New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 1,7-10x42 VS 2-12x50
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

1,7-10x42 VS 2-12x50

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Poll Question: The new Meostar R2 Series. What magnification would you choose?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
8 [80.00%]
2 [20.00%]
You can not vote in this poll

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/23/2013 at 14:29
Renico View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: March/08/2013
Status: Offline
Points: 113
About to order the new Meostar R2 for my all-round rifle in caliber 270Win.

Cant decide if it should be the 1,7-10x42 or the 2-12x50 model.

Should be used in daylight, twilight, and seldom in night. Both illumiated reticle 4.

Which one would you choose of the two models and why?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/23/2013 at 14:40
SVT_Tactical View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
Chief Sackscratch

Joined: December/17/2009
Location: NorthCackalacky
Status: Offline
Points: 28753
I like the smaller objective of the 1.7-10 to keep the scope lowest possible without effecting check weld.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/23/2013 at 15:15
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18334
Cheekweld with a 50mm objective vs 42mm objective has never been an issue for me… however, lowlight performance is noticeably better with 50mm objective (in apples to apples comparison).  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/23/2013 at 16:21
Robster80 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: November/02/2012
Location: MS
Status: Offline
Points: 421
id go with the 50mm. where r u ordering from? i dont see em listed anywhere
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/23/2013 at 16:46
Renico View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: March/08/2013
Status: Offline
Points: 113
From my local hunting shop here in Denmark. Should be out in start of 2014 here.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/23/2013 at 16:51
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14312
I tend to prefer scopes maxing out at 10X and 42-44 max size reticles for several reasons:

1. I don't like my scope's objective bell to be wider than my rifle's forend, if at all possible. I slide my rifles in and out of a scabbard on my ATV, and it tends to hang up on the cloth liner inside if parts of the scope or other accessories are wider than the rifle.
2. 10X is more than enough magnification for anywhere I ever hunt -- if we're talking about a big game hunting rifle, so I'd rather not spend extra for capabilities I don't benefit much from.
3. All else being equal, I prefer my scopes to be as light and compact as possible, unless I pay a significant penalty in optical performance in exchange. In this case, you don't compromise any optical performance with a 1.7-10X42.
4. I have several high end 2.5-10X42s and a Swaro Z6 1.7-10X42. I also have a few high end 50mm scopes. All of the 42's are already superb low light performers that allow me to shoot way beyond legal hunting hours as-is, so the slight low light performance benefits of the larger 50mm objective isn't significant enough for me to warrant the increased cost and scope width.
5. I like my scopes to be mounted as low as possible, though on some setups 50mm doesn't pose a height problem for me. It's really when the objective gets to 56mm and beyond that it becomes a cheek weld issue for me. Still, all else being equal, I prefer my scopes to be closer to the barreled action, if for no other reason than the rifle fits in double rifle cases and my ATV scabbard better.
6. 12X doesn't give me enough additional detail over 10X for me to consider it a real "advantage" in field conditions, on big game sized animals, and at typical shooting distances I'm likely to encounter. So, I'd rather not spend the extra $ for a heavier, bulkier scope if I don't have to.

I don't mind 50mm scopes, though that is my self imposed objective diameter limit for the reasons stated above. Either will work very well.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/23/2013 at 18:03
ccoker View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: February/13/2008
Location: Austin, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 2032
Ted,
If you were forced to only have one hunting rig for Texas, which scope would you keep?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/24/2013 at 10:33
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14312
Man, that's a tough question, Charles. Just as I'm not a "1 rifle" kinda guy, I can't imagine being forced to only have one scope.

I'd have to pick my Swaro Z6i 1.7-10X42 with lit circle dot. It very slightly edges out my Leica ER 2.5-10X42 in my mind, only because of it's awesome illumination system, and I love the Swaro's lit circle dot reticle. I like the longer main tube and lighter weight (and lighter price tag) of the Leica better, though. Optically, it's a wash between those two.

That's for all around hunting.

If it's strictly for deer hunting in a thick woods type environment, I'd likely go with the Kahles CL 2-7X36 with #4 reticle. To my mind, it's the perfect scope for a light, carbine length deer rifle. The only reason it doesn't come in first place for me is because the 1.7/2.5 - 10X scopes offer more reach with essentially the same FOV on the low end, so they're more versatile.

Then again, I also love my S&B 1.5-6X42 w/ #9 Flashdot, and depending on my mood, it might come in first on any given day. What it lacks in upper end reach, it makes up for in pure optical bliss, and I love its reticle. It's illumination system is right there with the Swaro for kickassedness. I hate to relegate it to 2nd or 3rd place because it's so good, but, I would reluctantly have to still give the nod to the above scopes just based on versatility vs. size.

Don't want to take the thread off-topic, but I'd be interested in your take on that, brother.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/24/2013 at 10:59
Skylar McMahon View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar

Joined: April/05/2011
Location: TEXAS
Status: Offline
Points: 5507
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Man, that's a tough question, Charles. Just as I'm not a "1 rifle" kinda guy, I can't imagine being forced to only have one scope.
 
That is the truth. Cool
 
Like Ted, I also prefer the 1.7-10X42.
 
Anything over ten power would be over-kill for where I hunt. That is more than enough magnification for my eyes.
 
I also like the improved FOV with less mag, now that can be argued with the 2-12, but actively hunting hogs and other vaiours varmints, the 1.7-10 is quite exceptional. I also account for cosmetics as well. While I have several rifles that look great with 50mm objectives, but 42 & 44mm are proven low light exhibiters.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/24/2013 at 12:28
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 3379
I am fine with 50mm objective scopes on hunting rifles.

I would take the extra 2x on the top end of the magnification over the lost .3x on the bottom end.

2x is plenty low and wide.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/24/2013 at 12:32
coyote95 View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: January/24/2009
Location: michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1042
Looking forward to checking out the 1.7-10x42  Hope they kept the weight down.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "1,7-10x42 VS 2-12x50"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Swaroski AV 3-10X42 or AV 4-12x50 Preacher Rifle Scopes 6 5/31/2005 3:18:33 PM
ZEN RAY ZRS 10x42 or Olympus Magellan 10x42 EXWP gjcrop Binoculars 5
M onarch x 10x42 or Vortex Talon 10x42 nodule Binoculars 3
10x42 HD vs 10x42 brianaa Tactical Scopes 4
Bushnell Legend Elite 10x42 vs Monarch 5 10x42 2hoo Binoculars 7
Elite 3200 10x42 Mil/Mil Vs SS 10x42 JLud Tactical Scopes 2
got the 4-12x50 swaro z3..thoughts? Robster80 Rifle Scopes 5
Nikon BUCKMASTER 4-12X50 SF chefadamj Rifle Scopes 9
Swarovski Z3 4-12X50 BRH reticle Bitterroot Bulls Member's Tests and Reviews 23
Looking for a 3-12x50 MBar308 Rifle Scopes 7


This page was generated in 0.531 seconds.