I'm a shooter and deer/elk hunter. Right now I'm having an internal debate as to what's better for me: a lighter fixed scope or a somewhat heavier variable scope. Here's the funny part, I already have an incredible scope. A German-made Leica ER 2.5x10 power. The performance of this scope is simply awesome. Yet I'm thinking of actually simplifying to a Leupold fixed 4x on my primary deer rifle, a 6.5x55 caliber Sako model 85. In my decade of hunting I'm beginning to wonder why I use a 30mm scope with a 42mm objective lens (weight 21oz with rings) when a 1 inch scope will be fine (weight 13oz with rings). Also, the Leupold is better balanced, sits lower to the barrel and has no power settings to play with. I hunt eastern Oregon, walking all day at 4000 feet altitude through rough terrain. Dense pine forest mixed with open canyons and all that. Last year I noticed myself carrying the rifle by the scope a lot, using it as a carry handle. Scoped, my rifle weighs 8.6 pounds. Anyone else had this dilemma? Variable scopes let you bring things closer. But aren't binoculars for that? I am thinking I might well be served well by a lighter, simpler scope.