New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Seeing the target
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Seeing the target

 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: October/08/2006 at 06:47
pooreyes View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: October/08/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 27

Ok here is my question...

 

Which scope would better serve my needs, not my wants, but needs.

 

I hunt with a 270.  I used to have a Springfield Armory Gen. III  4.5 X14 X 56, but the amount of light it took in wasn’t as good as my buddy’s Leupold.  It was an easily proven fact one early morning hunt with very low light and a deep fog.  I could see better with the Leupold than the Springfield.

 

I am looking at the Leupold VXIII 6.6 X 20 X 40 Varmint or the Bushnell 4200

 

For price and clarity,  I know there are a lot of choice’s out there, but I need a scope for these poor eyes I have, I shoot a lot of shot’s at 200 yards.  I have had to pass on some shots because I just couldn’t  see the game clearly.  With the Springfield I could drill a three shoot group at 200 yards all three shoots would be touching, but I just had very bad luck with it as far as seeing at early morning and at sunset. 

 

I hunt deer in N.C. They aren’t as big as they are up North.  Some aren’t much bigger than a Great Dane...  LOL… small bodies and large horns.  

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 07:54
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479

Welcome to The OT!!

 

What part of NC do you live/hunt, pooreyes??

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 08:10
pooreyes View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: October/08/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 27
Pitt Co. Greenville area.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 08:31
pooreyes View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: October/08/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 27

Ok I have been on this site since 4:30 am EST, I have read alot of post on just about everything dealing with scopes, alot of great info on here, and it seems to hold alot of very well educated people on various levels.

 

I have learned so much this morning about scopes, light and the tube size. 40mm vs 50mm. I have been on the SWFA site for a few years, but never made it to this place before... Boy I see alot I have been missing out on.  Thanks for all in the info E1.

 

OK... Now back to the choice I have to make:

 

 I like the Bushnell 4200 6x24x40 milt dot.

 

 I also like the Leupold 6x20x40 varmit scope

 

 Also what about the nikon 6.5x20x44 Monarch with the BDC  

 

 I dont see much else under 800 bucks I am looking for. 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 11:56
ceylonc View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: September/13/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 514

Welcome to the forum!  There is indeed a wealth of knowledge to be had from this community.  I learn something new every time I log on.

 

I sounds like you're wanting to keep you budget under $800.  That is certainly adequate for your needs.  You listed a few scope "finalists" & I'll give my opinion (for what it's worth) that might help you with a decision:

1) Bushnell Elite 4200 6x24 40mm -- excellent scope & glass for the money.  Personally, I prefer a larger front objective than 40mm (I'm probably in the minority on this perference but I feel that the ability to gather a touch more light is worth it) but 40mm is fine for 95% of hunting conditions;

2) Leupold VX-III 6.6x20 40mm -- good scope but WAY overpriced for what you get optically.  Glass is not as bright or clear as the Elite 4200 yet is costs $250 more .

3) Nikon Monarch 6.5x20 44mm -- there isn't anything bad I can say about this scope.  Very capable, high quality glass that is on par with the 4200.  Might give you 3-5 extra minutes of shooting time due to the 44mm objective (vs. the 40mm).  About $80 more than the 4200 & probably worth it;

 

I'm going to throw in a couple of more scope that are worth considering.  They're under $800 and would also fit your needs well:

--Burris Black Diamond 4x16 50mm or 6x24 50mm- outstanding optical clarity & brightness.  Very reliable with accurate adjustments.  SWFA from $570-715.

--Meopta Meostar R1 4x16 44mm - I haven't personally looked through this scope but a few members here (who's opinions I highly value) have stated that this line offers a lot of value for the money.  The glass is said to be outstanding and they have a lifetime transferable warranty.  SWFA $780.;

--Zeiss Conquest 4.5x14 50mm - very good glass, fitting the Zeiss pedigree.  SWFA @ $790.

 

Best of luck.  Hope I haven't muddied the water too much for you!  Definitely check out SWFA's "Sample List" of used/demo scopes.  Some great deals to be had on scopes with a lot of life left in them...

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 12:25
www.technika.nu View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


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

If I bought on a budget the ones so far meantioned would never ever be considered by me if the light gathering is important.

