New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Help, with Kahles Scope choice
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Help, with Kahles Scope choice

 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: January/03/2008 at 22:02
Bullwrinkle View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: January/03/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 4

I was hoping if you guys could point me in the right direction of what kahles scope I should get (from samplelist) for low light - moonlight hunting for ferral hogs.  This scope will be going on a 22-250 rem. 700 and shots will taken within 125 yds. Where i hunt, hogs only come out at night, ruining crops from watermelons to sorgum. Thanks 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/04/2008 at 05:03
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044

The 2.5-10x50 or the 3-12x56 would both work. They are both 30mm tubes and are available with 4A and 7A reicles. Some of the folks around here like the 4A because it is fast. I have 7A's and like them. They are just as heavy as the 4A and easy to use in low light, but have the top post.

I'm not sure if the 2.5-10 would be able to be mounted lower since they both will require high mounts of some type.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/04/2008 at 07:54
ND2000 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/29/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 308
I am going to give you different advice.  Get the 1.5-6x42 C.  That will be plenty of power out to 125 yards (6x is plenty past 200 yds easy).  It is also lighter and can be mounted lower than the 50mm+ objectives.  This will also deliver more light to your eye than you can use anyway.
 
Keep in mind the 30mm tube is irrelevant from a brightness perspective, relative to the 1 inch.  The real benefit to the 30mm is greater adjustment range, which you won't need in this particular case.
 
ND2000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/04/2008 at 10:59
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
The 30mm tubes do not affect exit pupil. I was trying to point out mounting would be different. I have the 2.2-9x42C and my brother the 1.5-6x42C. Both are in standard Talley QD's, good for any light we've ever hunted in with the heavy reticles.
I don't hunt swine, but from what I've gathered around here it can occur in heavy cover. Having a 7mm exit pupil while being zoomed up to 8x might be an advantage in this regard. It does allow you to see smaller branches in more detail. This is where a Hubbel sized objective helps.


Edited by tahqua - January/04/2008 at 12:36
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/04/2008 at 11:09
TheDrakeTaker View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/21/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 201
I'd tend to agree with ND in this case, get the 1.5-6X42 off the sample list.  Tahqua does bring up a good point, but 125 yards and in on a watermelon patch you should be fine with 6x.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/09/2008 at 21:15
Bullwrinkle View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: January/03/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 4
Okay, I got the Kahles 1.5-6 42mm helia C 7a recticle scope in yesterday, and I compared it to my leupold Vx-II 3-9 42mm in my backyard at dusk conditions and then fully dark (with the exception of surrounding street lights in the distance, not as good as moonlight conditions since their was no moon out).  I compared these scopes at 80yds, then 65yds, and finally 45 yds.  Honestly speaking, my Vx-II was slightly clearer and the thin crosshairs it has could be seen a tad bit easier than the 7a.  Since I hunt hogs at moonlight, I placed a black T-shirt on a post at 45yds and I compared the two scopes.   Again my Vx-II was a bit clearer and I could make out the intersection of the crosshairs, unlike the kahles.  I want to say that my Kahles scope was defective since the best focus I could get out of it was rotated fully clockwise.  I was outside comparing the two for 2hrs and really wanted to find a reason why the kahles scope could be better.  I even had 2 others look through both to compare, and they said the scopes seemed the same. Any thoughts? Shoot%20Self
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/09/2008 at 23:09
TheDrakeTaker View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/21/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 201
You need to get the two scopes out in the field and compare them over several hours to see the difference.  I have run into the problem you have before, street lights will dilate your eyes and you will not be able to tell any difference between any scopes.  When you get into the field you will see a difference I promise.  So don't get worked up, just give a true comparison before you jump to any conclusions.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 07:10
Focus View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar
Conquistador!!

