Bushnell 4500 4-16X40

[Bookmark Man]

I want to buy a like new Bushnell 4500 4-16X40 with multi-X crosshair reticle.

Read More

 

[Darkker]

Then you should. If you are looking to buy, try posting in the classified section, not a discussion section.

 

[U8395279]

I want to buy a like new Bushnell 4500 4-16X40 with multi-X crosshair reticle.

Get a Minox ZA 5i HD 3-15x SF instead. Much better built scope with better optics. Has greater eye relief, wider field of view at low power, and a 50mm objective, instead of only 40mm on the Bushnell. On top of all of that, it even has an illuminated reticle.

Only weighs 2 oz more, so you get a lot of additional functionality and features for just a tiny weight gain.

It is definitely well worth the extra $170 in cost over the Bushnell:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/914149-REG/minox_66525_3_15x50_za_5i_riflescope.html

Info Video:

.

 

[Bookmark Man]

Then you should. If you are looking to buy, try posting in the classified section, not a discussion section.

I did that too.

 

[Bookmark Man]

Get a Minox ZA 5i HD 3-15x SF instead. Much better built scope with better optics. Has greater eye relief, wider field of view at low power, and a 50mm objective, instead of only 40mm on the Bushnell. On top of all of that, it even has an illuminated reticle.

Only weighs 2 oz more, so you get a lot of additional functionality and features for just a tiny weight gain.

It is definitely well worth the extra $170 in cost over the Bushnell:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/914149-REG/minox_66525_3_15x50_za_5i_riflescope.html

Info Video:

.

The Leupold VX-6 3-18X44 is only one ounce heavier and has 3X's more than the Minox. I have a Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 which is noticeably better than my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 during the day and stays with it in low light performance. I would be willing to bet the Minox would not beat the VX-6 in a side by side comparison for resolving detail. Also, I doubt the glass in the Minox is better since my Bushnell 4200 4-16X40 matches my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 in all tests except perceived brightness by everyone who has compared them on my eye charts and deer antlers. The z5 seems brighter to look through, but when looking at deer antlers in the woods 131 yards away, as low light sets in, they both quit at the same time . According to Bushnell the 4500 has even better optics. If I was going with something that cost more and weighed more I would get a VX-6.

Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against Minox. I had some Minox 13X56 binoculars which I compared with my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50, set on 13X, for low light performance. Despite the Minox having TWO 56mm objective lenses they quit two minutes before the 6500. The 4200 4-16X40 lasted about five minutes longer than the 6500! I traded the 13X56 for some Minox 15X58. These are noticeably better.

 

[U8395279]

The Leupold VX-6 3-18X44 is only one ounce heavier and has 3X's more than the Minox. I have a Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 which is noticeably better than my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 during the day and stays with it in low light performance. I would be willing to bet the Minox would not beat the VX-6 in a side by side comparison for resolving detail. Also, I doubt the glass in the Minox is better since my Bushnell 4200 4-16X40 matches my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 in all tests except perceived brightness by everyone who has compared them on my eye charts and deer antlers. The z5 seems brighter to look through, but when looking at deer antlers in the woods 131 yards away, as low light sets in, they both quit at the same time . According to Bushnell the 4500 has even better optics. If I was going with something that cost more and weighed more I would get a VX-6.

Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against Minox. I had some Minox 13X56 binoculars which I compared with my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50, set on 13X, for low light performance. Despite the Minox having TWO 56mm objective lenses they quit two minutes before the 6500. The 4200 4-16X40 lasted about five minutes longer than the 6500! I traded the 13X56 for some Minox 15X58. These are noticeably better.

Well yes, that VX6 is better, but it also costs another $600 over the Minox I mentioned. If you are willing to go that high, then by all means I agree that this VX6 you refer to would be an awesome scope.

With my tired old eyes, having an illuminated dot in lower light is really a big plus for me. But if you are still relatively young, then that probably will not matter as much to you.

.

 

[Bookmark Man]

Well yes, that VX6 is better, but it also costs another $600 over the Minox I mentioned. If you are willing to go that high, then by all means I agree that this VX6 you refer to would be an awesome scope.

With my tired old eyes, having an illuminated dot in lower light is really a big plus for me. But if you are still relatively young, then that probably will not matter as much to you.

.

My .com friend, I understand "tired old eyes." About a year and a half ago I had my first cataract surgery. I am delighted with the results. In about six months I have an exam on the other eye. It's not too bad, so I may pass on the surgery.

I hope you have a great season.