Rifle Scopes Leupold Mk5 Lineup Pics

[Pusher591]

Looks like Optics Planet has released/posted pics of the new Mk5 lineup.

https://shop.opticsplanet.com/leupol...RoCFY8QAvD_BwE


https://shop.opticsplanet.com/leupol...BoC6_cQAvD_BwE


Another swing and a miss for Leupold (aesthetically speaking) but not really surprised. Looks like they just blended the Mk6 line with the VX line adding 1mm to main tube.

Price is decent, even with illumination. Makes you wonder why the Mk6 MSRP is still $4k with a TMR reticle. Can anyone say mark up for military contracts? Just annoyed because it seems like Leupold is never gonna listen.

 

[EDDK9]

Leupold needs to be clear of wheat the heck the difference is between their scopes? What makes this one so special or different, besides 1mm on the tube? I agree, another swing and a miss.... besides the pricing between the Mark 6 & 8 lines.

 

[308pirate]

Another swing and a miss for Leupold (aesthetically speaking) but not really surprised. Looks like they just blended the Mk6 line with the VX line adding 1mm to main tube

Are you serious? Who the hell cares how it looks? It looks like a rifle scope.

 

[Pusher591]

Are you serious? Who the hell cares how it looks? It looks like a rifle scope.

Because just like pussy, it all feels the same but it’s sure heck of a lot better if they are hot.

Just as with anything else, looks matter. Lines and curves and proportion are all a part of how and why things sell as well as their function. My point was they had the opportunity (again) to stand out with a new line and they chose to basically blend the looks of two existing lines.

 

[bp7178]

Man, that Mark 5 3.6-18x44 M5C3 illuminated TMR hits all the right check marks. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out. Its nice to see they didn't hit the crazy illumination premium of the Mark 6 line. [h=1][/h]

 

[TheGerman]

LOL

In the price range those are in, and even in the range they will fall into, I don't see them offering anything that isn't already out there.

 

[Mike Casselton]

Local store called shoot straight had a mk6 with a price tag of over 6k.
I kept looking for the giant gold nugget hiding in the box. Wasn't there.

 

[TheOE800]

Local store called shoot straight had a mk6 with a price tag of over 6k.
I kept looking for the giant gold nugget hiding in the box. Wasn't there.

A 5oz nugget of gold isn't all that big at all.

 

[GhostFace]

Nothing in MOA, not interested and Im not sure at those prices I would even look at Leupold. I think that I would buy a proven product like a Gen 2 Razor.

 

[Pusher591]

Nothing in MOA, not interested and Im not sure at those prices I would even look at Leupold. I think that I would buy a proven product like a Gen 2 Razor.

Thats what I’m saying, it’s like no one from Leupold even looks outside their bubble and they are just coming up with all these “new” ideas in meetings like they don’t already exist.

The Gen II Razor, AMG, NF and even S&B are selling scopes at or below Leupolds prices for their 5-25’s and they all have options and glass that are far superior.

The only thing the 3-18 really has going for it is length/weight but reticle options are way more important. I mean, this doesn’t surprise me but it just boggles my mind who at Leupold is calling the shots.

 

[supercorndogs]

Lol. 2k.

 

[osu92]

I'd maybe wait on jumping to too many conclusions about what a complete piece of shit this thing is until you actually use one. I love the internet overreaction based on very little substance. I got to use one last week. I like it. I imagine others will as well.

 

[Clearlight]

Looks like it got hit with the ugly stick again . At least no 3 story
elevation turret this time .....

 

[EDDK9]

Osu92,

Since you have first hand experience with the Mark5, tell us how it differs from the Mark6 or even Mark8? Unsure which scope you used? Was it the new Mark5 18x or 25x? Let us know how it was, thanks!

-K9

 

[SRPowah]

If it weren't for the fact that I would have to switch rings, I would give the 3-18 a shot as I like compact scopes. 35mm though is just stupid when 34mm works just fine in the few situations that 30mm doesn't work.

 

[EDDK9]

^Yep. Now add the cost of a new quality 35mm mount and the price isn’t that great.

 

[Pusher591]

I'd maybe wait on jumping to too many conclusions about what a complete piece of shit this thing is until you actually use one. I love the internet overreaction based on very little substance. I got to use one last week. I like it. I imagine others will as well.