Joined: June/05/2007
Location: Maine
Status: Offline
Points: 1006
The leupold won't be 42mm but 40mm, there should be a noticeable difference in brightness and resolution between the two scopes with or without streetlights. Agree that getting away from reflected light will give you a truer sight picture....but ....you should see some difference at noon in full daylight. The leupold reticle will be thinner and less easy to see in low light than a heavier 7a reticle. Simple post size makes this a fact, 4a and 7a are for low light conditions while the std leupold plex is more for fine target work and not covering the target, unless you have a heavy duplex in the leupold. Your findings seem opposite to the norm for all aspects, there must be something not right with the kahles.

   Focus
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 08:55
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
thats funny a vxII better than a kahles c
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 11:51
TheDrakeTaker View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/21/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 201
I disagree focus, when I first got my Kahles C I compared it with my nikon buckmaster with street lights on at dusk and I could not tell a difference.  The stray light dilates your eyes and you can't get a true image.  The only way to do this is in the field over time letting your eyes dilate with the fading light.   The coatings on the Kahles are also designed to transmit certain colors better like a deer's hide for example.  You will only see the real difference in a hunting situation.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 12:05
Focus View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar
Conquistador!!

Joined: June/05/2007
Location: Maine
Status: Offline
Points: 1006
I'll defer to your opinion about streetlights......where I live we have stars and moonlight.....not streetlights. Your last statement is incorrect however..... as I suspect ILya who does more scope testing than all the rest of us combined doesn't only work in hunting situations. I use acuity charts and contrast charts and can tell optical differences right behind my home and low light evaluation is best done with several scopes at the same time from a good rest with a stationary target. The thing that allows a scope to pick out textures such as deer hide lie more with the resolution (clarity) than with the color correction which will favor soft (reds) or white (blues). You will see the real difference in low light with brightness and reticle prominence, while acuity will be easiest with more light or an indirect light source at the chart in low light. There are some comparisons and tests I do at full light, there are some I do into a setting sun, and there are some I like to do in failing or extremely low light.

On a side note I just took a VX ll leupold and a zeiss conquest out in full afternoon light and compared them on the same power setting. There is a LOT of optical difference to my eyes and its not even low light yet. You guys all tell me that the kahles is better yet than the conquest.......hmmmm......than there is something wrong with this picture that bullwinkle and his friends are seeing.

   Focus

Edited by Focus - January/10/2008 at 12:21
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 13:17
TheDrakeTaker View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/21/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 201
Focus, I'm sure you have compared many scopes.  These guys who posted may not have, it will take a little while for them to see the difference most likely.  I can see way they are confused though because it took me awhile to be able to see the difference.  It's easy to tell now with a trained eye, but going from only using low end scopes then using a high end one it will take some time for them to really see where the difference in clarity comes in.  I can tell a difference between scopes in full lighting as well now that I have spent some time looking, but the difference is not as easy to see.  All I was saying is that being in the field for a period of time and watching the light fade is an easier way to see a difference in scopes.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 13:23
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
actually ilya doesnt hunt much at all
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 14:22
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
I hesitate to respond to this thread knowing the backlash that I will receive from various leaders in the "Kahles cult" but I feel that I must put my two cents in. As you may recall, in a previous thread of mine I told of my dissapointment with my new Kahles CL. Of course my opinions fell on deaf ears because after all it is a Kahles CL and that should be reason enough to be totally satisfied with my new scope. You remember, putty filled holes, reticle changing colors,etc.. Well, after reading this thread it seems as though Mr. Bullwrinkle is not happy with his Kahles. I am glad that this topic has come up again because last time after receiving my beatings for my Kahles complaints, I didn't dare go on about what I thought about looking through the darn thing. Before I go any further I want to make one thing clear I like Kahles and I'm not saying that they are a bad scope by any means-BUT, I don't think that they are the greatest thing since sliced bread either, as some would have me to believe. when I first looked thru my CL I was not overwhelmed with what I saw. It was OK but so was my Zeiss Conquest. After comparing the two (CL and Conquest) in various lighting outdoors and in.-No steetlights, the truth is I found little if no difference in the two, here we go - FOR MY EYES. Believe me, I wanted the Kahles to be better, I dropped some serious cash on the thing and everybody says it's better so I was looking for that element of "better" I just couldn't find it. If I really get honest with myself and humble myself I would say that I could have saved alot of money and bought another conquest. I know some of you will disagree with my findings,but like I said this is my conclusion for MY EYES.   Bricat
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 14:28
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
i will say this i believe in a fight between the kahles scopes mentioned in this thread and also the zeiss scopes mentioned you cannot go wrong with either choice
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 14:33
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
EXACTLY CORRECT MY FRIEND!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 14:36
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
Hitler like Zeiss!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:13
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
I guess I'm missing something. What does Hitler have to do with any discussion regarding scopes around here.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:15
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
good question not much of a fan myself
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:42
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
UHH..nothing. thought the avatar was frickin' hilarious   Adolph and Carl-both German. Don't read it to it too much boys, just a little levity.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:44
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 12709
Originally posted by tahqua tahqua wrote:

