New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Scope performance evaluation question
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Scope performance evaluation question

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/09/2007 at 18:07
SingingRiver View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: May/06/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Hello, I've been reading this forum trying to digest all the great information, but this is my first post.  I've been convinced to go with German glass - a Swarovski American, Kahles KX/AH or CL, or Zeiss Conquest depending upon how far I can push the budget.  However, before trying to figure out the specific scope I would like some help to clear up some confusion I have.  As background, most of my hunting is whitetail deer or hogs in the deep South.  While I do hunt open fields or pipelines that may result in 200 yards shots, that is the exception. The majority of my hunting is in hardwood bottoms with heavy canopies (creating shadows at high light and dark conditions even before dusk.)  Thus, most hunting is either by very low light in the evening (deer) or moonlight (hogs) at distances under 100 yards and mostly under 75 yards.  With adequate light, a 3-9 scope is all I need for either and a 1.5-6/7 is enough too.  In poor (low) light, I need to see a deer that is brown and black in heavy verticle brush that is also tinged toward brown/black plus shadows. In other words, a deer staying close to cover. I need to see the horns very well.  I also want to extend the hunting time as long as possible. Hogs are dark/black and hunted in moonlight.  Given good optical glass like in the above scopes, magnification works with the objective lens size to further the details of the FOV so long as the FOV doesn't shrink because of the magnification to where the resolution actually decreases.  In one post, a gentlemen stated that he had good resolution from his 36 mm Swarovski even in moonlight, while in another some Alabama hunters raved about their success in early dawn and at dusk with a 56 mm Meostar Meopta.  I'm not a fan of big objective bells on my rifle, but will go that route if dictated by the hunting conditions.  Since I will not get to preview the scopes in the field, I would like to know "how to evaluate for each manufacturer's scopes, the magnification range and objective lens size that will meet the in the field objectives?"  As the various posts state, exit pupil numbers on the scopes at particular magnification will not, by itself, provide the answer.  I would be happy with a 1.5-6 X36 if it will do the job under hunting conditions.  Likewise with a 3-9 x40.  However, is there a way to evaluate other than trial and error?  Any help will be appreciated. (Sorry, I couldn't get the question out in a shorter format  )  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/09/2007 at 18:34
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7702

Actually, exit pupil is one of the very best indices by which you should be judging.  Goosd glass is a must-have, but exit pupil tells the story.  Stick with soemthing good (all of the ones you mentioned are "good" at worst) and you will be very pleased.

 

Magnification isn't the biggest thing, bell diameter ain't your biggest thing: get a good scope with good glass and an objective in the 36-40mm range and night shooting will be fine, especially with a spotlight to supplement.

 

My recommendation, given your specifics, would be to skip the 3-9 and go the 1.5-6x route.  First and foremost, that gives you the greatest FOV for wooded areas where a part of a target may be all you initially see.  Also, 6x is more than adequte for deer-sized game at 200 yards.

 

Do not get a huge bell!  40mm is fine, 36 will work.  I too hunt deer and hogs in the South (mostly in Texas, near the border) and my favorite scopes have 40 mm objectives as the max.  You need a rifele/scope that moves well, tracks well, is good in the brush, and that doesn't carry weight not needed.  Get something like the Kahles 1.5-6x 42 or even the 2-7x36 (sample list has both) or the Zeiss 1.5-6x42 (with illuminated reticle on the sample list) and you will be a happy, well-fed hunter!

 

The Zeiss costs a little$$, but worth every penny!

 

And a final note: don't save money on the scope you will be frequently hunting.  Save for awhile if you must, but don't save on the optics, you will regret it!

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/09/2007 at 19:37
HuntMaster View Drop Down
Optics Professional
Optics Professional
Avatar

Joined: March/19/2007
Location: St Stephens,Al.
Status: Offline
Points: 991

Welcome to the OT, singingriver.

I too hunt in the deep south .(Washington co., Al.- southwest Al.) I must say from experience in extreme dense woods, I recommend 50 - 56 mm objectives and only on good glass (German , Ausrian, or Czech). This size bell on cheap stuff is nothing more than a decoration. I've tried all sizes, and this is what works best for me.

