Scope Magnification

[paul6806]

I have a few queries regarding peoples scope magnification preferences.

I shoot up to 1Km and all I've the most mag I've used on the furthest target = 1048m (Fig 11 (man size target) is x20. Lydd - Serial 45 1200m ETR and hard target. That was plenty. This particular scope goes up to 25.

 

At the weekend, shot 600m, max mag used there was 10x.

 

Even at Bisley on century I use the same mag x10, Stickledown - x20

 

Bunny bashing I rarely come off x6 mag, except when using the Pulsar at night (Fixed x4.5)

 

What your favoured magnification for what circumstances, and why do manufacturers make scopes more powerful?

[Gimlet]

HMR bunny bashing 10X in good light for precise shot placement, down to 7X (optimum exit pupil with 50mm lens) as soon as the light starts to go.

Stalking I stick with optimum exit pupil mag for everything, so 8X with 56mm lens.

.222 zeroing at 200 yds and rabbit shooting to 300, 12X. Again reduce to optimum exit pupil when the light goes (7X).

Like you .22 lr used with NV. So 4.5X which I find fine for .22 ranges once I'd got used to it. Haven't felt the need for a doubler.

[bedwards1966]

On a .22lr used on rabbits, pigeons and crows I've a 4-16. It pretty much stays on 4, except when zeroing (I find it harder to see a makeshift target at low magnification than a rabbit head), and to zoom in and see where it's hitting - not that I buy high magnification to save walking though!

It does get cranked up sometimes to about 12 to identify birds at long range, as my eyesight is poor, but otherwise low magnification does me fine.

 

My .243 runs a 6-24, more magnification than is needed, it tends not to go beyond 18, except when zeroing, but again it's mainly left at 6x and cranked up sometimes for quarry identification.

 

I find it better to use the lowest magnification possible, as it gives a wider field of view and has a psychological benefit of not allowing you to see how unsteady you can be, but sometimes (for me) a high magnification is needed.

[Beretta28g]

.22lr 3-9x50 Mostly used on 9x

 

.17HMR long range sniping tool 6.5-20x50 mostly used on 12x or 20x

 

6.5x55 6-18x50 left on 6 unless zeroing.

[Redgum]

I have 10x on my .22lr and went a bit mad with the hmr and went 20x, I soon realised that there was little point in this sort of mag and got fed up with fiddling about as light goes. On my 243 and 308 I have 10x with 50ob, which are more often set on 6x, plenty for sub 200yd deer targets, especially in low light. As I have learnt more about rifle shooting I have found simplicity in a scope is the way to go, practice and consistant shooting skills in the field are much more important than a high mag scope.

[paul6806]

Thanks for your replies folks. I noticed that March have a tactical scope out now that is 5 - 40 x50. WHY?

As you guys have said, you need fantastic light to use >20 mag, so why go to 40? Even bench resters don't need this sort of capability.

[bedwards1966]

Thanks for your replies folks. I noticed that March have a tactical scope out now that is 5 - 40 x50. WHY?

As you guys have said, you need fantastic light to use >20 mag, so why go to 40? Even bench resters don't need this sort of capability.

 

Because if you make something, someone will buy it.

There are always people around who have to have the 'best' and biggest of everything, so someone will want it, even if it serves no purpose.

[kent]

Thanks for your replies folks. I noticed that March have a tactical scope out now that is 5 - 40 x50. WHY?

As you guys have said, you need fantastic light to use >20 mag, so why go to 40? Even bench resters don't need this sort of capability.

 

I suggest you look again at the world of target shooting, larger mags than you mention are doing a lot of winning these days. your looking for detail other than actually seeing the v-bull, do some research

[paul6806]

I suggest you look again at the world of target shooting, larger mags than you mention are doing a lot of winning these days. your looking for detail other than actually seeing the v-bull, do some research

 

Research - Done

Target Shooting I do - read the initial post (up to 1 Km Lydd / 1000yds Bisley)

Competitions - Entered - and did quite well. Surrounded by F Class shooters.

Scopes seen - none have any advantage over my own.

Have you shot at Bisley Kent? Each shot is marked and scored. with a 2" dayglo disc. At 600m you can see a 308 hole in the target at 20 mag.

[paul6806]

For other peoples information, before we get any more comments.

In addition to the above, I am also a NRA Club Instuctor, a RCO, with HME, ETR and Blackpowder qualifications. I load all my own ammunition except for rimfire/shotgun and pellets, do more target shooting than bunnying.

 

My opinion regarding >20 mag is still valid - what is the point - as I have experience.

 

My cage has been rattled and I have spoken.

Edited May 29, 2012 by paul6806

[kent]

Research - Done

Target Shooting I do - read the initial post (up to 1 Km Lydd / 1000yds Bisley)

Competitions - Entered - and did quite well. Surrounded by F Class shooters.

