Hi all: I am in need of some advice/experience. I am looking at buying a new scope for my deer rifle. Vortex Diamondback 3.5x10x50 or Vortex Viper 3x9x40. Which one do you think would have better low light capabilities? So hard to tell in store. Don't wish to purchase and then have to return. I have zero experience with these scopes.
Help with scope purchase
- Thread starter loogin28
- Start date
Glass quality and glass coatings will allow more light to your eye than a big objective lens size ever will and truthfully, unless you get into high magnification optics, a 50mm is basically useless. Buy the best glass you can afford. A 40mm objective lens on a 3-9 hunting scope is more than you will ever need....with quality glass of course.
This is one area where you get what you pay for and should spend as much as you can afford on good quality optics and coatings! Best thing to do is check out various brands and price ranges and make an educated choice! Quality beats a big objective lens for light gathering 99% of the time!
What's the rifle?
I have a Leupold Rifleman 2-7x33m on my Marlin 336C in 35 Rem.
Last deer shot with it just before dusk at 140 yards using the 200 grain Hornady FTX ammo.
One shot kill (lung shot) and the animal never went more than 15 yards from the point of impact before dropping stone cold dead.
The scope package was purchased for $375 rings, mounts and tax inc.
If I had a bolt action in say 308 Win or 30-06 Sprng I'd have upped the scope to a Leupold Rifleman 3-9x40mm.
Still less than $400.
The Viper is the better of the 2 you singled out. Both are Philippine built scopes so the quality of either is not too bad but the Viper is clearer with better lenses and coatings.
I wouldn't be surprised if most people thought the 40mm Viper was "clearer" than the 50mm Diamondback thanks to the coatings.
I wouldn't be surprised if most people thought the 40mm Viper was "clearer" than the 50mm Diamondback thanks to the coatings.
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
I would rather have a sore *ss than a 50mm objective on a hunting rifle. Too big and bulky. I prefer something more trim. For you I would recommend either a 3-9x33, 2-7x33 Leupold or a 2.5-8x Leupold.
That gives you an opportunity to see how the elevation difference affects you by trying your friend's rifle and comparing that to a 40 mm objective.
The height difference is only 5 mm but to some it affects their cheek weld.
Have you wondered why there are so many 50 mm's on the EE?
I put one on my rifle only to find it would not fit into a Kolpin boot.
The light gathering ability is about 1x power difference. The eye can only accept 7 mm of light. With my 42 mm objective and a 6X setting that is 7 mm.
a 50 mm at 7X allows 7mm of exit pupil light same as my binoculars.
The height difference is only 5 mm but to some it affects their cheek weld.
Have you wondered why there are so many 50 mm's on the EE?
I put one on my rifle only to find it would not fit into a Kolpin boot.
The light gathering ability is about 1x power difference. The eye can only accept 7 mm of light. With my 42 mm objective and a 6X setting that is 7 mm.
a 50 mm at 7X allows 7mm of exit pupil light same as my binoculars.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I have a 1-4X30 Nightforce, I'd bet its as bright as a 50 mm Vortex, so a big objective is not necessarily the end all and be all of low light performance. Like Sheephunter said, the quality of the glass and coatings is much more critical to light transmission than the objective size. IMHO, the only thing worse than a 50 mm scope is a 56. To shoot well, you must have a solid, repeatable cheek weld; if, due to the height of the scope, you're balancing your chin on top of the comb, your cheek weld is neither solid or repeatable.
Boomer and Sheephunter have said it all.
And the last bit by Boomer is what your looking for...''quote To shoot well, you must have a solid, repeatable cheek weld; if, due to the height of the scope, you're balancing your chin on top of the comb, your cheek weld is neither solid or repeatable end quote''.
Leupold is your friend and as much as I like the vortex line up of scopes I just can not find myself selling off the Leupolds on my rifles or the spare to be replaced by a new and upcoming scope manufacturer.
Tight Groups,
Rob
If you are an 18 year old blue-eyed male perhaps. Most people are under 5mm and if you are 40 years old + you are likely 4mm or less. That's why really high quality optics become critical the older you get.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
It all depends on mounting height. I have a few 50mm scopes and the cheek weld is just fine, but there's very little space between the barrel and objective bell. Mount a 33mm scope too low and you have the same issue, it works both ways. In fact, with proper ring/mount combinations, I've found that 50mm scopes fit me better and look better on a rifle than the small ones jacked way up.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Correct, though it depends on the firearm as well. Quite a few rifles have a low bolt lift (ABolt, MkV) or none at all(lever, semi-auto, single).
I don't really understand the hatred toward large objectives. Maybe some guys think they're being more traditional in using a straight tube daylight scope. After all, you're mounting a tube a little over a foot long onto something that's already 4 ft. long. Somehow that makes it bulky all of a sudden? I can understand the weight issue with mountain hunters, but aside from that there's nothing bad about them.
It better be as it costs 3 times as much as a top-end Vortex Viper(10 times as expensive as a Chinese-built Vortex Crossfire). I will be the first to agree your Japanese made lenses in the Nightforce are better than the Philippine made lenses in the Diamondback but I question if they are 3 times as good.
For what it's worth I have been using a 3-9X40 Viper for a couple of years now and find it every bit as bright and rugged in the field as either of the Leupold VX II 3-9X50 scopes on 2 of my other rifles..
Last edited:
The '06 has plenty of range so there's no sense being a cheapskate and short changing a very capable rifle in the glass department.
I'd go with a Leupold "Rifleman" 3-9x40mm.
The Leupold ultra-light weight 3-9x28mm is 4 oz lighter and $150 more expensive but seems as bright and clear as the "Rifleman" with the bigger bell. I have one of those on my BAR in 300 Win Mag.
The Nightforce company is laughing all the way to the bank selling Japanese glass for 5x the money of equivalent generic brands.
Guess everybody wants to feel like they're Tom Barringer acting as the uber-elite spec ops sniper.
I'll stick with Leupold.
BC Bigbore
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- BC's Peace Country
What BUM said.
Most of my rifles are topped with Leupold VX II's & III's (a Burris FF II 4.5-14x44 is on my coyote rifle) Last week however, I decided to break from tradition and try something new (to me) My new .300Mag arrived at Corlane's and while poking around the store, I decided to try a Vortex scope on the latest addition. The boys installed a set of low one piece Talleys and mounted a Vortex 3-12x42 Diamondback HP on top. Seems like a nice clear glass so I'll give 'er a try.