Good luck,

Derek 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/09/2007 at 22:38
Triple S View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: May/08/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9
I agree completely with Huntmaster and his recomendation. I too hunt in the deep south and know all about getting the most out of your scope when it comes to last light. As you know, the mature bucks we all seek seem too only move at the very last bit of light. When I set out to hunt a mature, dominant buck, I reach for my 56mm Zeiss or 56 mm Swarovski. I have Leupolds in every size from 36mm through 50 (both 1" and 30 mm tubes), a 44 and 48 mm Zeiss, and a handful of Nikons from 40 to 50 mm objectives. Yes, the 36 and 40 mm objectives will get you by and I enjoy shooting my Leupolds, "smaller Zeiss, and Nikons. They are great scopes, but they can not compete in low light with the 56 mm. I have used all of them successfully a countless number of times, but when I am serious about a sought after buck the 56 mm Objectives with 30mm tubes get the nod every time. From my experience, I feel as though I get an extra 15 minutes of shooting time. This is happens to be the make or break time when the big boys move! Regardless if I am hunting in a climber, ladder, ground blind, or "condo" stand, the 56mm are made for last light. No, not everyone needs them. They are much heavier, mount much higher, and are not made for every situation. However, if you want to be more successful at last light, go with a quality 56mm. I wish there was scientific evidence on whose scope is the best, but I have not been able to find it. My observations are made on many years of chasing whitetails with all types of scopes.  This is another "opinion" and you will recieve more, but go with what gives you the most confidence. No one can tell you what this will be. Have fun, you are buying a new scope!!!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 08:25
jonbravado View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/05/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1131

i hunt in the hardwood bottoms of SC and lowlight performance is necessary to take advantage of the long legal hours.

 

on my 'all purpose' deer rifle, i have a 56mm meostar - i started w/ a 44mm zeiss conquest, then a 50mm elite 4200, and then

upgrade to the meostar 56mm - it's awesome for the money.

 

it allows a greater exit pupil at higher magnifications.  it may look 'too' big for some, but it really performs when i need it to.

 

if you can't tollerate the big bell on your rifle, i would reccommend going w/ a 50mm objective. 

the kahles KX is a great scope. so is the conquest, elite, monarch UCC, and the meostar.

 

i love the #4 reticle for lowlight and tracking - good luck, and happy hunting.

 

J

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 08:25
jonbravado View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/05/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1131

and welcome to the OT.

 

glad to have you here.

 

J

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 08:37
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13881

Rancid Coolaid is on target a 1.5-6x42 is a very practical hunting scope for 200 yds and under in brush. Note that a 6x42 has a 7mm exit eye pupil and your eye is unlikely to be able to use more light than that. I dont think Euro glass is a must but if you feel you should have Euro glass why not consider IOR  here is one worth considering:

251042 New IOR 2.5-10x42 Hunting 30mm Rifle Scope                  New IOR 2.5-10x42 Hunting 30mm Rifle Scope
  • Matte
  • 4a
  • 30mm
SWFA: $584.95
More Info... Buy Now

 

You are giving up one power on the low end to gain four on the high end and you can turn it down to 6x at dusk. While 1.5 is nice close in I think I could live with 2.5 for a low end. The Nikon Monarch Gold 1.5-6x42 30mm is also well worth a look.



Edited by Urimaginaryfrnd
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 08:57
ceylonc View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: September/13/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 514
Originally posted by HuntMaster HuntMaster wrote:

Welcome to the OT, singingriver.

I too hunt in the deep south .(Washington co., Al.- southwest Al.) I must say from experience in extreme dense woods, I recommend 50 - 56 mm objectives and only on good glass (German , Ausrian, or Czech). This size bell on cheap stuff is nothing more than a decoration. I've tried all sizes, and this is what works best for me.

Good luck,

Derek 

 

I agree with the above post.  I hunt Monroe Co. in Alabama (about 80-90 miles north of Mobile) in heavy hardwood timber & small planted green fields.  Most shots are under 100yds but there are a few places were you're looking at 600yds.  The last two deer seasons I've hunted with a 50mm and 52mm CL, 56mm Zeiss VM/V, 50mm Black Diamond, and 50mm IOR Tactical.  I have to drive almost 6hrs. to get to this property to hunt and, to me, I'm not going to take a chance not seeing a trophy because my scope wasn't up to the task at twilight & dusk.  The 52mmCL and 56mm VM/V rewarded me the past two seasons with nice bucks taken literally at night (probably questionable whether it was even "legal" shooting time).  In the case of the deer taken with the 52mm CL, I got to shoot the deer because my partner in the blind couldn't see the buck well enough through his Swaro PH 42mm to take a shot.  He now has a 56mm Swaro PH .