Scopes seen - none have any advantage over my own.

Have you shot at Bisley Kent? Each shot is marked and scored. with a 2" dayglo disc. At 600m you can see a 308 hole in the target at 20 mag.

 

No i am a Northern lad so its Diggle no intrest in flat field shooting with self appointed experts. i am quite aware of what you can and cannot see like mirage and grass to read the wind better. I no longer compete but i do have practically unlimited long range facilities outside my own front door (litrally) when i did compete i used nightforce 32x but times they are a changing and there are advantages in larger magnification as has been shown competitively - the univerce don't revolve around Bisley there are a few tallented shooters in the North of England and Scotland you know .

[Salop Matt]

6-10 x for the air rifle

&

10-12 x for the HMR unless its close !

[gixer1]

I personally like high mag scopes as I just don't have that great eyesight, I don't wear glasses but I just prefer the magnification, obviously it will depend on light, distance to target etc, I personally struggle to see 243 sized holes in a target at 100yards depending on the colour it's on (fine at longer distances if using the shoot n c type targets) but on plain wooden boards I find it difficult if the nag is below 10x at 100-150 yards.

 

this is a point where you most notice the difference between a high or low end scope - having recently sold a Swaro PV 4-16 x 50 and bought a nikko sterling night eater 8-32 x 56 I can say the comparicon of these on 14-16x is night and day (literally!) but in good light I do like to have extra mag and it usually stays around the 14x mark.

 

Regards,

Gixer

[kent]

I personally like high mag scopes as I just don't have that great eyesight, I don't wear glasses but I just prefer the magnification, obviously it will depend on light, distance to target etc, I personally struggle to see 243 sized holes in a target at 100yards depending on the colour it's on (fine at longer distances if using the shoot n c type targets) but on plain wooden boards I find it difficult if the nag is below 10x at 100-150 yards.

 

this is a point where you most notice the difference between a high or low end scope - having recently sold a Swaro PV 4-16 x 50 and bought a nikko sterling night eater 8-32 x 56 I can say the comparicon of these on 14-16x is night and day (literally!) but in good light I do like to have extra mag and it usually stays around the 14x mark.

 

Regards,

Gixer

 

Are you realy saying you cannot see as good with the PV????? at 16x you should be able to see a .22 hole in white paper at 250. Try spending time focusing the eyebell of the scope, cleaning the glass etc. Or book an eye test, seriously i personally need reading glasses these days but i can still see this good without wearing them and a lower quality leupold vx3 scope. dont delay eye test today- there might be issues that need adressing ignoor them at your peril

[gixer1]

Are you realy saying you cannot see as good with the PV????? at 16x you should be able to see a .22 hole in white paper at 250. Try spending time focusing the eyebell of the scope, cleaning the glass etc. Or book an eye test, seriously i personally need reading glasses these days but i can still see this good without wearing them and a lower quality leupold vx3 scope. dont delay eye test today- there might be issues that need adressing ignoor them at your peril

 

 

no, thats not what I am saying, what I am saying is the PV was better in low light at high mag...and if you used your reading glasses you'd see I said "depending on the colour it's on"

 

I have regular eye tests and my eye sight is apparently very good - but an eye test will tell give results for one set of variables and that depend on what you are trying to see - I have a good eye for spotting movement yet my eyesight for definition is poor - a good description is I can see a fox /deer move out of cover or sign at 500 yards but can't tell you what the letters say.

 

Regards,

Gixer

Edited May 30, 2012 by gixer1

[gixer1]

Here's another good reason I personally like high mag on my scopes, I took the below pics tonight and it's plain to see the detail on the higher mag versus where the centre of the reticle is on the low mag, and this buck was only about 60-70 yards away.

 

This is 8x and then 32x

 

 

Edited May 30, 2012 by gixer1

[Mr_Logic]

Hmmm... Looks pretty similar to me.

 

Magnification is a question which is not easily resolved. I prefer large mag for 1000 yard target work, and field shooting 8-10 is generally enough. I shoot a Nightforce 8-32 on my 308 target gun, and it's generally on 32x.

[gixer1]

Hmmm... Looks pretty similar to me.

 

Magnification is a question which is not easily resolved. I prefer large mag for 1000 yard target work, and field shooting 8-10 is generally enough. I shoot a Nightforce 8-32 on my 308 target gun, and it's generally on 32x.

 

 

Similar? the 8x mag is 5 mil dot's in size - the 32x mag is 14! thats a fair old difference in what you can see! although as you say I guess it depends on how you see it personally, this specific scope has a very very fine reticle and to be honest if you had a "german" (i think it's called) type reticle or wide post I struggle to see how you can put the point of aim on a specific point on a target (as some reticles cover the bull completely)

 

Regards,

 

Gixer

[al4x]

I can't believe gixer you've swapped an awesome scope for a frankly pants one I've got the same swaro in 6-24 and have to say rarely use the higher magnifications, so much so I've just got a 2-12 z6 and realistically on a fox and stalking rifle that looks like it will be very adequate.

