Print Page | Close Window

4200 vs bigsky

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Rifle Scopes
Forum Description: Centerfire long gun scopes
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=15562
Printed Date: March/29/2024 at 10:59
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: 4200 vs bigsky
Posted By: amk204
Subject: 4200 vs bigsky
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 15:46
Beating a Dead Horse  I still need help what is the better scope ?? its going on a 300wsm. this is for deer, elk.  The 2 scopes are sightron sii big-sky 3.5-10x50  @  bushnell 4200 2.5-10x50. both have plex. ret. witch one is better in low light??  50$ diff between them.  Thank you for all input both past @ present.

-------------
Life is to short to shoot an ugly gun



Replies:
Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 15:47
I would say the Sightron will be slightly better.  They are pretty amazing glass wise.

-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: pyro6999
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 15:49
i think i would take the sightron also.

-------------
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 16:10
http://www.swfa.com/pc-10612-1511-new-sightron-3-12x42-sii-big-sky-riflescope.aspx - SIIB31242AO http://www.swfa.com/pc-10612-1511-new-sightron-3-12x42-sii-big-sky-riflescope.aspx">New Sightron 3-12x42 SII Big Sky Riflescope                                                                             New Sightron 3-12x42 SII Big Sky Riflescope
  • $50.00 Mail in Rebate (expires 12/31/2009)
  • Matte
  • Plex
  • 1"
  • Adjustable Objective
  • Target Knobs
SWFA: $519.95
http://www.swfa.com/pc-10612-1511-new-sightron-3-12x42-sii-big-sky-riflescope.aspx">More Info... http://www.swfa.com/addtocart.aspx?returnurl=showcategory.aspx&productid=10612&variantid=10592">Buy Now
http://www.kentonindustries.com/pics/picbytype/ - http://www.kentonindustries.com/pics/picbytype/   with kenton knobs on the Target knobs and the adjustable objective running 42mm rather than 50mm to get it closer to the bore. The only advantage in going up from 42 to 50 mm is you gain one power in low light, You have to dial down to 6x to be super bright at 42mm and you have to dial down to 7x to be super bright at 50mm in low light.  The 42mm scopes generally handle very nicely.  The bonus here is you just picked up half a power on the low end and two additionall power on the high end so seems like a win win to me.

-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 16:22
If you were willing to give up one power on the low end you could go with this one.
http://www.swfa.com/pc-10622-1511-new-sightron-4-16x42-sii-big-sky-riflescope.aspx - SIIB41642 http://www.swfa.com/pc-10622-1511-new-sightron-4-16x42-sii-big-sky-riflescope.aspx">New Sightron 4-16x42 SII Big Sky Riflescope                                                                             New Sightron 4-16x42 SII Big Sky Riflescope
  • $50.00 Mail in Rebate (expires 12/31/2009)
  • Matte
  • Plex
  • 1"
  • Adjustable Objective
  • Target Knobs
SWFA: $548.95
http://www.swfa.com/pc-10622-1511-new-sightron-4-16x42-sii-big-sky-riflescope.aspx">More Info... http://www.swfa.com/addtocart.aspx?returnurl=showcategory.aspx&productid=10622&variantid=10602">Buy Now


-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: Horsemany
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 17:05
Good advice.  I'm much rather have a 42 than a 50 on a 300wsm.


Posted By: Cbissell07
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 19:38
why's that?


Posted By: rifle looney
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 19:41
IMO...size/bulk.....weight

-------------




Posted By: Cbissell07
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 19:42
because i have a light weight 300WSM and i too am looking at these scopes for it. and a conquest(99% chance that will be going on it)


Posted By: rifle looney
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 19:48
I ran a 50mm on an 300 win mag and just hated it while hunting its just big enough too get in the way bushes ,limbs, what ever! I put a 40mm and fell in love again.

-------------




Posted By: Horsemany
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 20:44
You know I don't own a single rifle that doesn't feel better without a scope on it at all.  So when I'm scoping them I want the scope as compact and lightweight as possible.  50mm scopes are higher and heavier than necessary on a big game rifle IMO.  They give a top heavy feel when shooting offhand.  50mm's I use only on benchguns anymore.  And if you're using a good quality scope in 40mm or 44mm you probably won't need more brightness especially in the lower magnifcation ranges appropriate for big game scopes.