I’m not saying it’s a piece of shit. I have several Mk6’s and love them for what they are but they haven’t been without their issues and lack of options. Options that people have been wanting for years and at a price that’s competitive. my point is they had a really good opportunity to get back in this game and pulled a Ray Finkle.

Lets compare. They are obviously keeping the MK6/MK8 line around or they would have been discountinued. This line can’t be as good or better then a current line that they also sell at twice the price.

Lets assume its just as good for a minute. Even if it’s just as good as the MK6/MK8 line at the price point they are releasing them at there are far better options for the money.

I just can’t for the life of me see what these scope offers at its price point. Options and reticles aren’t anything that stand out and no way the glass is nice or nicer then the current MK6/MK8 line which isn’t that great for the price they sell them for either (4k-6k msrp)(3k-4k retail)(2k+ but without illumination)

I am just a dumb cop BUT seems like they could have lowered the MSRP on the MK6/MK8 line until possibly phasing them out and introduce the MK6/MK8 Gen 2’s that are competitively priced and have options that the people and customer base have been requesting for years. That’ is exactly what’ Vortex did and look how outrageously successful it was. But what do they know.

 

[Pointman308]

I personally like the way Leupolds look and I’m not sure what features they are missing, but the guy who prices them must be Dr. Evil.

 

[Lexington]

Looks like Optics Planet has released/posted pics of the new Mk5 lineup.
Can anyone say mark up for military contracts?

The government gets the cheapest price. They demand that they buy at no higher than the lowest price the vendor is selling to anyone else (and usually want it lower because 8 points margin is overly generous in their minds). The government thinks they are your best customer.


And I would really like an illuminated TMR.

 

[BCP]

I like the features but I just don't see 2k value there.

 

[wareagle700]

They are priced about $1000 too high across the board to bear the Leupold name.

 

[Pusher591]

The government gets the cheapest price. They demand that they buy at no higher than the lowest price the vendor is selling to anyone else (and usually want it lower because 8 points margin is overly generous in their minds). The government thinks they are your best customer.


And I would really like an illuminated TMR.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if they sell at no higher then the lowest vendor it means they are marking up the MSRP so even by the time they hit retail price they are still priced too high for what they are which means they are marking the msrp up just keep retail/contract prices up.

 

[-Time-]

At this point it hurts to see Leupold get so close, and still be so far away.

That magnification ring is really ugly. The turrets could look better, but they’re not bad.

the lack of modern reticles is dumb. Reticles are probably one of the main reasons vortex does as well as they do.

3-18 is my favorite magnification range, and if the turrets tracker right, and the glass was great, I could see the price range, but Leupold doesn’t necessarily have that reputation, so if they wanted to sell scopes at that price point, they really need to blow people away with the look and feel, and they’ve already failed at the first IMO.

im still going to keep my eye on these, and I’ll reserve judgement until I can play with them at SHOT, but initial impressions aren’t looking favorable.

 

[Pusher591]

at this point it hurts to see leupold get so close, and still be so far away.

That magnification ring is really ugly. The turrets could look better, but they’re not bad.

The lack of modern reticles is dumb. Reticles are probably one of the main reasons vortex does as well as they do.

3-18 is my favorite magnification range, and if the turrets tracker right, and the glass was great, i could see the price range, but leupold doesn’t necessarily have that reputation, so if they wanted to sell scopes at that price point, they really need to blow people away with the look and feel, and they’ve already failed at the first imo.

Im still going to keep my eye on these, and i’ll reserve judgement until i can play with them at shot, but initial impressions aren’t looking favorable.

exactly!!!!!

 

[lawofsavage]

I think these look nice just don’t know how great of a value it is but you really have to sell a lot more to make up for coming in at a lower price.

 

[Pointman308]

This website has made criticizing Leupold a fad. The scopes haven’t even made it to anyone’s hands yet and here comes the torches and pitchforks already! It’s so hilarious to watch.