 

I'm not going to argue whether smaller objective scopes of exceptional glass quality can or cannot provide the same hunting time as the exact same scope with a larger objective.  My field experience tells me that you do indeed get more time with a larger objective IF all other characteristics of the scope are the same.  I readily agree that glass quality and coatings play the largest factor in a scopes ability to provide the longest hunting time possible. 

 

With all this said, I like the advice that you really don't need more than 6x for the application you're looking to fill.  I've heard awesome things about the Meopta Meostar 7x56.  That scope might be right up your alley and "jonbravado" has posted some excellent reviews on that exact scope. 

 

With regard the opinion that a 50mm+ scope provides too much bulk & weight, I really don't see where that is going to be a factor with the hunting you described.  I'll grant that you probably won't "appreciate" the added size on a rifle you're carrying over mountains.  However, I have NEVER been bothered by weight or bulk in the 25 years that I've been hunting deer & hogs in south Alabama.  To each his own on this but I'd hate for you to miss a great buck because you were worried that a 50mm+ scope would harm your ability to hunt your terrain.

 

Best of luck to you & let us know what you decide.  Also, welcome to the forum!

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 10:22
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7702

At the end of the day, it all comes down to how much light your eye can use.  At 4x, your eye gets more than enough light with either a 40mm or a 50 mm (and even a 36mm,) whehter daylight or dawn/dusk.  I completely agree that at higher magnifications, a larger objective is useful; however, if the shot is in scrub at close range, I always prefer smaller.  Maybe the issue is that I tend to stalk more than I do sit and wait.   Mayeb the issue is that I don't shoot an animal that might get away from me in the dark and might die somewhere just out of reach because I took too far a shot or took it too late. 

 

I want a scope that doesn't hang on anything as I move and that fits the rifle well.  Hell, from a blind, I agree: bigger is better!  I've taken a few deer in a blind with my PSS and 15X Nightforce, but it ain't my "hunting setup."  And the onl;y shots I have taken at >8X were 300+ yards in perfectg conditions at an animal I kew I could hit well and I could watch where he went after imapct.

 

So, to clarify: if hunting from a blind in failing light, larger objective can be good.  If NOT blind hunting, smaller objective works well.  The singular point to remember is that exit pupil = objective diameter / power.  In low light, the human pupil is about 7 mm so having an exit pupil > 7 gets you absolutely nothing. 

 

On this, we can agree to disagree.  But I hunt dark/black hogs in low light in Texas and have taken shots (without spotlight) right up to the appearance of the first stars in the night sky.  I usually hunt with a 44mm objective and usualy at about 6x. (And the comment about one with a 56mm taking a shot because the other guy with a 40mm couldn't see the deer - that is much more about the scope itself than the diamter of the objective - probably.  If both scopes had been the exact same model and make and the only variation were the objective diameter, I'd bet the outcome would have been different.

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 10:51
ceylonc View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: September/13/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 514
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

 

 

On this, we can agree to disagree.  But I hunt dark/black hogs in low light in Texas and have taken shots (without spotlight) right up to the appearance of the first stars in the night sky.  I usually hunt with a 44mm objective and usualy at about 6x. (And the comment about one with a 56mm taking a shot because the other guy with a 40mm couldn't see the deer - that is much more about the scope itself than the diamter of the objective - probably.  If both scopes had been the exact same model and make and the only variation were the objective diameter, I'd bet the outcome would have been different.

 

 

I assume you're referring to my experience two seasons ago where I took a buck with a Kahles CL 52mm that my friend couldn't see well enough through his Swaro PH 42mm.  I am only relating my personal experience.  I'll agree that it is certainly possible that he may have been able to take the shot IF he was shooting a Kahles CL 42mm.  Unfortunately for him, this wasn't the case and it was I who put the meat in the freezer that evening!

 

I agree that those dark hogs are really tough to see at dusk.  Even if you do see them, making out the reticle becomes a crap shoot.  I hate to say it but there have been quite a few times where I've been hunting the last few minutes and seen hogs through my scope but not be able to take a shot because I couldn't get a solid reticle hold due to their dark color. 

 

p.s.--Rancid, LOVE your tag line!!!

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 13:26
jonbravado View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/05/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1131

yes w/ that said, my fixed 4x40 monarch is PLENTY bright for shots under 75 yrds or so in the near dark.

