Interesting. Thanks for the heads up, Salty. I've wondered about those claims before, but never really went by them except maybe within a brand.

I'd like to try a Leica, but don't really like those choices or the sizes/weights of them.

[Strick9]

Woodie, the weight is 25.5 for the 56mm I am betting its hard to beat. I run Kahles for my short range rigs and I can just about bet ya that this will run right with them and for about half the cost. If I needed one I would be grabbing .. just saying.

[WoodieSC]

Woodie, the weight is 25.5 for the 56mm I am betting its hard to beat. I run Kahles for my short range rigs and I can just about bet ya that this will run right with them and for about half the cost. If I needed one I would be grabbing .. just saying.

Strick, no question the prices are great, but for a Model 7 rifle the scope sizes are huge. I definitely don't want anything over 50mm as I've never been convinced that the 30mm tube and a 56mm objective made that much difference, if any. I know some of you guys love 'em, but I'd need to do a side by side at dusk comparison at my shooting lane out back where I can see out to 500 yds to see it.

As reference, my Swaro weighs about 13 oz and is about 12 1/2", so there's a big difference to adjust to.

[Coastal Woodie]

Just ordered a 2-10x50 with the 4a reticle. Should be perfect for one of my .243s.

[duckchoppin]

3x15x56 for me. Thanks salty

[BigBrother]

Numbers are like whores, you can do pretty much anything with them...

Thank you. I believe I will be using this one in the future.

[CurLee]

Thanks salty. I was gonna order a vortex this evening. Went with the 2-10 w the 4a.

[WoodieSC]

Do you guys prefer the Plex, the 4A, or the Ballistic reticle?

I've always had the Plex, except in the Strike Eagle scopes. I'm thinking about the 2-10x50 with the Std Ballistic, but not sure if it's an advantage out to potentially 500 yds or not. All of my shots have been under 250, but have passed on a nice buck or three over the years out at a tree line at 500 and am thinking about extending my practice shooting to be ready for one next time. Yay, or dumb thought?

[Saltydog235]

Since it's a hunting optic and we don't have many shots here over 250, I got the 4A. I just shoot a #4 or its variations better in hunting situations than others.