 

[softcock]

I got no doubts the glass will be nice with good focal clarity, and the I like the way the 3.6 -18 looks and size of it .

but..The 35mm is back ? like others were saying . why bring back the 35mm ? . Unless Leu. is adding more structural strength and thicker tube body wall ? larger internal lens's ?
I got rid of my 35mm rings because I saw they were basically getting phased out . and all for the better because 34mm was headed for industry standard size .

 

[TheGerman]

The government gets the cheapest price. They demand that they buy at no higher than the lowest price the vendor is selling to anyone else (and usually want it lower because 8 points margin is overly generous in their minds). The government thinks they are your best customer.


And I would really like an illuminated TMR.

The gov pricing is how you got the insane MSRP on the Mk4 going back some time, the Mk6 and Mk8. The street price is VASTLY different which just shows what a joke MSRP/gov pricing really is.

With the Mk5 line, I don't think the gov is interested/looking at these because the MSRP isn't 4k. Instead, this is the MSRP they think vendors should sell these at which immediately leads me to ask - what on earth do these have over all of the 2k range optics out there right now? Other than being 5 years late, I don't see anything.

 

[jlficken]

I actually like it overall and would love a MK6 if the prices weren't so insane.

I also don't understand why illumination is so hard for them both at all in some cases (like the CCH) and at a reasonable price in the case of the MK6 line.

If they CCH was available illuminated in the MK5 like for the price of my Gen II Razor the Vortex would be gone as it is a boat anchor.

 

[Pusher591]

This website has made criticizing Leupold a fad. The scopes haven’t even made it to anyone’s hands yet and here comes the torches and pitchforks already! It’s so hilarious to watch.

Given Leupold reputation and how they knowingly operate in the past, yes these conclusions are all but fair.

No one said it’s going to be a bad scope. Neither I or anyone else can figure why they have done what they have done. This scope will be released at shot and proably not available until spring and it’s already behind (or at best equal/provides same option) as current scopes that have been out for some time. It’s just disappointing because they really had a chance to get back in the game and while this scope is nice, it’s nothing that hasn’t been being done by its competition for a few years.

Leupold is another huge profit company and not really in tune with its tactical/competition markets. I highly doubt this thing is going to do anyhting better then their Mk6/Mk8 line because that would make the more expensive line obsolete. That’s just not good business practice. So if you think Leupold has just decided to throw us a bone and make the best scope they can for little or no profit margin you proably live in a state that has legalized marijuana and the THC is creating dilusions for you.

If they really wanted to be relavant they would have maintained there current Mk6/Mk8 line up and came out with a Gen II version that had updated and awesome reticles, maybe a few updated styling cues, and priced it to compete with the current market, which is highly competitive as of the last 2 years. They are going to have to make some sacrifices big time, most likely in the profit margin area and I personally don’t think they will do it.

 

[spife7980]

If they really wanted to be relavant they would have maintained there current Mk6/Mk8 line up and came out with a Gen II version that had updated

Is that not exactly what this is? An update on the mk4?

Cant please every one even if its what they asked for.

 

[Pusher591]

Is that not exactly what this is? An update on the mk4?

Cant please every one even if its what they asked for.

It may be an update from the Mk4 but that’s the complaint. The Mk6 line was the original update and for its time offered a lot of new options. Great mag range, lite, and short with very good glass. Then they decided to price them outrageously high so they just have not done that well because in that time many other options have come along that do just about all of what the Mk6 does or better and at a significantly better price.

It seems to me, that now they are trying to stay relevant but are bringing a scope to market and in a price range that the other scopes have been doing for sometime. They are releasing it this SHOT and from just what I’ve seen already they are already behind again with the New Kahles 3-18 SKMr3, and the new EOTech VUDU shorty 5-25 being released.

Granted we don’t know what these scopes have to offer other then what’s listed on paper BUT we know from both of these companies that they are both very active in the community and listen to the community and it shows with innovative products that people ask for. Not to mention Steiner is to suppose to release 5 or 6 new scopes as well.

Again Im not saying the new Mk5 line is a bad thing, more options are always great I just feel they had an opportunity to really get ahead of the curve instead of always staying behind it.