Posted By: newreloader
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 21:38
I have always thought you needed to have bigger mm scopes such as a 50. After reading this it makes better sense not to have one.


Posted By: cyborg
Date Posted: February/20/2009 at 23:48
You only need the bigger obj if you are going to be utilizing higher mags in low light or you will be doing a lot of target range stuff and need the extra resolution. In that instance you'd also need the best glass you can afford. For hunting resolution is a nice advantage, but the proper coatings and power to obj ratio for your range usage is more important. A 40mm at the proper range and power is not giving up anything to a 50mm for most North American hunting purposes.

-------------
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other

An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects.

OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause.

Cyborg


Posted By: amk204
Date Posted: February/21/2009 at 06:49
Ok, the next question sense 50mm are out would you go up in mag?? witch one is better 4200 4-16x40 sf plex or big-sky 3-12x42 mill dot. same money 430. I don't want a AO, It's just one more thing to f-with when you should be shooting.








-------------
Life is to short to shoot an ugly gun


Posted By: Horsemany
Date Posted: February/21/2009 at 07:06
Originally posted by amk204 amk204 wrote:

Ok, the next question sense 50mm are out would you go up in mag?? witch one is better 4200 4-16x40 sf plex or big-sky 3-12x42 mill dot. same money 430. I don't want a AO, It's just one more thing to f-with when you should be shooting.






 
No I wouldn't go up in magnification.  You're right AO on a big game scope is not necessary.  Really a deer at 500 yds is easily seen and shot with a 10x scope.  I've shot prairie dogs on 10x @ 500yds.  It's easy to overscope a big game rifle.  I've found it's more beneficial to have low end than big high end magnification.  Even here on the plains you often find deer in creek bottoms and you're right on top of them when the shot presents itself.  There's really nothing a 3-9x can't do on a big game rifle IMO.


Posted By: hunter12345
Date Posted: February/21/2009 at 14:00
The Sightron Big Sky is the better choice.


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: February/21/2009 at 17:26
Correct power  range depends on how  you hunt. If you hunt stalking in brush or  timber you are better off with low powers which give wider  field of view and allow you to acquire the  target more rapidly. Under such  circumstances an illuminated retilce is a big advantage the trijicon Accupoint scopes are  very deadly.  If on the other hand you hunt from a blind or tree stand or along the edge of a field  from a fixed position you have more time to get on  target so more  power can be an advantage because you can look more  closely at the game to see if you want to select to shoot that particular one. 

-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: 257WM_CDL-SF
Date Posted: March/24/2009 at 13:34
I really like the Sightron SII BIG SKY  4.5x14x42 with HHR reticle  would it be to much just to deer hunt with ??


Posted By: huff143
Date Posted: March/24/2009 at 15:40
Stan,
 
I have a 4-16x42 Big Sky, and no, it isn't too much to deer hunt with. 
 
It mostly depends on what type of habitat you hunt the most.  I hunt from a stand with a good add-on rest which overlooks a large field.  If most of your hunting is in dense timber where shots are seldom over 50 to 100 yds then you might look at something with a weaker low end.
 
Huff


Posted By: Dshusker
Date Posted: March/24/2009 at 17:39
Both very fine scopes. I own both and prefer the 4200s for low light transmission and the Rainguard coating. I think the 3X9X40 is hard to beat. Great price/value equation IMO.


Posted By: skilly1979
Date Posted: March/25/2009 at 21:42
4 power on the low end ain't good enough for 50 or 100 yards shots, how low do you want to go, any lower then you might as well use iron sights. i never u nderstood the need for 1x ,2x, 3, for low end you should just use iron sights because magnification is to make your target bigger to engage on it and percisely put the bullet where it goes thats why i use a little power. and 16 power on the high end is for looking at the rack, you cant tell how big a deers rack is at 300 yards but with 4 power you cant determine if he is a shooter. it dont take much effort to turn the dial from 4 to 16 and if you decide to varmit hunt then 16 will work fine. better to have it then when you need it and you dont have it. just my opinion


Posted By: Dshusker
Date Posted: March/27/2009 at 17:04
The optics for the 4200 and the Big Sky are made by LOW in Japan. A top notch optics company that competes with the Germans. I wonder how much difference there really is between the two? I own both and prefer the 4200 because of the Rainguard and IMO a better cost/value equation.


