Rifle Scopes New Leupold Mark 5 models announced

[redneckbmxer24]

Leupold has release some more configurations on the Mark 5 line. Per Euro Optic they will have them all for January delivery and some are already in stock and available. After this batch they won't have more until next month so jump on it. The Mark 5 is hands down the best top tier optic for the money available today.

Edit: There's also 11 more models/configurations coming but Leupold isn't allowing that info to be released until the 21st so stay tuned. They will be added to the same page with the others below.

Edit #2: The cats out of the bag for the new models early. The 7-35 and other configurations have been released. See link below for all the details.

Link here.

 

[cleric]

It looks like just new reticles for moa turrets or am I missing something

 

[DangerRanger]

Why is illumination like 500 bucks on these

 

[generalzip]

Leupold has release some more configurations on the Mark 5 line. Per Euro Optic they will have them all for January delivery and some are already in stock and available. After this batch they won't have more until next month so jump on it. The Mark 5 is hands down the best top tier optic for the money available today.

Link here.

Bold statement. I think you'd find many that would disagree.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Why is illumination like 500 bucks on these

R&D for a feature that most people don't need. Instead of making them all illuminated and running the higher price they did them like this so people can buy into an optic without a feature they won't use for a lower price point. Those who want/need illumination have the option to get it, but they have to sell it for enough to cover R&D. All things considered it's still a good value, just not quite the value of the non illuminated version.

 

[lte82]

R&D for a feature that most people don't need. Instead of making them all illuminated and running the higher price they did them like this so people can buy into an optic without a feature they won't use for a lower price point. Those who want/need illumination have the option to get it, but they have to sell it for enough to cover R&D. All things considered it's still a good value, just not quite the value of the non illuminated version.

The Leupold engineer I spoke with told me it was because in order to meet the same standards for waterproof-ness there is a lot of extra production time and costs. Once you drill holes and run wires through it, you still have to seal it up to the same level as everything else.

 

[Just Macca]

Naive to think this thing cost more than a few hundred for Leupold to produce. If you consider a $500 premium fair (that effectively no other manufacturer charges to the same exponential degree), then all the best to you.

As per the comment, “best for the money” I’d say you should look at the Bushnell LRHS series.

 

[BR7.62]

I think these are made in the USA which is worth some premium as well.

 

[Quackaddict]

Be interesting to hear what the new models will be. I would presume a low power or 1x variable to round out the line and a few new reticle options.

No other manufacturer charges or they just include the upcharge in all scopes sold? There is no free lunch...

Be interesting to see what an ATACR would cost without illumination, I hardly ever use the illumination on my scopes so I like being able to delete it and save a few bucks.

 

[jda2631]

Illumination is just really helpful for using low power on a FFP, or low light situations while hunting. Those are the only times I use it.

Would love for Leupold to join the 21st century with their reticle designs. I really want to like the mark 5HD, and want one. But just don't like any of the reticles enough to pull the trigger. Not a Horus guy and their proprietary reticles are just pretty poor designs IMO...

Just do like everyone else and make clone of the SKMR3 / MR4 / Mil XT / EBR-7C / Gen 3 XR / (maybe the new Burris XTR III reticle?)....

 

[Langford]

I think these are made in the USA which is worth some premium as well.

They were forced to stop printing “Made in the USA “ on their scopes years ago because enough of the major components were outsourced. I don’t know if that was just the glass, or if other components came from overseas also.

If the mark 5 is actually produced here, not just assembled...I’d be curious to hear where they are getting their glass. As far as I know, Vortex with the Razor AMG is the only company using glass produced here in the states.

 

[osu92]

They were forced to stop printing “Made in the USA “ on their scopes years ago because enough of the major components were outsourced. I don’t know if that was just the glass, or if other components came from overseas also.

If the mark 5 is actually produced here, not just assembled...I’d be curious to hear where they are getting their glass. As far as I know, Vortex with the Razor AMG is the only company using glass produced here in the states.

