Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
good glass vs. magnification |
Post Reply | Page <123> |
Author | |
RONK
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: April/05/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3199 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I don't like very brightly-colored targets, especially bright orange ones when I'm trying to shoot very tight groups. They tend to "flare" on me, drawing my eye away from the intersection of the crosshairs. Dull reds aren't so bad, but I like gray best, for that and for the reason Budperm noted.
|
|
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Cool, I'll have to try the gray. I haven't experimented with different colors but I do
know that I don't like "plain Jayne" black on traditional paper
targets. I don't get the flare using orange but it sounds like I'm using a lot smaller circles than you Ron.
|
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
budperm
Optics Retard show me your sheep!! Joined: January/01/2009 Location: Pennsylvania Status: Offline Points: 31710 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
"Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading".
--Thomas Jefferson |
|
onfinal
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/28/2009 Status: Offline Points: 135 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks for all the input. Very helpful and I appreciate it, but leads to one more question: does a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40 qualify as "good glass" or is it not there yet?
|
|
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
onfinal, you would not be disappointed with a Zeiss Conquest as it will run circles around your Leupold VX-1. |
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
John Barsness
Optics Optimist Joined: January/27/2009 Status: Offline Points: 785 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Am not suggesting that Leupold glass is the best in the world, but am constantly puzzled by examples that don't fit my experience. Was out the other day shooting a .257 Weatherby at 200 meters (219 yards) and could see the bullet holes easily with a 3.5-10x40 VX-III (not the latest VX-3)--and 25-caliber bullets holes at 219 yards are considerably smaller than .224 bullet holes at 100. |
|
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Everyone's eyes are different. My shooting partner, for example, with the same scope carefully tuned to his eyes sees very different amount of detail than I do. Then there is another consideration entirely: I suspect that most shooters close their other eye completely when using a high mag riflescope. If you keep just slightly open, it changes the visual acuity of your shooting eye. ILya |
|
sakomato
Optics Master Joined: February/28/2008 Location: Houston Status: Offline Points: 1166 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Perhaps we need to get E over here to teach us how to focus those Leupolds!
Uhh.......not!
John, I have seen a couple of Leupolds that had an almost clear image but several that did not. I do think they are a usable optic rifle sighting instrument but IMO are totally outclassed by the Conquest. I reload for over 40 rifles, most of them very seldom, and some of those do have Leupolds on them. The quality of the image seems to vary some from one to the other.
The 3x9x40 has the same clarity as the higher powers, just not as much light gathering. The Conquests are larger and heavier.
|
|
Guns only have 2 enemies, rust and politicians
|
|
John Barsness
Optics Optimist Joined: January/27/2009 Status: Offline Points: 785 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
sakomato,
I would agree on all points, partly because Leupold makes different levels of scopes. But I do not think that a Leupold VX-3, for instance, is totally outclassed by the Conquest, because I bave tested both at night on my optics chart.
At the moment, I have a 3-9x Conquest, a Swarovski Z3 and Z6, a 3-9x Trijicon, several Burris's, several Bushhell 4200's, and a Nightforce on various rifles. I am familiar with the view through a Zeiss Conquest, as I was sent one of the very first made, and have used several since.
I was not claiming that Leupold makes the best glass in the world (as was plainly stated in my first post on third thread) just that my experience with seeing bullets holes with a 3.5-10x was different than somebody else's.
But I have grown a little weary of some of the claims I have seen against Leupold on opticstalk. Another one a few months ago was from a guy who claimed that he now used only Swarovski because he was unable to aim at a deer in daylight across an open meadow at 200 yards with a 3.5-10x Leupold. Such BS is just as bad as claiming that Leupolds have the best glass in the world.
|
|
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I think we know your position on Leupold products, so what's your thought's on glass vs. magnification?
|
|
onfinal
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/28/2009 Status: Offline Points: 135 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I wasn't trying to start a heated debate about the pros and cons of Leupold products when I asked my original question about good glass. Much of my experience is with hand guns (wanna talk Glocks?) and I'm a little late to the quality optics party, as you can see.
What others can see through their whatever is beside the point. I have a Leupold VX-1 that I feel is inadequate for my needs and I was trying to get a feel for what would meet my needs, considering weight, length and cost limitations. I was looking for answers not a critique, and to the 99% of you who responded with good ideas about good glass and targets, thank you very much. The search begins.......... |
|
Trays 7940
Optics Master Joined: August/09/2009 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 1149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I got in here late but, I can see 223 holes at 100yds with my Super Sniper 10X with nooo problem at all... My eyes are not as good as they once were either... I think I would have to go with good glass over Magnification.... Atleast right now...
|
|
TJ427
Optics GrassHopper Joined: September/27/2009 Status: Offline Points: 5 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks for the info. There really is no substitute for quality glass.
|
|
Tip69
Optics Master Extraordinaire Tip Stick Joined: September/27/2005 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 4155 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I'm really glad you opened this thread, as I think I learned something about the type of target I was using and what type of optic I was trying to see my holes with! Will be trying some plain white paper with various "bullseyes" to see which are easier to see the holes with!
So, my opinion might change slightly. Currently, I think it's a combination of good glass and magnification. |
|
take em!
|
|
onfinal
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/28/2009 Status: Offline Points: 135 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I'm glad I opened it, too. I had not given that much thought to targets before, but I will now. I have already found a white/light gray target that will replace the black/dark red ones I was getting at the range. I still plan to upgrade from the Leupold VX-1 though. |
|
John Barsness
Optics Optimist Joined: January/27/2009 Status: Offline Points: 785 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I often use blue-and-white targets. They give very good contrast too, while allowing bullet holes to be seen. There are some very good ones on the market, such as those from Mountain Plains, but I also carry a couple of big, blue Magic Markers in my range bag to make targets. Blue also works very well for iron sights, as well as scopes.
|
|
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Blue looks like another good color try John.
I'd like to try this one for my rifle with open sights. |
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
Jon A
Optics Journeyman Joined: March/14/2008 Location: Everett, WA Status: Offline Points: 670 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yes, as mentioned target color can make a big difference. Even with good glass, a bullet can "hide in the black" sometimes when other holes are very obvious. I also print my own targets and instead of using black I use a dark gray which helps quite a bit.
Back to the original question, yes good glass can certainly trump magnification within reason. A good example for me in the theme of seeing holes in targets was with a 2.5-10 IOR I could often see 30 cal holes at 300 yds I could not see with a Leupold 4.5-14X50 VXIII. But as I said--within reason. For an example the other way, while the glass of that IOR was certainly better (by a ways) when on the same power as my Vortex Viper 6.5-20X50, I can pretty easily see .22 cal holes at 300 with the Viper where the IOR doesn't have a prayer. |
|
John Barsness
Optics Optimist Joined: January/27/2009 Status: Offline Points: 785 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
A lot also depends on objective size. A smaller objective at the same magnification doesn't allow as fine resolution as a larger objective with the same magnification, everything being equal.
|
|
Post Reply | Page <123> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |