I had a few Zeiss, scopes, but actually like Leupold's features better. I own Swarovski binoculars, and they are primo,and great glass. They cost $2500 apiece, and the public can purchase them, they just don't say USMC. The sniper scopes are 10X with a mildot reticle. Unertl still has the biggest contract with the military. If the Zeiss and Swarovski's were better choices, why then do the military rifles have New Unertl's mounted on them? I'm talking about (today). Their glass does not need the multicoatings or enhancers to make it good. All Unertl glass, is of the best quality out there. I have been to the Unertl repair shop many times, and ask many questions. The light gathering ability of the Unertl, compared to my Leupold, was unbelievable. It was evening, and we stayed at the range, until it was almost dark. My 24X Leupold did not even come close in that test. He had 4 very small groups printed on the target. His old Unertl, tore the corners out of the grid. 8 clicks up, 8 clicks over, and so on, to make a square. We went to the range, and we did what I'll call a return to zero test. At the time, I could afford any glass I wanted, that was not an issue. I posed the same question to him, and he made a believer out of me. Both rigs are custom jobs, and for both guns, groups average less than 1/2". My father-n-law, had a 24X Unertl 2" target on his swift. And wiley is a little off on his statement "it is mostly a cult of old guys thing" I thought there was better glass out there, and that with the technology today, how could a vintage 1960 Unertl compare. It is sort of a cult thing, but there is more to it than that.