Take the Leupold for example, if its not already dark outside, it' will be definitely be it when look throug the high magnification Leupold.

Asian glass is simply not good enough when it comes to low light.

 

Here is my advice-

Buying on a really low budget buy a second hand german or austrian 6x42 or 8x56.

 

If you have slightly higher budget buy a 3-12x56, 2,5-10x50 or similar second hand for around 800 dollars.

 

Regards Technika

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 12:50
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13882
LEU57140 Leupold 4.5-14x50 VX-III 30mm Riflescope                    Leupold 4.5-14x50 VX-III 30mm Riflescope
  • Matte
  • Boone & Crockett
  • 30mm
  • Long Range
  • Side Focus
  • Index Matched Lens System
  • Free Leupold Ballistic Aiming Training CD w/ Purchase
  • Free One-year Membership to Boone and Crockett Club's Associates Program w/ Purchase
SWFA: $769.95
More Info...

The larger the objective the better.The 4.5-14 x 50 is one of my favorited and add the B&C reticle this scope is a winner.

You really dont need 20x near as much as you need to go to a larger objective. A 6x42 will give a bright 7mm exit pupil light transmission and be a very bright scope. At 20 x to get that same type of light transmission the scope would look like a Howitzer.

The 4.5-14 power range is a nice compromise of allowing some magnification and still being a fairly bright scope.  Even a 4.5-14 x 40mm would allow you to turn the scope down to 6x and that would be 6x40 which would be bright.   If you dont like the Leu my other suggestion would be:

6586 Nikon 5.5-16.5x44 Monarch UCC Riflescope                    Nikon 5.5-16.5x44 Monarch UCC Riflescope
  • Matte
  • BDC
  • 1"
  • Adjustable Objective
  • Free Nikon Spud w/ Purchase
SWFA: $429.95
More Info... Buy Now

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 15:33
pooreyes View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: October/08/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 27

 

Ok now I am really lost on the scope choice... One says the 40 mm won,t gain as much light as the 50mm or bigger.  I thought I read a post in here talking about that and that the 40mm took in the same light as a 50mm, the only diffrence was the field of view.

 

Also am I reading some of these post right? Are you all saying that a lower power scope would be better in low light? And, what is the talk about the eye exit pupil and 7mm ? I don't understand that at all.

 

Thanks!

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 17:09
smithrjd View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: September/27/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 86

 I'm not so sure that a larger objective allows more light, at least all the way through to your eye. What it will do is give you a larger field of view making it appear brighter or clearer. A low power scope or setting allows more light. The exit pupil is kind of the tunnel that you look into, larger at smaller magnification getting smaller as the magnification goes up. At lower power the view will be brighter, as the exit pupil shrinks by the magnification the view will get darker. The human eye will open to a maximum of 7mm. As we get older not even that much or so I've been told. All of this will be listed in a scopes specifications, field of view at 100 yards at minmum and maximum magnification. The exit pupil will also be listed. Bigger is better. I'm going through the same issues, trying to pick the "right" scope for a given rifle. Way to many choices and price ranges..

 

HTH

 

Ron    

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 20:55
silver View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: November/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2291
Originally posted by pooreyes pooreyes wrote:

 

Ok now I am really lost on the scope choice... One says the 40 mm won,t gain as much light as the 50mm or bigger.  I thought I read a post in here talking about that and that the 40mm took in the same light as a 50mm, the only diffrence was the field of view.

 

There is not gain in light, but a gain in exit pupil and a possable gain in resolution.  There is not a gain in field of view as that is handled by the rear lens not the front.

 

Originally posted by pooreyes pooreyes wrote:

Also am I reading some of these post right? Are you all saying that a lower power scope would be better in low light? And, what is the talk about the eye exit pupil and 7mm ? I don't understand that at all.

 

Thanks!

 

Yes, the lower power scope would do better in low light.  The iris of the eye expands and contracts like the aperture (F-stop) on a camera to control the amount of light that eye processes.  The iris has a limit of expanding to 7mm.  So when you get to the point that the front objective size divided by 7 you get the maximum useful power in low light.  Now, in all fairness at this point it should also be said that the coatings on the lenses and prisms are often a bigger factor than the size of the lenses in determing how much usefull lights gets through Or in a more plain manner,  a higher quality scope can out perform a cheaper scope with larger lenses.