 

[Glassaholic]

I have been wanting/hoping for Leupold to come out with some compelling optics for tactical/competition but I have been baffled at what they have offered. I think the Mk8 3.5-25x56 was probably their most compelling model but they priced it into the stratosphere. The 3-18 Mk6 was very intriguing with it's size but the tracking issues as well as the quality of glass for the price always steered me away, and those M5B2 turrets were a horrible design, I think I could live with the TMR reticle if they could get some of the other things right. But why does it seem Leupold has such a hard time getting things right, and one of their worst offenses is the high premium for illumination, seriously Leupold $500 for illumination, certainly better than the $1000 premium for the Mk6 but still? And I agree with others, the industry has standardized on 30mm and 34mm tubes which makes finding rings/mounts pretty easy, but now you have to go buy a specialty mount to work with 35mm, even the Mk6 used 34mm tube so why the Mk5 went back to the odd 35mm? Leupold has its own cult following and these folks have been duped more often than not into believing the Leupold brand is best in class regardless of what design foibles they make. I understand that the scope hasn't even hit the market yet and some wonder how we can make such judgments before release, but the fact that they made the Mark 5 scopes with 35mm tubes and have such a high premium for illumination and have priced them in the same tier as some of the best scopes on the planet, well, that is a lot to overcome.

 

[BangBangBlatBlat]

So I think there might be a little bit of drama going on here, and a lot of the criticism is overblown.

The Army bought a lot of Mark 8 Leupolds for the M2010s. My understanding is that the Mark 8 superseded the Mark 4 6.5-20x, and by most people that have used the scope, it's actually pretty fucking awesome. The turrets might not be everyone's cup of tea, but I think that it has proven itself to track well in some of the scope testing threads. However the Mark 8 is priced ludicrously so that the Army can pay a lot less and look like it's getting a good deal; part of that deal is that the Army would be really upset if you could buy their super awesome sniper scope for the same price or less from Optics planet.

Last year Leupold brought out the M5C2 style turret, a non-illuminated version of the Mark 8, and CCH reticle. Street price is right around $3000 and I'm sure you could get better if you shopped around. I know a PRS competitor that used one this year, and from his estimation, it was an excellent scope.

So now we at least have a modern reticle, and a turret most users will like. It looks like the CCH is a less cluttered and tactical version of the H59. This also saves the end user money by not paying Horus royalties.

Now we have the Mark 5. And what the Mark 5 looks like, is that they slightly altered the design of the Mark 8, and priced it even lower, and changed the zoom ratio slightly. I would hazard to guess that the reason they chose 35mm instead of 34mm is so that they could use the parts and machinery from the Mark 8 line in the Mark 5 line. I wouldn't be surprised if the Mark 5 shares the same glass as well.

It looks like Leupold is trying to position itself in the market for tactical scopes in the niche occupied by pretty much every other major scope maker. I would expect these scopes to be as good as Khales, Schmidt, and Vortex. Just look at the Optics Planet prices on the 5-25x56mm, it runs from right at $2000 to $2700 for the one with the dumb Horus reticle; thats right in line with everyone elses 5-25x scopes.

 

[DeltaRogerVictor]

I'll stick my head above the berm...
The 5-25 looks good to me, looks like its built on the old MK8 tube, at least 10 oz. lighter than a Razor 2, priced right, I think a good brick and mortar store will sell the CCH at about 1899.99 and the tmr even less. Grab some badger 35mm rings and a Holland 35mm bubble level and drive on. I have a mark 8 and that thing has been flawless, shoot with friends that have thetas, RZR's, schimdts, burris, nightforce, and I have never been left feeling like I got a bad deal with my leupold. This site really is anti Leupold, has been for years. If its not the flavor of kool aid they've been drinking its shit...
I think the Mark 5's will do well, but time will tell.

 

[Pusher591]

So I think there might be a little bit of drama going on here, and a lot of the criticism is overblown.

The Army bought a lot of Mark 8 Leupolds for the M2010s. My understanding is that the Mark 8 superseded the Mark 4 6.5-20x, and by most people that have used the scope, it's actually pretty fucking awesome. The turrets might not be everyone's cup of tea, but I think that it has proven itself to track well in some of the scope testing threads. However the Mark 8 is priced ludicrously so that the Army can pay a lot less and look like it's getting a good deal; part of that deal is that the Army would be really upset if you could buy their super awesome sniper scope for the same price or less from Optics planet.

