Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Is a FoV formula available? |
Post Reply |
Author | |
tpcollins
Optics Journeyman Joined: January/12/2009 Status: Offline Points: 428 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: January/13/2010 at 08:06 |
I asked something similar about FoV for a 3-9 scope set at 6x with a FoV of 39'-13.5- and got this response:
************************************************
No, roughly speaking, the FOV at 6X would be half of what it is at 3X and 1.5 times what it is at 9X. However, there is rarely an exact progression from the low to the high end. If you divide 39 in half (39 * 6/3), you get 19.5 and if you multiply 13.5 X 1.5 (13.5 * 9/6) you get 20.25. It might be reasonable to average those two values (19.875) and consider the scope to have about a 20' FOV @ 6X.
If my math is right, a 3-9 scope would typically show half of its FOV (.e.g 26.25) around 4.5X. ************************************************ This formula doesn't seem to work on my Redfield 3-9x40 that lists a FoV of 42.5 - 10.9' At 6x for example, 1/2 of 42.5' = 21.25' and 1 1/2 times 10.9' is 16.35'. That's a difference of 4.9' compared to the .75' in the above example. Do I still average those numbers or have I messed up somewhere? I was wanting to figure the various settings on my 2-7x32 which lists 57.78' - 18.34' and wondering if there's a formula to figure FoV at every power setting? Thanks.
|
|
8shots
Optics Jedi Knight Lord Of The Flies Joined: March/14/2007 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The field of view is determined by the size of the field stop ring.
This is a general formula:
This will give you field of view in degrees, which can be converted to MOA and to feet.
So you need to know the field stop diameter of your telescope . Only the manufacturers will have that info (or break it open and measure it!!!)
You then need your focal length, which changes through the zoom of your power settings. So for each setting say 3X and 6X and 9X you will need the exact focal legth. It is rather technical stuff, which scope manufacturers seem to keep to themselves.
Far easier to sit at a 100yd range and see how much you can see left and right. Get someone to knock in pegs and measure it with a tape measure. Edited by 8shots - January/13/2010 at 08:59 |
|
lucytuma
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: November/25/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 5389 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
"Far easier to sit at a 100yd range and see how much you can see left and right. Get someone to knock in pegs and measure it with a tape measure"
+1 on that "8", actually a pretty good idea.
|
|
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You will get closer number if you start with the higher magnification FOV and work off of that. For example, for the Redfield, the field of view at 9x is 10.9 ft@100yards. It is probably pretty safe to assume that at 4.5x, it is double that (21.8ft@100yards) or very close that. At lower magnifications other factors come into play, so the change in FOV is not always linear. However, for the top 70% or so of the magnification range, it is pretty linear. ILya
|
|
SVT_Tactical
MODERATOR Chief Sackscratch Joined: December/17/2009 Location: NorthCackalacky Status: Offline Points: 31233 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Set your rifle, unloaded, in a rest, look through the scope and then go out to where the edges of view are and measure, Easier than all that math and you won't have a headache!
|
|
magshooter1
Optics Professional Joined: August/27/2008 Location: El Dorado, AR Status: Offline Points: 827 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Subtract the high end magnification form low end magnification. 42.5-10.9=31.6 Divide 31.6 by the difference of low to high pwer 9-3=6 31.6/6=5.27 (rounded). Starting at 3x subtract 5.27 from 42.5
3x=42.5
4x=42.50-5.27=37.23
5x=37.23-5.27=31.96
6x=31.96-5.27=26.69
7x=26.69-5.27=21.42
8x=21.42-5.27=16.15
9x=16.15-5.27=10.88
|
|
Some people are educated BEYOND their intelligence.
|
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Unfortunately, that does not work for most scopes, since there is non-linear field of view constriction at low magnifications. ILya
|
|
magshooter1
Optics Professional Joined: August/27/2008 Location: El Dorado, AR Status: Offline Points: 827 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
"Unfortunately, that does not work for most scopes, since there is non-linear field of view constriction at low magnifications."
|
|
Some people are educated BEYOND their intelligence.
|
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I mean something like this (very hypothetical and not drawn to scale):
|
|
magshooter1
Optics Professional Joined: August/27/2008 Location: El Dorado, AR Status: Offline Points: 827 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That's kinda what I figured it would be like after reading about the non-linear constriction.
So it would actually be closer to correct if you added the derived number (5.27) to the high end FoV and worked your way down in magnification.
|
|
Some people are educated BEYOND their intelligence.
|
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Not really, no. Your 5.27 number is derived assuming linear change in FoV. ILya
|
|
magshooter1
Optics Professional Joined: August/27/2008 Location: El Dorado, AR Status: Offline Points: 827 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
So while you cannot get an exact number for FoV you can get a number that will in actuallity (sp?) be a liitle bit less than the actual FoV?
|
|
Some people are educated BEYOND their intelligence.
|
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The closest would probably be to just take the FoV at the highest magnification (9x, for example). At half the magnification, you can assume that the field of view will be double that. At magnifications between 4.5x and 9x, it will be pretty linear. At lower magnifications, you just do not know for sure. ILya
|
|
tpcollins
Optics Journeyman Joined: January/12/2009 Status: Offline Points: 428 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks Koshkin, actually it's the mid and upper powers that I was interested in. When sitting on stand deer hunting, I keep my 3-9 or 2-7 set at about 4.5 - 5 power and don't recall ever changing it to make a shot except one time. I think compensating for the extra shake at higher powers while hunting is counter productive. Actually I think a scope with something like 4-7 variable power would be better suited than what's offered now.
|
|
TwoLaneBlackTop
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/02/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 52 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have a spreadsheet that does a pretty good job of predicting the FOV of a scope throughout the range based on the FOV at the minimum and maximum magnifications. If you want to compare the FOV of several scopes within the same magnification range you enter the data, and then integrate the equation for the predicted line across the desired magnification range and the one giving the greatest area under the curve will have the greatest average FOV throughout the selected limits.
Edited by TwoLaneBlackTop - January/18/2010 at 07:35 |
|
Post Reply | |
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 |