 

and you do prove a good point on shooting late = added risks - BUT there's that 15 minute window where you can make/ not make an

ethical shot at 125 yards on a 6 point that needed to be an 8 point. the big objective has saved me a time or two from pulling the trigger

on a deer i should not shoot.  and i needed the HIGHER magnification to make that call.

 

i prefer a lower magnification hunt, because the image is more stable and easier to execute (IMO).

 

i rarely shoot over 150 yrds or so.

 

J

 

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 15:12
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7702

Great point, which is why I take along My Leica Ultravids - bought from SWFA - to score my target before scope comes into play.  I spend allot more time on my binos than I do on my scope.  Once the rifle is up, the target is well known and defined.  maybe that too is a big differentiating factor.

 

I still like my 44mm Zeiss for just about everything.  And on a 7-pound 300 win mag, there ain't much on this continent that has a chance at winning that fight.  190-grains of BTHP whoopass has won every battle so far.  If ever I face prey that takes a few rounds and keeps coming, I've got 6 rounds of .454 Casull waiting.  If he survives that and keeps coming, all you folks can split up my gear because that, my friends, is ballgame.



Edited by Rancid Coolaid
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 15:50
jonbravado View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/05/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1131

indeed - sounds like you have the ideal setup for you.

 

one last point - my fujinon 7x50's are super bright, but picking out that 'bad-boy' again in a small herd can be tough after

putting your binos down and shouldering your rifle.   i have learned that one the hardway.  many moons ago, i shot the wrong doe.

this one had balls and buttons. i still feel bad about that one.

 

i have let many many deer walk since because i wasn't 100% sure.

 

good points, per usual, rancid.

 

J

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 16:47
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14313
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

At the end of the day, it all comes down to how much light your eye can use.  At 4x, your eye gets more than enough light with either a 40mm or a 50 mm (and even a 36mm,) whehter daylight or dawn/dusk.  I completely agree that at higher magnifications, a larger objective is useful; however, if the shot is in scrub at close range, I always prefer smaller.  

 

...The singular point to remember is that exit pupil = objective diameter / power.  In low light, the human pupil is about 7 mm so having an exit pupil > 7 gets you absolutely nothing. 

 

Rancid is 100% correct. 

 

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the benefits and limitations of 50mm+ objective diameters.  First of all, a larger objective lens does not provide greater field of view.  FOV is influenced by the ocular lenses.  Larger objectives do transmit more light to a point, but whether or not a larger objective diameter will provide an advantage in low light depends entirely on the magnification of the scope.  Therefore, when comparing scopes of equal optical quality, it's a mistake to assume that a larger objective scope will always transmit more light to the eye than a smaller objective scope.  A 1.5-6X42 set at 6X will transmit more light to the eye than a 2.5-10X56 set at 10X.  The former has an exit pupil of 7mm, while the latter has an exit pupil of 5.6mm.  Even when the 2.5-10X56 is set at 6X, most eyes cannot use the additional light the 9.3mm exit pupil provides, because the average person's eyes don't even dilate to the 7mm theoretical maximum, so both will appear equally as "bright."  Again, this assumes both scopes are of equal optical quality.  Where the 2.5-10X56 has an advantage over the 1.5-6X42 is when the former is set at 8X, where you have the same 7mm exit pupil, plus a little more magnification to help you resolve the target.  If you plan to buy a scope topping out at 6X, the discussion of 50 and 56mm objectives is a moot point because 1.5-6X scopes aren't typically available with objectives larger than 42mm... and for good reason -- 42mm objective provides a 7mm exit pupil @ 6X, so a larger objective provides absolutely nothing but added weight, size, and cost.  50 & 56mm objectives are ONLY beneficial when the scope magnification exceeds 7X, and then only marginally if you're using good optics to begin with.  I have a 42mm S&B, and when comparing head to head with my 50mm Zeiss Diavari, I cannot discern any light transmission advantage whatsoever to the Zeiss in low light, since the S&B is a 1.5-6X and the Zeiss is a 2.5-10X.  Turn the Zeiss magnification to 10X, and it has a noticeably dimmer image than the S&B set at 6X.  OT member Tbone1 also noted that the larger objective didn't provide the advantage one would expect in a similar low light comparison test he did.  

