New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Additional notes on "brightness" testing
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Additional notes on "brightness" testing

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 20:27
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785

Thought I'd add a few things:

1) The lenses must be CLEAN. This may seem obvious, but this means right to the edges of the lenses. If there's dust around the edges, this will not only affect brightness but apparent sharpness, especially toward the edges. The very first Swarovski scope I ever saw belonged to a Louisiana whitetail hunter who I shared an Alabama hunting camp with over 20 years ago. He bragged so much on his expensive, big scope that I had to take a look though it. The view was quite dim, because the lenses were covered with a layer of dust. (Despite that, he killed every deer he shot at.)
 
2) The fairest test is between new scopes. Even one year of use can result in a degradation of the coatings, especially in "field" conditions. Normal, correct cleaning will cause some light scatter with most lens coatings after a while. I recently tested a brand new Phillipines model 3-9x Burris Fullfield II against an older model American FFII, and the Phillipines model was noticeably brighter during my standard chart/darkness test. Was this because the older scope had been used hard for several years? I dunno. The only way to make sure woud be to test a brand-new scope from several years ago, against the new Phillipines FFII. Maybe some of the newer hard coatings would help, but again, the onl;y way to know would be to set one aside, in the box, for a couple of years and compare it to an indentical but well-used scope.
 
3) In general I have found the reticle to be more important than the optics, given modern multiu-coating throughout the lens system. The thing we really want to do with a scope is aim. If we can see the target but not the reticle, then we are SOL.
 
JB
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 20:34
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
Hence my affection for the FireFly reticle. If you can't see that reticle you need to stop hunting cause it's way past bedtime
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 20:40
Relentless Pursuit View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: March/09/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 61
I eagerly await the newest coatings to unveil,so I can greedily scoop secondhand the "inferior" versions..................(grin)
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 20:41
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
  Only my first season with it but the Heavy Duplex in my VXIII is becoming a favorite. So far it's been GOOD in low light and thick foliage.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 20:45
Relentless Pursuit View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: March/09/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 61
There are few reticles I hate more than it...............
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 20:53
Horsemany View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: February/28/2008
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 640
Originally posted by 300S&W 300S&W wrote:

  Only my first season with it but the Heavy Duplex in my VXIII is becoming a favorite. So far it's been GOOD in low light and thick foliage.
 
Have you compared that to the etched Boone & Crockett?  I'd be interested to see both at dusk.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 20:56
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Relentless Pursuit,
 
I am sure most of us would like to hear the specific reasons for your dislike. That's how we gain perspective on these threads.
 
Thanks,
JB
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 21:03
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
  Sorry,but no I haven't Hm.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 21:05
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592

 That's why they make so many different reticles,RP.  Different strokes for different folks.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 21:21
Horsemany View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: February/28/2008
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 640
The reason I ask is I've seen a lot of the B&C reticles in the VXIII discount piles.  There's a bunch on the samplelist.  I've looked through them before and I know they're a fairly heavy reticle.  Just wondering how it stacks up to the heavy ret.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/09/2009 at 22:34
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
  I'll get the sub tension reticle specs on both and post them for you Hm. Might help ya.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 04:03
Relentless Pursuit View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: March/09/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 61
The Hvy is obtrusive and mires business. I have them in 2.5X Compact,6x42 and 3.5-10x and it is a junk reticle for killing.
 
Couldn't formulate anything redeeming in the reticle's regard......................
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 07:09
farscott View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: February/10/2009
Location: Athens, AL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Quote Even one year of use can result in a degradation of the coatings, especially in "field" conditions.
What does this imply for those of us who use scopes for years?  I always thought my eyes were getting worse, not my scopes were transmitting less light.  Yikes, now I know it is both.

I guess I have a new reason to upgrade some of my optics.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 07:13
Dogger View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/02/2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 5347
Originally posted by 300S&W 300S&W wrote:

  Only my first season with it but the Heavy Duplex in my VXIII is becoming a favorite. So far it's been GOOD in low light and thick foliage.
 
I like the heavier duplex in my 3200 for exactly the scenario you mentioned 300.  Typical ranges where we hunt are short and the reticle is very easy to pickout against a dark background or when swinging on a moving target.
 
Doesn't seem obtrusive in this application.
 