Last year Leupold brought out the M5C2 style turret, a non-illuminated version of the Mark 8, and CCH reticle. Street price is right around $3000 and I'm sure you could get better if you shopped around. I know a PRS competitor that used one this year, and from his estimation, it was an excellent scope.

So now we at least have a modern reticle, and a turret most users will like. It looks like the CCH is a less cluttered and tactical version of the H59. This also saves the end user money by not paying Horus royalties.

Now we have the Mark 5. And what the Mark 5 looks like, is that they slightly altered the design of the Mark 8, and priced it even lower, and changed the zoom ratio slightly. I would hazard to guess that the reason they chose 35mm instead of 34mm is so that they could use the parts and machinery from the Mark 8 line in the Mark 5 line. I wouldn't be surprised if the Mark 5 shares the same glass as well.

It looks like Leupold is trying to position itself in the market for tactical scopes in the niche occupied by pretty much every other major scope maker. I would expect these scopes to be as good as Khales, Schmidt, and Vortex. Just look at the Optics Planet prices on the 5-25x56mm, it runs from right at $2000 to $2700 for the one with the dumb Horus reticle; thats right in line with everyone elses 5-25x scopes.

Well you are forgetting one thing. The street price for the 5-25 is for the illuminated TMR which people have complained about for a while is $2500. It may have been a good reticle back in the day but again, has been surpassed 10 times by several other manufacturers. That’s the only complaint with that price, they only offer that one in illuminated. They only offer the CCH in non-illuminated so that didn’t make much sense. There are multiple other scope companies providing the better options with illumination for $2200-$2500

I do think the 5-25 is more of a value then the 3-18. If they want to be taken seriously and want in on the PRS/Competition side of things, they need to bring the heat. That means, great magnification ranges, updated reticle options, good/great glass, great turrets with locking feature, respectable weight/length, and at a price that is in line with its competition.

Appears they have attempted that but are lacking in the areas of reticle options and price. That’s just my opinions of the 5-25 option and assuming they are using he same glass. If not using the same glass and possibly glass that is of lower quality then yes, it will without a doubt be over priced. One thing Leupold did get right with the Mk8 was the glass. It’s one of he best I’ve looked through before.

The 3-18 is a joke. The original Mk6 should only be selling at a $2200-$2400 street price. I don’t see any reason it shouldn’t considering other companies are doing it. The fact that you intentionally keep the price high just for the military is a douche bag thing to do when you know it’s not worth it, it’s just how the game is played thing. Then come out with a lower model scope that offers some of those options and price it at what the better model should be anyway?? Just goes to show that lining their pockets is the number one goal and bringing the best possible scope priced fairly to the consumer isn’t. They may want to try to take play from Vortex playbook if they want to stay relevant other then hunting and military contracts.

 

[Pointman308]

I just think Leupold is in the business of making and selling military grade tactical scopes to the military. Your average military trained sniper isn’t even close to some/most of the PRS competitors that frequent this forum. Maybe on the battlefield, but certainly not at some competition. That’s why they sell the scopes they sell. I think they have found their targeted consumer and are sticking with it. The military sucks the fun and coolness out of everything and Leupold has the product for them to do so.

 

[Glassaholic]

So I think there might be a little bit of drama going on here, and a lot of the criticism is overblown.

The Army bought a lot of Mark 8 Leupolds for the M2010s. My understanding is that the Mark 8 superseded the Mark 4 6.5-20x, and by most people that have used the scope, it's actually pretty fucking awesome. The turrets might not be everyone's cup of tea, but I think that it has proven itself to track well in some of the scope testing threads. However the Mark 8 is priced ludicrously so that the Army can pay a lot less and look like it's getting a good deal; part of that deal is that the Army would be really upset if you could buy their super awesome sniper scope for the same price or less from Optics planet.

Last year Leupold brought out the M5C2 style turret, a non-illuminated version of the Mark 8, and CCH reticle. Street price is right around $3000 and I'm sure you could get better if you shopped around. I know a PRS competitor that used one this year, and from his estimation, it was an excellent scope.

So now we at least have a modern reticle, and a turret most users will like. It looks like the CCH is a less cluttered and tactical version of the H59. This also saves the end user money by not paying Horus royalties.