 

I'm in no way anti- large objective, even though I generally prefer lower magnification, more compact scopes on a hunting rifle.  They definitely have their place.  Objectives larger than 42mm are beneficial for low light performance on very high quality 8X fixed or 2.5-10X variable scopes and above.  However, if your shot distances are always 200 yards and less, why spend the extra money for larger objective diameter / higher magnification when you'd gain more noticeable benefit from putting that extra money into higher quality optics and a more modest 1.5-6X, 2-7X, or 3-9X?

 

The slight additional bulk of the larger objectives may not seem like a big deal at first, but keep in mind you'll generally have to use high or extra high scope mounts to provide clearance for a huge objective bell, which usually doesn't allow proper cheek weld on the stock.  Besides the potential negative effects to shooting accuracy of less repeatable eye/sight aligment, specifically if some parallax is present, in a hurried shot situation, this may in fact cost you a shot at a deer of a lifetime if your eye doesn't line up with the sight picture immediately when you shoulder the rifle.  So, unless you sometimes take really long shots or routinely use magnification beyond 7X in low light, an objective larger than 42mm provides no usable benefit yet has several disadvantages.



Edited by RifleDude
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2007 at 21:25
SingingRiver View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: May/06/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3

Thank everyone for their comments, ya'll have given me your experience and a lot of food for thought and I certainly welcome additional comments.  I am sixty and according to the info in this forum my eyes probably dilate to only about 5mm.  Like Triple S, I seek that mature buck that seems to be at the edge in brush or still at a holding area at the last bit of light, but like Ceylone's blind partner my scopes don't support those last 15 mins. much less first stars.  Like Jon Bravado, I have used higher magnification primarily to evaluate the points - club rules are 8 and above only - but my experience in last huntable light has been that it is the wrong time to be switching from binos to scope so the scope has to do the whole job.  [For clarity, none of my scopes for deer hunting exceed 10 magnification.] 

 

 

   

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/11/2007 at 16:23
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13881
One of my favorite scopes is Leupold VX III 4.5-14x50 wide duplex range estimating reticle. I tend to shy away from the 56mm objectives. I have probably shot more deer with a 3-9x40 than any other scope and I am pleased with the trend for manufacturers to go to a 2.5-10x which I think is a very nice power range for most hunting. I experienced a hunting situation last year during the antlerless only season there was a spike in with a group of several does and I couldn't tell which one it was with a 10x but my son could see it clearly with a 8.5-25x so I like a little extra magnification. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/12/2007 at 08:18
arro222 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/01/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 48
As you probably knew already, you were going to get several differing opinions. Several because everyone brings to the table a different set of variables that are either physical or mechanical in nature. In your quest to spend your money as efficiently as possible and still  maintain your hunting criteria, there is no better indicator than yourself. I am the same age as you and didn't know where my eyes could dilate to. I purchased several scopes from a house with no restocking fee. Yes the initial expenditure was quite large but worth every initial penny. ( I bought six ranging from $1400 to $300). I then sold most to friends at no loss or returned the couple I couldn't sell. I then simulated my hunting conditions and with the scope unmounted but rested, came to my own conclusions. Not only did I get to pick the correct scope for me, I didn't have to overspend to acquire what I was after. In this way, the only variables I had to contend with were mine. Use the insightful findings of your fellow posters to narrow your selection. Maybe you'll only need to buy 2or 3 scopes as a result.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/12/2007 at 09:20
www.technika.nu View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: August/02/2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 611

Rancid and rifledude makes the whole nightusing thing to asy and not very correct.

 

It's almost right that the human eyes pupil can't be bigger than 7mm, BUT there is individuals that get bigger than that.

 

You cannot measure the light that reaches your eye only with the exitpupil. IT's entirely wrong.

If it had been correct a diopter with 7mm hole would be best choise as there is no glasspieces that is consuming light.

Or a 2x14 rifle scope with have been equal with a 8x56, and it's not.

Eysest way to find out is to compare som extremes, take a look at something that is easaly seen in daylight at 70 yards. Something with the size of a roebuck.

Start looking through a good quality 1,5-6x42 set at 1,5.

Take a 3-12x56 set at 12 X and see wich scope that is loosing the roebuck sized item first.

 

Magnification is one of the big issues in night hunting, not to much but enogh.

If you have your target at 100 yards and you look at it with 10x, it's the same image for your eyes as you looked at 10 yards.

If you studies the darkness without scope or optics you will find that you are loosing your long range sight first, and when it's really dark you can maybe only see things poorly on 2-10 yards and not at all on 20 yards or longer.

