Please forgive me if I am on the wrong forum, but wanting to hear from hunters who use vortex diamondback scopes? specifically the tactical 4x16x44. What is your opinions on this scope for overall hunting? I currently use an older Bushnell elite 4200. Thanks. I have read that this is one of the better scopes under $500.00?

I have a couple Diamondbacks, but not that exact one. Mine work just fine, and I will most likely buy more Vortex scores in the future, should the need arise.

I had a 4-12 diamondback. It served its purpose. I killed a deer while using it on my 270. My only complaint was depending which way you looked, around sunset, it would catch a glare and you couldn’t see very well. Other than that it was a solid scope for the money.

I believe the viper line is a step up from the diamondbacks in quality of glass. I’d probably look for one of those on sale. IMHO Those 4200’s were good glass for the money

This. Its a fine scope until you need to look anywhere to the southwest past about 4:15 on a sunny day.

I not the diamondback line but I went with the vortex crossfire 2 hog hunter with the illuminated reticle…really pretty decent for lowlight and was only $300…may want to take a look at at least

You can find a Viper on sale fairly often for a dang good price. I’ve got a diamondback but also have several vipers and they’re a nice step up. Midway had them for a great price not long ago.

Midway had a viper on sale for 179$ now

I just bought the same scope in a viper from midway. $324 tax and all, free shipping. Already have one similar i like very well

Link? All I can find is $229

There was a 3x9 on there for $179

I’ve got the diamondback tactical 6x24x50 I believe it is. Only thing I don’t like about it is it doesn’t have zero stops. Has tracked true the few times I’ve checked it. I’m most likely going to get it or an Arken for a 300 project I’m about to start.

I have two 4x16x44. Great scopes.

I have one on my Weatherby and really like it.

I put a Diamondback 3.5-10x50 on two of my guns this season. So I don't have a lot of time with them yet, but so far they're at least comparable to the Prostaff Nikons I'd been using.

My only thought is they feel like I have a narrower FOV than the old Nikons, but I have no idea if that's right or not. It also seems like they have less eye relief, almost seems like the parallax is less acute....you really have to get close and center your eye up.
I'm not saying it has all three of those issues, it's possibly just one thing causing what I'm describing, I just don't know the technical aspects of scopes.

I bought a 4-12x40 a year or so ago took it hunting twice and took it off and it’s just sitting. The eye relief sucks it looks fine just looking in the store or the yard but take it hunting in the afternoon and can’t hardly see through it.

The 4200 is a better scope than the diamondback.

That was my first thought also.

I used a friend's gun once many years ago, it was an A-Bolt .270 with a 4200 Bushnell "Elite" (I think?), I remember being impressed with it.

Personally I've only had Nikons and Vortex scopes for most of my hunting life. Something I noticed about the Nikons was I couldn't really tell much difference between the lower end ProStaff version and the Monarch. Not that I believed a Monarch was something incredible, but I didn't perceive the lack of difference to mean the Monarch was crap, but moreso that the ProStaff was a REALLY good low end scope. But with the Vortex scopes, there's a very noticeable difference when you go up in model....I'm a person with basically no concern for high end optics, but even I admit I can tell a difference between a Diamondback and a Viper (for example). Heck, I can tell a difference in the Diamondback and a ProStaff Nikon.

I'll just say I'm glad I bought those Diamondbacks for nearly half price on sale.