Now we have the Mark 5. And what the Mark 5 looks like, is that they slightly altered the design of the Mark 8, and priced it even lower, and changed the zoom ratio slightly. I would hazard to guess that the reason they chose 35mm instead of 34mm is so that they could use the parts and machinery from the Mark 8 line in the Mark 5 line. I wouldn't be surprised if the Mark 5 shares the same glass as well.

It looks like Leupold is trying to position itself in the market for tactical scopes in the niche occupied by pretty much every other major scope maker. I would expect these scopes to be as good as Khales, Schmidt, and Vortex. Just look at the Optics Planet prices on the 5-25x56mm, it runs from right at $2000 to $2700 for the one with the dumb Horus reticle; thats right in line with everyone elses 5-25x scopes.

Thank you BBBB, that is probably the best explanation I have seen on Leupold and their methodology. Specifically related to the new Mark 5, if it indeed shares the same glass quality as the Mark 8 but with an altered optical formula to align with the 5x erector spec, this could indeed open the door for Leupold in this market; however, I disagree with your cost assessment because you're comparing the non-illuminated reticle prices to other manufacturer's scopes that all offer illumination at the same price point or slightly lower. The turrets on the new Mark 5 don't bother me, they are certainly better than the M5B2 turret design, the big question will be tracking which some Leupold's have struggled with and finally the reticle, will the reticles appeal to the community? Reticles have never been Leupold's strong point, in fact, one well known company to this forum (Premier Reticles) basically got its start by replacing Leupold reticles with better options. But first things first, Leupold needs to prove themselves worthy of making scopes that can compete mechanically and optically with the already established big players in long range competition, if the Mark 5 can prove to do that the next would be for Leupold to release a competition worthy illuminated reticle (or license the MSR/MSR2) and finally (or maybe firstly) drop the price premium for illumination. Sponsorship would be another area that Leupold could invest more in, once the community starts seeing some victories in long range competitions with Leupold's name, that has a tendency to sway folks' opinions; like you mentioned, having just one shooter in the top ranks of PRS and the like using a Leupold does not instill a lot of confidence that they have a competition worthy scope. Granted not everyone bases their decisions on what Matthew Brousseau or other top PRS competitors use, but it does make a difference for many.

 

[Glassaholic]

I'll stick my head above the berm...
...This site really is anti Leupold, has been for years. If its not the flavor of kool aid they've been drinking...

I don't think that is a fair assessment of this site, it might be of some of the members of the site, but certainly not for the site as a whole. The reason I keep coming back to Snipers Hide is because I feel it is a community that offers information and advice that is not nearly as biased as most other shooting forums on the web. I've railed on Nightforce for their reticles and poor FOV and I've railed on US Optics for their baseball bats and so forth, does that mean I'd never own one, certainly not, I keep waiting for them to bring out a scope and features that I can be excited about. Do other shooters own Nightforce and US Optics and rave about them, absolutely, that is just a testament to the diversity on the site. Not everyone has to like everything, this is why there are 100's of flavors of ice cream at the store and why so many different options are available in the scope world. Saying that Leupold is not the best option for competition/long range shooting is a matter of opinion, but that opinion is backed up by the fact that there is a serious lack of this brand of scope where you'd expect to see them if they truly were worthwhile. It doesn't make the scope junk it just means they come with an unwritten disclaimer "caution should be taken when choosing this scope for the sport of long range competition". To be honest the biggest detriment to Leupold is their price, if the Mark 8 were priced $1500 cheaper or if the Mark 6 were priced $1000 cheaper and the Mark 5 priced about $800 cheaper, there would be a lot more shooters considering them, but when you can buy the equivalent or even better quality scope for less then why would you choose the more expensive option that offers less?