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: March/27/2009 at 17:55
I tend to think that for brush hunting stalking deer in the woods an aimpoint red dot is about ideal or a low power Trijicon.  I usually hunt from a stand and have more time to make a carefully placed shot so I do like the 4-16 power range but watch how much eye relief these scopes have as some brands are a lot more forgiving of hard kicking rifles than others.  I would also suggest you give some serious consideration to the new Leupold VX3 in the 4.5-14x40  I cant believe this one is still on samplelist.
10141 Leupold 4.5-14x40 VX-3 http://www.samplelist.com/picture_form.aspx?pic_url=10141_0009.jpg"> 66425, Matte finish, Boone & Crockett reticle, 30mm tube, Long Range, Side Focus, Xtended twilight lens system, 100% new 2009 demo model, used for current SWFA.com web pictures $879.00 $659.95


-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: hunter12345
Date Posted: March/27/2009 at 18:20
My favorite scope is the Big Sky.I also own the Bushnell Elite 4200 but I find the Sightron brighter and clearer.The eye relief on the Sightron is better with a lifetime replacement if the scope breaks.


Posted By: j.chappell
Date Posted: March/28/2009 at 12:47
Originally posted by skilly1979 skilly1979 wrote:

4 power on the low end ain't good enough for 50 or 100 yards shots, how low do you want to go, any lower then you might as well use iron sights. i never u nderstood the need for 1x ,2x, 3, for low end you should just use iron sights because magnification is to make your target bigger to engage on it and percisely put the bullet where it goes thats why i use a little power. and 16 power on the high end is for looking at the rack, you cant tell how big a deers rack is at 300 yards but with 4 power you cant determine if he is a shooter. it dont take much effort to turn the dial from 4 to 16 and if you decide to varmit hunt then 16 will work fine. better to have it then when you need it and you dont have it. just my opinion
 
Are you serious? Wow, I guess I should throw away all of my low end variables cause they havent been doing me any good, come on.
 
I hunt groundhogs here in PA with 4x scopes. If you cannot see a deer well enough to make a shot at 50-100 yards with a scope of any magnification 4 or below then you do not belong in the woods. I realy dont understand how you can make a statement like you do. I can shoot 1.75" groups at 200 yards with many of my fixed 4's and even better with some of my low end variables. I personally do not see the need for a scope that tops out at more than 9-10 power for any big game hunting. If you cannot tell that the buck, bull, ram, boar, or whatever it is that you are shooting is a shooter at 10x then you shouldnt be shooting at that distance anyway.
 
The reason I say this is that I am not a "Next County Cannon" advocate and belive that shots at big game should be taken at reasonable distances and for 99% of your hunting a simple mid range variable will suit you fine.
 
I like it better when a fella just comes out and says that he got that 20" long, 56mm objective, 32x scope for his deer rifle simply because he wanted it and not because it is needed. You can justify any decision you make by simply saying "because I wanted it", I use it all the time.
 
As for the OP if it is possible look at both scopes first hand it is the only true way you will know which one you prefer.
 
J.


Posted By: skilly1979
Date Posted: March/31/2009 at 22:28
thats my point you have 4x for close and high power if needed, better to have when not needed then to have when needed.


Posted By: jetwrnch
Date Posted: April/01/2009 at 05:49
Try using that 4 power in a thicket when a deer jumps up right in front of you and you'll understand the need for a lower magnification. I was walking down a dirt path in the fog last year and found myself within 30 feet of a buck. I'm REAL glad I was using a 1.5x scope. The buck, however, would've preferred that I hadn't. You won't see me in hog country with a minimum of 4 power either.


Posted By: Dshusker
Date Posted: April/01/2009 at 06:37
Good point jetwrnch. Tough to acquire a target in thick cover with 4X.  A 1.5X or 2X is much preferable. I would a 4X14 for shots 200 and beyond, such as Pronghorn or hunting senderos in Texas. Just my opinion.


Posted By: skilly1979
Date Posted: April/01/2009 at 20:59
i have never used anything lower than 4 x. i really never had any trouble close range, thats what i use on my slug gun a 4x fixed weaver. no problems yet. i hunt out of a tree stand always and never on the ground. maybe thats why i never had a problem yet.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net