They definitely acquire their glass from overseas, just as nearly everyone else does as well. Their specs aren't the same as anyone elses but the manufacturer is. After that, their scopes are made, from scratch, in Beaverton, Oregon. Other optics like binos, spotters, (probably) rangefinders are not. I've walked the floor and seen the whole process more than once.

And personally, a 3-18 MOA Mark 5 is something I've VERY excited to put on a hunting rifle or two.

 

[jarredsc]

Why is illumination like 500 bucks on these

the scope is water proof down to 30 meters so it is expensive to keep the while adding illumination

 

[lte82]

As per the comment, “best for the money” I’d say you should look at the Bushnell LRHS series.

Performance per dollar is very subjective. IE, I would say a Schmidt 5-25 at $2000-$2500 is clearly the winner. In fact, I would say it's a STEAL. Same goes for the *good* examples of Minox ZP5's at $2000-$2500. Until you get to use them side by side to other scopes for a good amount of time, it's difficult to understand how good *good* can really be, and what those extras dollars get you.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Naive to think this thing cost more than a few hundred for Leupold to produce. If you consider a $500 premium fair (that effectively no other manufacturer charges to the same exponential degree), then all the best to you.

As per the comment, “best for the money” I’d say you should look at the Bushnell LRHS series.

I’d highly suggest you check out the Mark 5. The Bushnell tactical scopes are good optics but they’re not in the same league as a Mark 5 by any stretch.

 

[spife7980]

What I always think of when I see claims of leupold illumination being outrageously expensive is that its not just a simple potentiometer or something that controls it. It has push buttons and a chip that monitors when it hasnt been moved in awhile as well as the angle of the scope etc and turns itself off. There a lot more to theirs than many of the other more affordable brands illumination.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

The Leupold engineer I spoke with told me it was because in order to meet the same standards for waterproof-ness there is a lot of extra production time and costs. Once you drill holes and run wires through it, you still have to seal it up to the same level as everything else.

Exactly, that costs money for them to develop and put into the scope.

 

[footsteps]

How many scopes/rifles are recovered from 30 meters of water ? Maybe the teams need such things but not Joe blow .

 

[generalzip]

Well maybe they should make a cheaper version of the illumination. The mark 5 is light with decent glass. Would make a great hunting scope if it had illumination. Even cheap illumination. Not having illumination is a deal breaker for many looking for a hunting scope. For a match or range scope illumination is rarely if ever needed.

 

[DangerRanger]

I understand why it costs more, but it seems like illumination kicks it to AMG pricing while it’s not quite an AMG level scope(from what I’ve read)

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Well maybe they should make a cheaper version of the illumination. The mark 5 is light with decent glass. Would make a great hunting scope if it had illumination. Even cheap illumination. Not having illumination is a deal breaker for many looking for a hunting scope. For a match or range scope illumination is rarely if ever needed.

Sooooo... spend more $$ on R&D to develop another type of illumination that’s still going to cost more because that R&D has to be paid for and then will confuse people on the difference. Yup, that makes perfect sense.

 

[generalzip]

Sooooo... spend more $$ on R&D to develop another type of illumination that’s still going to cost more because that R&D has to be paid for and then will confuse people on the difference. Yup, that makes perfect sense.

It's either that or lose a lot of hunting sales to other manufacturers that offer illumination for the same price. Adapt or die. Everyone else was able to do it except Leupold. Ultimately it's their business decision and I'm sure they are aware of the trade-offs. However for many, including me, a Leupold will never go on one of my hunting rifles because for the same price I can get an AMG or similar quality optic with illumination.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

It's either that or lose a lot of hunting sales to other manufacturers that offer illumination for the same price. Adapt or die. Everyone else was able to do it except Leupold. Ultimately it's their business decision and I'm sure they are aware of the trade-offs. However for many, including me, a Leupold will never go on one of my hunting rifles because for the same price I can get an AMG or similar quality optic with illumination.