 

[blbennett1288]

I don't think that is a fair assessment of this site, it might be of some of the members of the site, but certainly not for the site as a whole. The reason I keep coming back to Snipers Hide is because I feel it is a community that offers information and advice that is not nearly as biased as most other shooting forums on the web. I've railed on Nightforce for their reticles and poor FOV and I've railed on US Optics for their baseball bats and so forth, does that mean I'd never own one, certainly not, I keep waiting for them to bring out a scope and features that I can be excited about. Do other shooters own Nightforce and US Optics and rave about them, absolutely, that is just a testament to the diversity on the site. Not everyone has to like everything, this is why there are 100's of flavors of ice cream at the store and why so many different options are available in the scope world. Saying that Leupold is not the best option for competition/long range shooting is a matter of opinion, but that opinion is backed up by the fact that there is a serious lack of this brand of scope where you'd expect to see them if they truly were worthwhile. It doesn't make the scope junk it just means they come with an unwritten disclaimer "caution should be taken when choosing this scope for the sport of long range competition". To be honest the biggest detriment to Leupold is their price, if the Mark 8 were priced $1500 cheaper or if the Mark 6 were priced $1000 cheaper and the Mark 5 priced about $800 cheaper, there would be a lot more shooters considering them, but when you can buy the equivalent or even better quality scope for less then why would you choose the more expensive option that offers less?
[/QUOTE

The best way to look at how people view Leupold is the resale price. I got a MK6 3-18 with M5C2s and TMR for $1600 shipped and insured. Most scopes take a $200-300 hit at resale but the Leupold prices keep falling lower and lower. New from EuroOptic they are $2200

 

[Monstershot]

The most valuable trait of the Mark 6 3-18x44 to me is it’s weight and size. Weight and size is the area where I think Leupold bests it’s competitors handily with March options excepted. Anyone willing to put a Vortex Razor on their rifle values that trait much less than I do. Need drives our product expectations. On a site filled with people sporting heavy competition bolt action rifles half a pound to 2 pounds of extra scope weight means much less compared to the person trying to keep their 6.5 Grendel light enough to carry, but capable enough to reach/see targets out to 800-1000. It’s my understanding that the weaknesses the Mark 6 has in comparison with better options for similar or even less expensive competitors, are present because of the engineering challenges of making a light weight, compact yet rugged scope.

My my concern with the Mark 5 is the weight gain. It should’ve gone down not up. But if it’s a little heavier AND tracks better, has better glass, is clear throughout the mag range, etc (things that should come with weight gain) than the Mark 6, for only a 2.4 ounce weight gain, they may have hit it out of the park. At 26oz it’s still lighter than anything else except the Mark 6 and the March.

It’ll be interesting to see what they’re like in users hands. It’ll also be interesting to see what the street price ultimately is. My curiosity is peaked.

 

[Pusher591]

The most valuable trait of the Mark 6 3-18x44 to me is it’s weight and size. Weight and size is the area where I think Leupold bests it’s competitors handily with March options excepted. Anyone willing to put a Vortex Razor on their rifle values that trait much less than I do. Need drives our product expectations. On a site filled with people sporting heavy competition bolt action rifles half a pound to 2 pounds of extra scope weight means much less compared to the person trying to keep their 6.5 Grendel light enough to carry, but capable enough to reach/see targets out to 800-1000. It’s my understanding that the weaknesses the Mark 6 has in comparison with better options for similar or even less expensive competitors, are present because of the engineering challenges of making a light weight, compact yet rugged scope.

My my concern with the Mark 5 is the weight gain. It should’ve gone down not up. But if it’s a little heavier AND tracks better, has better glass, is clear throughout the mag range, etc (things that should come with weight gain) than the Mark 6, for only a 2.4 ounce weight gain, they may have hit it out of the park. At 26oz it’s still lighter than anything else except the Mark 6 and the March.

It’ll be interesting to see what they’re like in users hands. It’ll also be interesting to see what the street price ultimately is. My curiosity is peaked.

I concur with this heavily

 

[GhostFace]

It may be an update from the Mk4 but that’s the complaint. The Mk6 line was the original update and for its time offered a lot of new options. Great mag range, lite, and short with very good glass. Then they decided to price them outrageously high so they just have not done that well because in that time many other options have come along that do just about all of what the Mk6 does or better and at a significantly better price.

Again Im not saying the new Mk5 line is a bad thing, more options are always great I just feel they had an opportunity to really get ahead of the curve instead of always staying behind it.