The 2.5-10x50 or the 3-12x56 would both work. They are both 30mm tubes and are available with 4A and 7A reicles. Some of the folks around here like the 4A because it is fast. I have 7A's and like them. They are just as heavy as the 4A and easy to use in low light, but have the top post.

I'm not sure if the 2.5-10 would be able to be mounted lower since they both will require high mounts of some type.



Question.....how's is the 4A reticle faster than say a plex? It's probably just me growing up with a duplex style reticle but I don't see a 4A being faster, in fact the times I've played with it I've found it slower but again it could be me trying to get used to it. From my very limited use of the 4A , it appears to be a very good choice for woods, close to medium distance, and low light conditions.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:44
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
Wait a minute, Adolph was Austrian!  post should read "Hitler like Kahles"
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:48
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
hmmm we need to hire you a writer bricat! suppose you will next tell me that hitler was also a fan of glocks too!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:51
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
Originally posted by mike650 mike650 wrote:

Originally posted by tahqua tahqua wrote:

The 2.5-10x50 or the 3-12x56 would both work. They are both 30mm tubes and are available with 4A and 7A reicles. Some of the folks around here like the 4A because it is fast. I have 7A's and like them. They are just as heavy as the 4A and easy to use in low light, but have the top post.

I'm not sure if the 2.5-10 would be able to be mounted lower since they both will require high mounts of some type.



Question.....how's is the 4A reticle faster than say a plex? It's probably just me growing up with a duplex style reticle but I don't see a 4A being faster, in fact the times I've played with it I've found it slower but again it could be me trying to get used to it. From my very limited use of the 4A , it appears to be a very good choice for woods, close to medium distance, and low light conditions.

 
I can't say because I don't have a 4A. I do like the 7A for long range and can see where not having the top post would hurt. The top post gives me a larger vertical reference for this type of shooting, IMO. Besides, like you, growing up has perimeter trained this dog on plex typesWink.


Edited by tahqua - January/10/2008 at 20:35
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2008 at 15:55
Focus View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar
Conquistador!!

Joined: June/05/2007
Location: Maine
Status: Offline
Points: 1006
Quote Besides, like you, growing up has perimeter trained this dog on plex typesWink.


Thats why I prefer a 7a reticle over a 4a. That long plex training has made me want a reticle with the top post also.

Focus
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Help, with Kahles Scope choice"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Hunting scope choice...help with research Jwterry3 Rifle Scopes 7
Help with scope choice harrydog Rifle Scopes 8
Mosin Nagant Scope Choice Help/Suggestions JunkTruck Rifle Scopes 7
Help for Tatical Scope Choice??? boxstereye Tactical Scopes 4
Help with scope choice: Swaro Z3 vs VX6 vs Zeiss sns2 Rifle Scopes 2
Scope Choice - Kahles or ??? blacktails Rifle Scopes 10
Scope choice - Help Ripper‏ Tactical Scopes 13
Help with scope choices please dan1942 Rifle Scopes 22
Overwhelmed---Help with scope choice for 30-06 Bboy623 Rifle Scopes 4
Help with scope choices shoff14 Tactical Scopes 7


This page was generated in 0.344 seconds.