 

So next step with all thing being equal, you have scopes from the same line, but with same magifications and differant objectives.  Let's say you have two 3x9 scopes, one with a 40mm lens and one with a 50mm lens. Divide both front numbers by 7... 50/7= ~7 or a useful magification of 7 power.  40/7= ~5.7 or not quite 6 power.  Not alot of differance...  Again this is why the coating make so much differance!!! 

 

Now, with a 6.5 -20x 40 scope even the lowest setting will not let enough light through.  Crank it up to 20 and your exit pupil will be -2-  Even if you get a 50mm or 56 front lens you see the problem?  So if low light useage is you concern you should focus on getting the best coatings you can afford and not worry with the magification as much.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/08/2006 at 23:26
www.technika.nu View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


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

Bigger frontlenses does definitely gives more light to your eye, and NOT bigger field of view.

 

But as previously said the coatings are very important, but also is the glass and construction very important and that is why you should buy a german-Austrian  scope when it comes for low light hunting.

Even a second hand German scope with 42 mm frontlens from the 60th will give you a brighter image than any new asian lensed modern scope assembled in USA.

 

For other purposes than low light hunting might very well the American assembled scope be ok, but not for low light.

 

Take a look at ebay, there is always plenty of good scopes at the same money as asian stuff costs new.

 

Regards Technika

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/09/2006 at 01:36
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10981
Originally posted by www.technika.nu www.technika.nu wrote:

Bigger frontlenses does definitely gives more light to your eye, and NOT bigger field of view.

 

But as previously said the coatings are very important, but also is the glass and construction very important and that is why you should buy a german-Austrian  scope when it comes for low light hunting.

Even a second hand German scope with 42 mm frontlens from the 60th will give you a brighter image than any new asian lensed modern scope assembled in USA.

 

For other purposes than low light hunting might very well the American assembled scope be ok, but not for low light.

 

Take a look at ebay, there is always plenty of good scopes at the same money as asian stuff costs new.

 

Regards Technika



Have you ever seen a top end asian scope?

Am I to understand that you are saying a German scope from the 1960s will be better than modern Japanese scopes?

That's BS, plain and simple.

Pooreyes, stay away form high magnificaiton scopes.  THey will not let you see better in low light.  If you expect to hunt a lot in low light, go with a Bushnell Elite 2.5-10x40 scope with Firefly reticle.

Even if you do not use the Firefly feature itself, the reticle is thicker than regular duplex reticle and is very visible.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/09/2006 at 04:04
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479
Originally posted by www.technika.nu www.technika.nu wrote:

Even a second hand German scope with 42 mm frontlens from the 60th will give you a brighter image than any new asian lensed modern scope assembled in USA.

 

HUH??

That statement is simply NOT true.

 

New Asian glass coatings have come a LONG way since the 60's, my friend. Hell, since the 90's!!

Coatings have a way of deteriorating after a while too, and you failed to take that into consideration as well.

Yes, even on high end Schmidt und Bender, Zeiss and Swaro products. 

 

Lower magnification, as the others have stated and smaller objective lens size so you can mount it lower to the receiver.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/09/2006 at 07:13
Tip69 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Tip Stick

Joined: September/27/2005
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
good stuff guys!  I've taken a part-time job and will be in the optics department....... can't wait to use this info........ THANKS 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/09/2006 at 11:36
www.technika.nu View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


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

Why don't you compare a old Helia, Zeiss or Swaroski 6x42 with a brand new Leupold with 50mm lens and poor light and compare them.

 

I have done it, and I would never chose the Leupold for low light.

Over the years I have owned 6 different Leupolds and will not do it again.

I know it hurts your national pride that european old lenses should be better than new asian ones, but that is to often a fact.

 

And don't try to compare the FOW , because then you are finally deffinitaly convinced.

 

Regards Technika

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/09/2006 at 12:23
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8047
Quoting technika

"I know it hurts your national pride that european old lenses should be better than new asian ones, but that is to often a fact."

Why is there any national pride involved here. Asian glass, American or Asian manufacture and it is the Asian glass you are criticizing, right.

The fact of the matter is that technology has improved optics greatly. The reason a lot of us are on this site is that we are swapping out old optics for new.