95% of the hunting market is $200 and under scopes and again, this is a tactical optic, not a hunting optic.

Leupold has done well enough on the Mark 5 to expand the line to include more models and configurations after just one year of it being in production.

I think they’ll be ok.

 

[generalzip]

95% of the hunting market is $200 and under scopes and again, this is a tactical optic, not a hunting optic.

Leupold has done well enough on the Mark 5 to expand the line to include more models and configurations after just one year of it being in production.

I think they’ll be ok.

It's called long range hunting. They actually have an entire forum dedicated to it. Leupold has been around a long time and isn't going anywhere anytime soon. That wasn't the topic of conversation. The topic was why can't Leupold make an affordable illumination option. For whatever reason they have failed to do so over the years, thus isolating them from a potential market of long range hunters.

 

[spife7980]

It's called long range hunting. They actually have an entire forum dedicated to it. Leupold has been around a long time and isn't going anywhere anytime soon. That wasn't the topic of conversation. The topic was why can't Leupold make an affordable illumination option. For whatever reason they have failed to do so over the years, thus isolating them from a potential market of long range hunters.

Sounds more like they are isolating themselves from you, not "long range hunters".

If its dark enough that you cant see your crosshairs are you really confident enough to take that "long range" shot at night? I know Ive never used illumination when hunting or even felt it would be of benefit. If its so dark that I cant see where Im aiming my scope then its too dark to see the target so what good does a illuminate reticle really serve? For deer there are legal shooting hours, I can always see the reticle until those have legal hours have passed. If its night hunting pigs or coyotes and the target is illuminated by a spot light then you can see the cross hairs just fine against the target.

I only see them losing your sale.

Edit: If yall think they are dumb for making their scope show they see fit then start your own company. I think I will give leupold the benefit of the doubt in knowing why they are doing what they are doing as opposed to thinking I know their business better than them.

 

[generalzip]

Sounds more like they are isolating themselves from you, not "long range hunters".

If its dark enough that you cant see your crosshairs are you really confident enough to take that "long range" shot at night? I know Ive never used illumination when hunting or even felt it would be of benefit. If its so dark that I cant see where Im aiming my scope then its too dark to see the target so what good does a illuminate reticle really serve? For deer there are legal shooting hours, I can always see the reticle until those have legal hours have passed. If its night hunting pigs or coyotes and the target is illuminated by a spot light then you can see the cross hairs just fine against the target.

I only see them losing your sale.

Edit: If yall think they are dumb for making their scope show they see fit then start your own company. I think I will give leupold the benefit of the doubt in knowing why they are doing what they are doing as opposed to thinking I know their business better than them.

It's more about losing your crosshairs in a dark woodline at dusk/dawn. It's obviously personal preference if you need or want illumination. For me it's a deal breaker and I know plenty of others that feel the same way for hunting. Would rather have and not need than need and not have. If you use clip on NV/thermal the illuminated reticle is very nice to have.

Response to your edit: I don't think anyone is saying they "know their business better than them" and they was not my intent, but manufacturers often read threads like this and it is this type of feedback that helps them get an idea of what people want to see in new products. Some manufacturers are much better at this than others. MPA, MDT, Kahles, etc have all taken notes on this type of feedback and that's part of the reason why we are seeing some awesome products today.

 

[MarinePMI]

Oh, Leupold reads the forums (including this one). Of that I am positive.

I think the illumination being separate is a unique offering, that while not everyone's cup of tea, does make some sense. I have illumination on several scopes (Rzr GII's, XTR, etc.). I have never used it. Not saying there won't be a time when I do want it, but practical experience tells me it is something I will very rarely need. Even hunting this past fall. By the time it was a legal hunting time, there was more than enough ambient light to see the cross hairs, despite the dark ridgeline in the back ground.

Different strokes, for different folks I suppose...