 

SO i would say for your use if you have to take shots at running game at close distance in the woods more than you shoots low light shoots I would go for 1,5-6x42.

But if you shoots more or mostly poor light shots i would go for a 2,5-10x50 or 3-12x56 of european make.

 

Regards Technika

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/12/2007 at 09:48
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7702
What I said, kinda; with a few more errors in spelling and grammar - but no one's counting.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/12/2007 at 11:21
1stscope View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: January/14/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 66

Fading light is harder to deal with than low light, as your eyes need time to adjust for darkness. There is a wide range of vision, including resolution, color, dark vision, and pupil dilation, etc. so try things out before accepting commonly stated values.

 

Magniifcation makes dim, low contrast things bigger, often making them easier to see. It often surprises people what you can see with some humble 7x35 binouclars in low light, just due to magnification. For some objects there is an optimum range of magnification, as at some point you can wash out the object in your field of view. You get maximum benefit if your pupils are fully dilated, but one problem is that low light vision is primarily a 'rod' thing, while color 'cone'  vision is concentrated in the center of the eye. Astronomers learn to use 'side vision' to detect things and then try to see it in detail with their focused 'center vision'. Dark adaptation improves a lot after a few minutes, but can take 20 to 30 minutes to peak. Lots of bright light during the day, alcohol, etc., impede dark adaptation.

 

You also need to consider that your pupil size can 'stop down' an optic. If you have a 4x40 scope the exit pupil is 10mm, which is nice for misalignment and such, but if your eyes only open to 5mm you effectively have a 4x20 scope as that produces a 5mm exit pupil. Larger objectives make sense for more magnification with a given exit pupil, but it won't help if you don't use it. Good contrast, which is essentially low levels of light scatter due to pactices like blackening, good use of stops, blackening the edges of lenses, good coatings, etc., helps a lot, but the benefit is more noticeable in bright light as there is more potential for glare and such. Sharpness does help a lot as edge definition makes low contrast objects easier to see. Good 'color transmission', which is the ability to transmit a good portion of the visible spectrum, seems to help with some objects.

 

In summary I'd pick an objective size based upon the maximum magnification that you expect to be using, using a larger assumed exit to account for misalignment. Most people don't seem to consider it, but I also like the ability to retain the ability to engage targets up close, so I ended up with a minimum magnification of 1.5x.        

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/12/2007 at 19:24
army_eod View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: May/03/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 445
Originally posted by Urimaginaryfrnd Urimaginaryfrnd wrote:

Rancid Coolaid is on target a 1.5-6x42 is a very practical hunting scope for 200 yds and under in brush. Note that a 6x42 has a 7mm exit eye pupil and your eye is unlikely to be able to use more light than that. I dont think Euro glass is a must but if you feel you should have Euro glass why not consider IOR  here is one worth considering:

251042 New IOR 2.5-10x42 Hunting 30mm Rifle Scope                  New IOR 2.5-10x42 Hunting 30mm Rifle Scope
  • Matte
  • 4a
  • 30mm
SWFA: $584.95
More Info... Buy Now

 

You are giving up one power on the low end to gain four on the high end and you can turn it down to 6x at dusk. While 1.5 is nice close in I think I could live with 2.5 for a low end. The Nikon Monarch Gold 1.5-6x42 30mm is also well worth a look.

 

I really liking the IOR scopes!!!

 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Scope performance evaluation question"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Best low light performance w/o glare CWPINST Rifle Scopes 5 8/9/2004 2:30:12 PM
Best low light performance under $700 CWPINST Rifle Scopes 14 10/25/2004 3:29:15 PM
Super Sniper low light performance Red_SC Tactical Scopes 8 12/10/2004 11:56:40 AM
Low Light Performance Rusty Binoculars 7 8/2/2005 9:45:36 AM
Optical performance & durability Stud Duck Binoculars 6 8/1/2005 2:51:47 PM
range performance tree vs. deer bigo_m Laser Rangefinders 2 2/18/2007 8:13:58 PM
Bino performance factors jeffbird Binoculars 1 9/22/2006 10:00:59 AM
Exit pupil & low light performance Stud Duck Binoculars 2 6/10/2005 2:25:28 PM
Scopes with 10+ mils per evolution tucansam Tactical Scopes 18
GunTests Bino Evaluation? Rusty Binoculars 0 7/12/2005 10:31:01 AM


This page was generated in 0.609 seconds.