My 6X42 Leupold Tactical and 2.2-9 Helia set at 6X - biggest difference at last legal light was the cost of the scope. 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/09/2006 at 12:43
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

There is some very nice japanese glass now days, Nightforce glass for example.

Leupold glass is not a good example of top end japanese glass. Location

should not be a deciding factor of a scope, only performance. I do not have alot of

expierience with old scopes but alot of expierience with new scopes 90's and

newer(I was 17yrsold in 94'), I can say that the technology from then till now just

gets better and better. Even though Japanese glass is not currently at the level of

the German or Austrian glass the potential to equal the performance is there for

the future. Time will tell where the best glass will come from in the future but where

ever it is the location should not hold people back from wanting to own and use the

best. 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/09/2006 at 14:44
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10981
The oldest German scope I had was a Zeiss 1.5-6x42 ZA made in the 80s, I believe.

It was actually a pretty nice scope with a FFP and good glass.  I compared it extensively with other scopes I had on hand at the time.  Then I sold the Zeiss.

The biggest surprise was that the Japanese made Israeli Nimrod 6x40 scope also manufactured in the eighties was comparable to the Zeiss in any light.

Elite 4200 1.5-6x36 was better than that Zeiss in low light. 

Lepold M8 6x42 (made in late 90s) was a fair bit worse than the scopes above.

Sightron S2 3-9x42 was comparable to Nimrod and Zeiss, with perhaps slightly better resolution.

There were a few other scopes there that I compared side by side.  The results were fairly uniform.  Better Japanese scopes were better than the 80s Zeiss.  Lower quality Japanese scopes were similar or worse. 

The funny thing is that I sold that old Zeiss for enough money to get myself a Elite 4200 varmint scope and have some money left over.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/14/2006 at 06:53
pooreyes View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: October/08/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 27

`   Ok it seems like I have alot to look at. While I am looking at a few different scopes. I'll be looking for something that can shoot out to 300 yards at any light.

 

   I ran up on this scope Meopta Meostar R1 4-16x44 Tactical riflescope   What can you tell me about it?

 

 Also what is a Burris MR. T Titanium Black Diamond Scope 2.5 X 10 X 50 worth?

 

 A guy on Ebay is saying it sold for over 1800, and he is selling it for under 600.

 

   Ok last thing. I have read alot of post kicking the leupold scopes for their price and not having the glass for the money. So what I want to know is who had the best glass and what type.

          Top 10 please.........

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/14/2006 at 07:13
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479
Originally posted by pooreyes pooreyes wrote:

 Also what is a Burris MR. T Titanium Black Diamond Scope 2.5 X 10 X 50 worth?

 

 A guy on Ebay is saying it sold for over 1800, and he is selling it for under 600.

  

 

$1800?!?!?!?  Mr. T!!!!!! "I pity the fool that buys that scope!!"

 

Just another reason NOT to buy optics from a fly-by-night outfit, Brother. 

 

http://www.riflescopes.com/products/200929/burris_4-16x50_bl ack_diamond_titanium_30mm_rifle_scope.htm

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/14/2006 at 07:25
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479
Originally posted by www.technika.nu www.technika.nu wrote:

Why don't you compare a old Helia, Zeiss or Swaroski 6x42 with a brand new Leupold with 50mm lens and poor light and compare them.

 

I have done it, and I would never chose the Leupold for low light.

Over the years I have owned 6 different Leupolds and will not do it again.

I know it hurts your national pride that european old lenses should be better than new asian ones, but that is to often a fact.

 

And don't try to compare the FOW , because then you are finally deffinitaly convinced.

 

Regards Technika

 

Firstly, not sure what "FOW" is my friend. Do you mean FOV (field of view)??

 

Secondly, who said anything about Leupold scopes??

I'm talking high end Jap glass and coatings like whats on a Night Force or Nikon Tactical.

 

I'm a huge fan of Euro optics BTW.

 

 

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/14/2006 at 15:52
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555
Originally posted by pooreyes pooreyes wrote:

 

 

   I ran up on this scope Meopta Meostar R1 4-16x44 Tactical riflescope   What can you tell me about it?

 

 Also what is a Burris MR. T Titanium Black Diamond Scope 2.5 X 10 X 50 worth?