NAILED IT! Plus charging $500 for illumination is a fucking joke. Every tactical scope comes with illumination, hell I've seen cheap scopes with good illumination. Reticles? They were just starting come out with some decent ones in the MK IV line. Meh...if they drop the price about $500 I might be tempted to try one but for now I 'll pass.

 

[Glassaholic]

Leupold now has the Mark 5HD up on their website and it lists both scopes with 34mm tubes on their Dimensions tab; however their features tab says 35mm? If it's 34mm that would fit the majority, but if it's 35mm then why, especially when the Mark 6 is 34mm???

https://www.leupold.com/scopes/rifle-scopes/mark-5hd-3-6-18x44

 

[BangBangBlatBlat]

Has anyone played with one at SHOT yet?

 

[Duffman1975]

Leupold now has the Mark 5HD up on their website and it lists both scopes with 34mm tubes on their Dimensions tab; however their features tab says 35mm? If it's 34mm that would fit the majority, but if it's 35mm then why, especially when the Mark 6 is 34mm???

https://www.leupold.com/scopes/rifle-scopes/mark-5hd-3-6-18x44

View attachment 6868926

it appears to be updated now. it shows 35mm when i looked at it this morning.

 

[5RWill]

It honestly doesn't seem that bad for the price. Leupold usually has good glass in their high end optics. Their tracking hasn't always been up to par especially with the MK6. Though i've griped on more than one occasion about that scope, least the one i had with the M5B2 knobs was a PITA, light weight or not.

 

[lawofsavage]

How about this hypothetical:

A guy is building a rifle he wants to keep around 10 pounds, say a Tikka CTR that weighs 7.5 pounds. Mostly just because he enjoys accurate rifles and nice things but will also hunt regularly with it and occasional club prs style matches. With a sling, bipod, rings, mounts, loaded mag, etc..., 10 pounds will be really tough to stay under. If the guy wants an optic that’s reliable, tracks properly, has around 25x mag, competition style reticle, locking turrets, illumination, and around 30 ounces or less; there is really not a whole lot out there.

I’m trying to decide between the Vortex Razor AMG <http://www.vortexoptics.com/category/razor_hd_amg_riflescope> at 29 ounces and the Leupold Mark 5 5-25x56 Tremor 3 <https://www.leupold.com/scopes/rifle-scopes/mark-5hd-5-25x56?selectedSku=171777> at 30 ounces. Just don’t want a March for some reason. Don’t see a lot that of other things that fit into this category. I’d bet a street price very close to each other between the amg and mark 5. Msrps’s are within about $70 for the above listed scopes. I think Leupold knows more about the market than they get credit for. I’d love to not see such a big up charge for illumination though.

 

[V-Ref]

http://www.military.com/video/guns/...polds-new-mark-5hd-rifle-scopes/5718757949001

 

[Duffman1975]

How about this hypothetical:

A guy is building a rifle he wants to keep around 10 pounds, say a Tikka CTR that weighs 7.5 pounds. Mostly just because he enjoys accurate rifles and nice things but will also hunt regularly with it and occasional club prs style matches. With a sling, bipod, rings, mounts, loaded mag, etc..., 10 pounds will be really tough to stay under. If the guy wants an optic that’s reliable, tracks properly, has around 25x mag, competition style reticle, locking turrets, illumination, and around 30 ounces or less; there is really not a whole lot out there.

I’m trying to decide between the Vortex Razor AMG <http://www.vortexoptics.com/category/razor_hd_amg_riflescope> at 29 ounces and the Leupold Mark 5 5-25x56 Tremor 3 <https://www.leupold.com/scopes/rifle-scopes/mark-5hd-5-25x56?selectedSku=171777> at 30 ounces. Just don’t want a March for some reason. Don’t see a lot that of other things that fit into this category. I’d bet a street price very close to each other between the amg and mark 5. Msrps’s are within about $70 for the above listed scopes. I think Leupold knows more about the market than they get credit for. I’d love to not see such a big up charge for illumination though.

I want to get my hands on a Mark 5, but based purely on the specs, i would go Mark 5. More adjustment, better eyebox, bigger objective, and more features built-in. If the glass is anything like the VX-6HD or VX-5HD, its gonna be amazing. It seems Leupold really gathered a lot of input from the end user on this scope.