[Mr_Logic]

Similar? the 8x mag is 5 mil dot's in size - the 32x mag is 14! thats a fair old difference in what you can see! although as you say I guess it depends on how you see it personally, this specific scope has a very very fine reticle and to be honest if you had a "german" (i think it's called) type reticle or wide post I struggle to see how you can put the point of aim on a specific point on a target (as some reticles cover the bull completely)

 

Regards,

 

Gixer

Yes it's bigger, but the detail resolution doesn't look any better so the size becomes irrelevant - I can shoot the deer perfectly happily with the lower mag, and for target acquisition it's far better. I also struggle with the notion of Swaro to Nikko - the glass is awful on Chinese tat, vs Austrian loveliness...

[demonwolf444]

I know this isnt the air gun section, but i'd never used more than 4.5X untill i got a AO scope, i use it on 9X all the time now, zoom out to 3x if im just spotting- wider FOV, comes down to preference, but even with a .22 i dont see why i would need any more then 12X overkill?

 

Then again i dont shoot foxes and deer at long ranges.*

Edited May 31, 2012 by demonwolf444

[gixer1]

I can't believe gixer you've swapped an awesome scope for a frankly pants one I've got the same swaro in 6-24 and have to say rarely use the higher magnifications, so much so I've just got a 2-12 z6 and realistically on a fox and stalking rifle that looks like it will be very adequate.

 

 

I sold the swaro with my last rifle (to a fellow PW member) with the intention of buying my new rifle and mounting a temp scope on it until I had a chance to nip over to the USA and buy a swaro/ziess at a slightly cheaper rate - they also seem to get a better range available (simply because there are gun shops/bass pro's on every corner) when I got there I didn't see anything I wanted or the combo I wanted as in reticle/mag/type etc so left it (as I have another trip planned back there in a couple of months)

 

a friend had the nikko sterling going cheap so it was a temp scope, it is a good mag range and has my favorite reticle and seems solid enough but the light is no where near as good as the swaro was - but then again it is literally 22 x cheaper!

 

I did think about just buying another PV Habicht but also like the thought of a ziess, then you also hear of people talking about sightrons and nightforce too....I should probably just stick with what I know and buy another swaro!

 

so it's not that I swapped a swaro for a nikko sterling - it's a temp fill-in as all my other rifles have scopes and i didn't want to take them off of them.

 

Regards,

gixer

[gixer1]

Yes it's bigger, but the detail resolution doesn't look any better so the size becomes irrelevant - I can shoot the deer perfectly happily with the lower mag, and for target acquisition it's far better. I also struggle with the notion of Swaro to Nikko - the glass is awful on Chinese tat, vs Austrian loveliness...

 

 

Another reason is you can have a better look at the animal when you have a high mag and select which if any to shoot! the bino's I carry stalking or out for foxes are only 8x so sometimes having the ability to see in more detail can be beneficial.

 

Regards,

 

gixer

[kent]

Here's another good reason I personally like high mag on my scopes, I took the below pics tonight and it's plain to see the detail on the higher mag versus where the centre of the reticle is on the low mag, and this buck was only about 60-70 yards away.

 

This is 8x and then 32x

 

 

 

 

 

I actually think this is great for showing the superiour field of view given at lower magnification levels. Not that its required much for "most" targets but often of great use in the field. at 100 yds or so there is little wrong with 4x on roe etc IMO. My main stalking rifle carries a 3-12 mag and i bet i have shot more on 3x than 12x

[al4x]

I sold the swaro with my last rifle (to a fellow PW member) with the intention of buying my new rifle and mounting a temp scope on it until I had a chance to nip over to the USA and buy a swaro/ziess at a slightly cheaper rate - they also seem to get a better range available (simply because there are gun shops/bass pro's on every corner) when I got there I didn't see anything I wanted or the combo I wanted as in reticle/mag/type etc so left it (as I have another trip planned back there in a couple of months)

 

a friend had the nikko sterling going cheap so it was a temp scope, it is a good mag range and has my favorite reticle and seems solid enough but the light is no where near as good as the swaro was - but then again it is literally 22 x cheaper!

 

I did think about just buying another PV Habicht but also like the thought of a ziess, then you also hear of people talking about sightrons and nightforce too....I should probably just stick with what I know and buy another swaro!

 

so it's not that I swapped a swaro for a nikko sterling - it's a temp fill-in as all my other rifles have scopes and i didn't want to take them off of them.

 

Regards,

gixer

 

 

I'll let you know if i sell my pv as I'm undecided at the moment, if the z6 performs well I may well sell the PV as I don't know I can justify it sat on a HMR. It won't be that expensive if so and at 6-24 x 50 sounds like it would fit the bill