 

 A guy on Ebay is saying it sold for over 1800, and he is selling it for under 600.

 

 

 

Meostar scope have great glass and offer alot for the money, the are better than the lower end euro's for the same price.

Burris Titanium is no better than a black diamond opticly but is priced much higher, this scope is a very rare exeption in

the Burris line of a scope NOT offering more than its price tag. 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/15/2006 at 00:33
www.technika.nu View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


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

Hi

 

When comparing older scopes it's important to have them in good condition.

Time and temperature will move fat from inside the scope to it's lenses and this is limiting the quality very much.

When comparing the high end Asian stuff to the Euro scopes the problem is that they get so expensive so the second hand european scopes is often a lot less costly.

 

I by the way own a Nightforce 8-32x56 as well, but I am not very satisfied with it.

Likely it will be sold in the near future.

 

Regards Technika

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/18/2006 at 12:55
medic52 View Drop Down
Optics Professional
Optics Professional
Avatar

Joined: October/05/2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 893
IMO I have both scopes the Bushnell is on a REM 700 Sendero 22-250. The Leupold is on a RUGER 1 Varmiter 220 swift. For what you want to do I would not be afaird of either scope, but I would lean toward the Bushnell. My 2 cents.....
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/19/2006 at 07:09
.41Dave View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: March/08/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Originally posted by pooreyes pooreyes wrote:

For price and clarity,  I know there are a lot of choice’s out there, but I need a scope for these poor eyes I have, I shoot a lot of shot’s at 200 yards.  I have had to pass on some shots because I just couldn’t  see the game clearly.  With the Springfield I could drill a three shoot group at 200 yards all three shoots would be touching, but I just had very bad luck with it as far as seeing at early morning and at sunset. 

 



IIf I understand correctly, you are looking for a scope with good low-light performance and good resolution/clarity. I also noticed you are looking at pretty high magnification scopes. IMHO, a lot of people seem to want magnification that is way beyond what they need. Higher magnification will not make a target look clearer. It will simply make a hazy target a bigger hazy target. Better glass however, WILL make that previously hazy target nice and sharp. I think you would be much better served with a quality 3-9x40 scope than one in 4.5-14 or 6.5-20. Here is my reasoning:

1) 3-9x40 is about the most popular variable size out there. for this reason, 3-9x40 scopes tend to be priced significantly lower than higher magnification scopes with comparable quality optics. That means you can get a 3-9x40 of the same quality for less money, or a better quality 3-9x40 for the same money. Just compare the price of  the Bushnell Elite 4200 in 3-9x40 vs. the same scope in 4-16x50. Same glass and coatings, but almost $200 difference in price, all for larger (thus heavier, bulkier and more recoil sensitive) lenses and magnification you will almost never have practical use for, especially in low light where the exit pupil is 3.1mm at 16x, meaning a very dim and probably useless view in low light.

2) You mentioned taking a lot of shots at 200 yards. If I asked you if you could hit a target with iron sights at 22 yards, you would probably be very insulted, (which is why I would never ask you that question) . Yet a deer 200 yards away, seen through a scope at 9x magnification presents the same sight picture as one standing 22 yards away in iron sights. So even 9x is pretty much overkill. A lowly 4x will give you an equivalent 50 yard sight picture, and amazing clarity in low light with the excellent glass in the better scope you were able to afford because you decided to skip the unnecessary expense of super-high magnification.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Seeing the target"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
TARGET RIFLE, TARGET SCOPE hot30 Target 4 1/22/2007 9:33:51 AM
Fixed or variable for target shooting? Racer9 Target 20
Adding target turrets to 3-12-56 zeiss 2506ackley Tactical Scopes 0
Target scope for a Cooper in 22 Hornet triggerfingers Target 0
Target Scope help. triggerfingers Target 3
Lyman Target 8x johnnyo Rifle Scopes 0
Lyman All American 6x Target Scope ekpugh Rifle Scopes 1
Scope Recommendation for Target or Varmint MudPuppy Rifle Scopes 8
Leupold Prismatic Target Knobs SpikesST Rifle Scopes 0
Scope for Paper and Steel Target Shooting Beiruty Rifle Scopes 4


This page was generated in 0.422 seconds.