is x50 too big for mtn rifle..
- Thread starter WhelanLad
- Start date
I respect your opinion, just as I hope other will accept my opinion. I have found a difference in 33 vs 50 mm scopes from the same manufacturer, but, again, my opinion. Close up, irons would be better choice, but, if it's a long shot, my old eyes need all the help they can get.
I respect your opinion, but, see my response to Hoyt. The OP asked for opinions and I have stated mine, the same as others here.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Comparing a Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40 and a VX3 4.5-14x50 at max power of 14, the 50mm's image will appear brighter at low light. The difference is in the exit pupil. Anything over about 5mm is pretty much unusable to most people's eyes, but when you get to high magnification, it does make a difference, assuming all coatings are the same.
That said, for most legal hunting times in North America it's maybe not necessary for some, but I prefer any advantage I can get and I don't have to worry about weight where I live. I've never found a 50mm to be more "obtrusive" than a 40mm. After all, we're talking about a 1cm difference in diameter.
That said, for most legal hunting times in North America it's maybe not necessary for some, but I prefer any advantage I can get and I don't have to worry about weight where I live. I've never found a 50mm to be more "obtrusive" than a 40mm. After all, we're talking about a 1cm difference in diameter.
- Location
- In the shadows of the Rockies
Is Leupold still making the series of scopes with the clipped out objective lens?
Might be worth a look, as a means to get the objective diameter without the height.
Most of the guys I have met that were obsessed with weight of their rifles would have been better served to have paid less attention at the dessert table, as weight saving measure.
Cheers
Trev
Might be worth a look, as a means to get the objective diameter without the height.
Most of the guys I have met that were obsessed with weight of their rifles would have been better served to have paid less attention at the dessert table, as weight saving measure.
Cheers
Trev
- Location
- In the shadows of the Rockies
The Leupold site lists the VX-3L as a past product -
https://www.leupold.com/hunting-shooting/scopes/
http://www.chuckhawks.com/leupold_VX-L.htm
https://www.leupold.com/hunting-shooting/scopes/
http://www.chuckhawks.com/leupold_VX-L.htm
Right ...... My little FXII 4x was more than enough to get me past legal shooting time this fall. Small rifle needs a good quality small scope.
You folks might think that the 50s are brighter, but there still remains the issue that comes with high scope mounts and the scope away from the boreline and comb.
I will keep my views on light transmission to myself because there are always two schools of thought on that topic..... That being said, I can't stand the way a high mounted scope with a 50mm objective throws a rifle's balance off.....
gday fellas, whats ya thoughts on having that Gold ring x50 scope on your mountain rifle?
for the ultra light factor I am aware the norm is to run a x33 or x36 of low to mid zoom 2-7 2-8 3-9 now an then.
The 3-9x40 is middle of the road but I don't own one at the moment, however I own a x50 VX2, but might sell it to fund something x40... x36 price depending really, if I can find a cheaper one! (any in EE)
the weights proberly the only thing that turns you off? or the 'extra' felt weight..
im half thinkin of trying it on the 7m08 scratch that as the talley lows wont allow the 50 to sit in there..
but say you had the right sized rings... would you run it?
WL
what kind of mountains are we talking about?
I bin looking at the Leopolds with the custom dial system
https://www.leupold.com/hunting-sho...ght-riflescopes/vx-2-ultralight-3-9x33mm-cds/
https://www.leupold.com/hunting-sho...ght-riflescopes/vx-2-ultralight-3-9x33mm-cds/
A 50mm objective messes up the balance of a lightweight rifle (yes, that extra 1/4 pound makes a difference on a 5 pound gun). If I wanted a brighter image, I'd spring for a better scope with superior lenses and coatings, not a bigger, heavier one.
Of course, a larger exit pupil gives you a tiny bit more leeway in the placement of your eye behind the scope. If the exit pupil is 3mm, your eye must be perfectly centered in that 3mm to get a perfect round field of view and to eliminate parallax. If the exit pupil is 7mm, you have a little wee bit more wiggle room. Your eye could be a mm or so off and still see the complete field of view...but parallax could exist.
If this sounds a bit ridiculous to you...I agree completely! However, CGN is loaded with folks who can't shoot a moose at 100 yards without monkeying with an adjustable parallax, a zoom dial and a BDC turret, so I thought I'd mention it!
Of course, a larger exit pupil gives you a tiny bit more leeway in the placement of your eye behind the scope. If the exit pupil is 3mm, your eye must be perfectly centered in that 3mm to get a perfect round field of view and to eliminate parallax. If the exit pupil is 7mm, you have a little wee bit more wiggle room. Your eye could be a mm or so off and still see the complete field of view...but parallax could exist.
If this sounds a bit ridiculous to you...I agree completely! However, CGN is loaded with folks who can't shoot a moose at 100 yards without monkeying with an adjustable parallax, a zoom dial and a BDC turret, so I thought I'd mention it!
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
A 50mm objective messes up the balance of a lightweight rifle (yes, that extra 1/4 pound makes a difference on a 5 pound gun). If I wanted a brighter image, I'd spring for a better scope with superior lenses and coatings, not a bigger, heavier one.
Of course, a larger exit pupil gives you a tiny bit more leeway in the placement of your eye behind the scope. If the exit pupil is 3mm, your eye must be perfectly centered in that 3mm to get a perfect round field of view and to eliminate parallax. If the exit pupil is 7mm, you have a little wee bit more wiggle room. Your eye could be a mm or so off and still see the complete field of view...but parallax could exist.
If this sounds a bit ridiculous to you...I agree completely! However, CGN is loaded with folks who can't shoot a moose at 100 yards without monkeying with an adjustable parallax, a zoom dial and a BDC turret, so I thought I'd mention it!
Actually, it has more to do with available light (exit pupil diameter) reaching/covering the entire diameter of the eye's pupil.
Of course quality of coatings,lenses,etc has a lot to with it, but there's a simple test that works with any variable scope regardless of quality or manufacturer; as you turn the zoom up, the image darkens, thanks to the exit pupil's diameter shrinking. So if you have a Schmidt & Bender Zenith 3-12x50, the image is still going to appear darker on 12x than a Leupold VX1 3-9x40 will be at 3x.
It's OK if people want to use a 50mm scope. Not everyone likes a gloss Leupold 1.5-4 in Weaver rings.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
But surely not on a "mountain" rifle???
Of course not. A mountain rifle can't have a wood stock either, at least one would never publicly admit it on CGN.