 

[generalzip]

Totally agree. I suppose it matters where you hunt. When I hunt in south Texas or north Texas light is never an issue. Go into the east Texas pines and it stays very dark well into hunting time. Especially when overcast. Add in the fact you’re on low power with a FFP scope with a bulky tree reticle. Good luck finding that center without illumination. I totally admit the scenarios are very rare but I refuse to miss the deer of a lifetime or worse wound it because I wasn’t able to make out the reticle quite well enough.

 

[DangerRanger]

I don’t understand why have to hold their hand and tell them they did a good job instead of just wanting them to improve.

Even bushnell managed to put illumination in the lrhs series. Then they nuked it but still. Leupold already has great glass put some money into affordable illumination.

They are big kids they can take it.

Personally if I’m gonna buy a mk5 w/ light I either want it to be as good as the competition or cheaper. From what I’ve seen it’s not quite as good and more expensive.

Also, they have illumination in their vx5s with what like a 100 dollar upcharge?

 

[MarinePMI]

I don’t understand why have to hold their hand and tell them they did a good job instead of just wanting them to improve.

Even bushnell managed to put illumination in the lrhs series. Then they nuked it but still. Leupold already has great glass put some money into affordable illumination.

They are big kids they can take it.

Personally if I’m gonna buy a mk5 w/ light I either want it to be as good as the competition or cheaper. From what I’ve seen it’s not quite as good and more expensive.

Also, they have illumination in their vx5s with what like a 100 dollar upcharge?

And your point is?

 

[DangerRanger]

And your point is?

And your point is?

 

[MarinePMI]

Well, you've said many times already you don't intend to buy a Mk5, so I guess my point is:

Why are you continuing to post the same thing, in the same thread?

 

[DangerRanger]

Never said that so I guess you didn’t. I don’t intend to buy one with light until it’s more affordable. I think they look like good scopes and an highly considering one, but I think there’s a reason you don’t see many illuminated ones. Illumination should be cheaper. Seems pretty obvious that many others agree.

Do you have any input on why they can illuminate vx5s for so much cheaper?

Still not sure why you came to get sassy with me when I’ve posted less than others in this thread with like opinions to mine, but whatever I guess.

 

[MarinePMI]

I guess it was just your winning personality, and apparent desire to bitch about Leupold pricing on illumination. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Lots of other options available, right? And so, I ask; what is your point in posting repeatedly about illumination upcharge? It is, what it is. You said your piece, why not just move on?

But hey, please continue if it makes you feel better.

 

[DangerRanger]

Lmfao did my three posts really hurt your feelings that much?

I’m glad you’re here to passive aggressively stick up for poor leupold when consumers ask for better.

 

[crunchy]

Big Leupold fan here. Not that there isnt better, but Leupold stands by their products, fairly priced, and I have never had an issue with any of my Leupold rifle scopes. Most recent I am replacing has been on my rifle 19 years without a hicup.

 

[MarinePMI]

Lmfao did my three posts really hurt your feelings that much?

I’m glad you’re here to passive aggressively stick up for poor leupold when consumers ask for better.

Lol. No feelings hurt here, though you can't seem to let this go, which is interesting behavior. That being said, do you have some thing to contribute here? Just curious...

 

[beetroot]

the scope is water proof down to 30 meters so it is expensive to keep the while adding illumination

That's good to know, I've been looking for a new optic for my long range spear fishing rig.

 

[THEIS]

Do you have any input on why they can illuminate vx5s for so much cheaper?

Hi,

I will take "Along the same reason the Mk5 scope is not same price as the vx5s" for $1000 Alex.....

Now onto the depth of waterproofing.....there has been some major advancements in regards to supercavitating underwater ammunition. Just saying.
Advancements that are allowing underwater vehicles to hit targets 1000 yards in the air from 6 meters underwater.

It sorta goes back to "Just because you may not know/understand the reasoning, does not mean one doesn't exist".

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[DangerRanger]

Ok, hopefully their target market is enjoying using mk5s underwater. I like the idea of offering not and illuminated.

How about they add in a 3m waterproof illuminated option for the hunters that would like it. The tech is already there is it not?