JB.  Wonder if one of the reasons for the dimmer image in the older scope is light scattering from minute scatches in the lens coatings.  No matter how carefully you clean these will happen over time.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 07:59
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
  Sorry H,ain't been able to find reticle subtension info for the B&C reticle anywhere. I hope this may give you and idea of how the Hvy Plex and B&C compare :
  Click on Specifications and you'll see the B&C and Heavy Duplex side by side.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 10:06
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Dogger, that's exactly it, tiny scratches scattering light.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 10:10
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Relenteless Pursuit,
 
"Mires business"? I was hoping for something more specific. I have shot a pile of big game with Heavy Duplexes, with both 2.5x and 6x scopes. Some was at fair distances, around 350 yards. I have yet to feel mired. But then, as somebody already noted, that's why Leupold offers different reticles.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 10:54
ccoker View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: February/13/2008
Location: Austin, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 2032
agreed, gotta test with clean glass or it's not a valid test

and also agree with the reticle comments
great glass with an ultra thin target reticle that disappears in low light is a useless scope
I am fond of etched reticles in a good #4, love the Kahles CL for those reasons (along with great glass)

I had 2 of the Kahles CL 3-10x50, one with a #4 and one with the standard plex
accidentally won both on Ebay at the same time, kept the #4 and all my subsequent scopes have been a #4

I don't like combat/ranging reticles as they obscure too much of the target for me
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 11:00
Relentless Pursuit View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: March/09/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 61
John,
 
I've killed alotta stuff,with alotta stuff.
 
The 6x42 remains my favorite glass and with standard duplex,it'll get a guy to 1K on critters,if one is inclined.
 
Fenceposts for stadia lines,do not aid crosshair intersection aquisitions................... 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 15:53
John Barsness View Drop Down
Optics Optimist
Optics Optimist


Joined: January/27/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 785
Well, there you are. You can provide actual details if pressed.
 
I also shoot quite a bit to 1000 yards (and on occasion even farther) but all on targets and varmints. I wouldn't use a Heavy Duplex for that shooting either.
 
But like many, I have no desire to try to plunk a deer at vast ranges, for various reasons--and see no reason at all to do it on something like a Cape buffalo. One reason is probably that my hunting mentors taught me that part of hunting is getting closer--in other words, stalking. For a lot of my big game hunting, then, a Heavy Duplex works very well.
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 16:10
big boar View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/26/2009
Location: ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 77
I have a 1-4 Leup with the standard(?) plex and just last year bought the heavy plex 1-4 Leupold. After last years hunt I prefer the heavy plex. Took a deer at full run at 50 yds in thick bush and the heavy plex stood out, I think, much better than the thinner plex. Very easy to pick it out in the thick stuff. If I shot over 200yds though, I don't think I'd be as pleased with it.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 16:27
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
   bb,I plan on setting up a 16"sq target at 300yds this summer just to see what I can do with my hvy plex. No shooting bench just a makeshift rest where I watch for deer in the off season. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 18:07
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4613
I wanted to protect my optics better and also dislike the time it takes to clean them. I bought a RainCote kit for my Leupold and was happy that my new Nightforce came with polarized flip-up caps. Obviously adding filters or other covers detracts from the view but I've found the RainCotes didn't dim the scope much. The flip-ups aren't great to look through but are passable for a sub-100 yard snap shot. Anything longer I've either already blown the stalk or will have time to pop them up.

It sure makes you wonder how long optics last over in the Sandbox.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 18:38
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14313
For me, the redeeming value of a heavy duplex is better acquisition in poor light.  Depending on the design of the reticle, specifically how much space is between the fence posts and how thin the center portion of the crosshairs are, low light contrast and suitability for long range shooting doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/10/2009 at 22:44
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24220
Makes you want to put camera filters on the scopes.  I had that idea 40 years ago.  But I figured that since the scope companies weren't doing it that it must be degrading to the image or the image-gathering of the optics.  What did I know?  I was a teenager shoveling manure on the farm.
 
Fast forward 40 years.........Leupold comes out with ( ahem ) MY idea and creates their screw-on filter-y thingamabobs...( which saves them the trouble of doing a Rainguard coating across the board----PLUS they can charge more for the accessory...!! ). 
 
THREAD THE DAMN SCOPE TUBES SCOPE MANUFACTURERS!!!  [ I wonder if I can get paid as a consultant?? ]  We'll put lens-saving Filters on there!!!  [ First check to see what SIZE filters are being manufactured, please.....49mm,  52mm,  etc., etc.....]   Bucky
 
Send the check to my bank................
 
 
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Additional notes on "brightness" testing"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Photo Contest #11 -- "NEW" Skylar McMahon Hot Shots 21
Photo Contest #11 -- "NEW" POLL Skylar McMahon Hot Shots 0
Kahles CL MultiZero "Key" JF4545 Tripods, sun shades, lens covers, etc. 3
Photo Contest #24 "Signs" cheaptrick Hot Shots 20
POLL: Photo Contest #24 "Signs" Skylar McMahon Hot Shots 0
Another "which scope" thread GunsIsFuns Rifle Scopes 7
Photo Contest #30 - "Industry" Skylar McMahon Hot Shots 0
Know a scope with "narrow" "turret base"??? leakycow Rifle Scopes 1
Range Report For "Thunder" Ernie Bishop The Range Report 10
Suggestions for new "toy" SVT_Tactical Tactical Scopes 23


This page was generated in 0.344 seconds.