 

[THEIS]

Ok, hopefully their target market is enjoying using mk5s underwater. I like the idea of offering not and illuminated.

How about they add in a 3m waterproof illuminated option for the hunters that would like it. The tech is already there is it not?

Hi,

Well just going off the first 2 reviews on the Leupold Mark V webpage....They would not see a need to change anything from the existing Mk5 for the hunting crowd; as the first 2 reviews mention how good it is for hunting as it is built right now.


Sincerely,
Theis

 

[DangerRanger]

Hi,

Well just going off the first 2 reviews on the Leupold Mark V webpage....They would not see a need to change anything from the existing Mk5 for the hunting crowd; as the first 2 reviews mention how good it is for hunting as it is built right now.


Sincerely,
Theis

On the leupold site? Odd... of the 7 reviews I see on the 3.6 literally none contain the word “hunt”

And on the 5-25 the 4th one says you’ll regret it if you don’t get the illumination.

This is from the sample size you cherry picked of people who did buy the scope... not all those who didn’t.

I’ll leave now as it’s obvious many are happy with the current situation, and I have already said I think there is a market they aren’t tapping with current offerings. I hope they decide that it is a profitable one and to throw it a bone.its obviously doing well, and they are adding MOA which appeals to the hunting crowd.

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

Maybe you should contact Riza or Michael and submit your resume to them for a consultant and/or marketing research position.
You seem to be under the perception that they could learn a thing or two from you so I am sure they would pay you for your assistance if your background and experience lends to match your opinion on what you feel they should be designing, cost factoring and catering to.

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[brado16]

I’ll leave now

Good- maybe visit Great Clips and vent to them

 

[Stickshift]

Also, they have illumination in their vx5s with what like a 100 dollar upcharge?

You'll note that the VX-5HD's illumination is a single dot in the center of the reticle. This is probably much cheaper than fully or partially illuminating a reticle, which is why it was included in every VX-R series scope and some of the low cost Mark AR series.

You'll also note that the VX-6HDs have partially illuminated reticles. They're $700 more expensive. No doubt some of that is caused by the 6x erector, anti-cant system, and fancy windage turret, but the illumination is probably part of it too. I wonder if they're also water rated to 30m?

Speaking of the water rating, Leupold tends to spec out the Mark series of scopes differently from the civilian hunting scopes, usually to meet military contracts. I wouldn't be surprised if that 30m water rating meets some obscure milspec that Leupold feels all of the scopes should meet that other manufacturers don't bother with unless contractually obligated to. Because you're buying the same scopes the OPERATORs use, you're paying the same upcharge even if you don't need it.

 

[MarinePMI]

VX-5 is also a 2nd focal plane scope. Which means, the real estate in the tube is laid out entirely different from a FFP scope like the Mk 5, which means the illumination is likely laid out completely differently (as well as on the SFP scope, there's likely a lot more room inside the tube since it has fewer lenses).

I haven't been able to find it, but @koshkin posted an excellent video a year or so back on the inner workings of a first focal plane scope. Left me with the impression that FFP scopes eat up a lot of the internal space with their lenses and erector housing...

Maybe (if he can find it) he could re-post it. Should be a sticky IMHO, since I believe when using a tool, you should understand how the tool works.

 

[Jay03]

That's good to know, I've been looking for a new optic for my long range spear fishing rig.

Beat me to it! That's exactly what I thought when I read that.

On a serious note. Definitely interested in what they add later this month. A MK5 is on my super short list for my new Seekins Havak.

 

[darth_ritis]

I'd love to see that 7-35 with a reticle somewhere between TReMoR3 and USMC MilDot, like an MSR 2 or something.

 

[Macca]

Shut up & take my money for a 7-35!

 

[remington patriot]

Seems like a nice scope but I don't know why they go with a 35mm main tube since everything else is either 30 or 34mm. When it comes to illumination it is nicer to have it and rarely use it then to not have it at all and it should not be an added $ option.