Redfield 3x9 or 4x12?

K

kapuskasing

Member
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
Sudbury Ontario
Hello,

Pretty much decided on a redfield scope for my 243. However, do I want the 3x9 power or do I want the 4x12?

Only ever used a 3x9 scope and have no experience with a higher power scope.
 
I bought a 4-12 as I like to zoom in. but I kinda wish I bought the 3-9x50 as it would be better for following a running deer or coyote. if you are in the bush more then go 3x9
 
If you are going to use a 40mm objective get the 4-12. You can always turn down the magnification. 50mm objective is good for getting more light through the scope, hunting at dusk and dawn. If you are a day shooter 4-12x40mm, but if you hunt in low light 3-9x50mm.

If Redfeild made a 4-12x50, I would buy that in a second.
 
3-9 is plenty for big game hunting and more field of view for closer shooting on larger game. 4-12 is more a varmint or long range scope by my way of thinking.

Personally on my big game scopes i never use the high settings except for at the bench anyway, and i've switched from a 3-9 to a 2-7 because i like the option of lower power and more field of view for bush hunting. For me, field of view is more important on a close animal than increased magnification on a longer shot.

The truth is a 4 power scope will work fine on moose or deer past where you or your rifle can hit. Everything else is bling.
 
kapuskasing said:
I'm buying for coyote hunting.

Does a 3x9 at 4 power have the same feild of view as a 4x12 at 4 power? Beleive I like the redfield 4x12.
Click to expand...

Yes, if they are the same size bell - 3-9x40 and 4-12x40 should have about the same FOV when they are set at 4 power.

I'd choose a 4-12 for varmints, too.
 
Last edited:
I had a discussion about the Redfiled scopes yesterday. I personally prefer the Burris Fullfield II scope over the Redfield. An interesting note. The Redfield is now made by Leupold and Burris was formed by former Redfield employees.

I checked them both out. I like the Leupold way that the Redfield keeps the rim of the scope small with the optics big. Look through a Leupold and you'll know what I mean. you see less black from the scope bell and more optic. The Burris is decent in this regard but the Redfield is better. The Redfield spec is for 94% light transmission which is in the same league as the Falcon scopes. It's pretty good. The Burris is listed at 95%. It's very good. That being said in the store I couldn't tell the difference when looking through them. I am a fan of the Burris ballistic plex reticle. Simple but it works well.

I have however tested my Zeiss Conquest, Leupold VX3 EFR scopes, Nightforce and the Burris at low light and night conditions. The Burris did surprisingly well.

Build quality. Well I personally like the Burris better. I think it just looks better. When I tried the adjustments the Redfield felt a bit soft or mushy. The Burris has metal here and the clicks are crisp and audible. I suspect the Redfield internals weren't metal for the adjustments.

One thing however was brought up by the other guy who likes the Redfield better. He has had Burris scopes fail on him. Fogging up, and one where the external plastic disc for the adjustment cracked. I've never had this, but I don't do hardcore hunting either. That being said I have heard of Leupold's failing in the field too. So which is built better? Who knows.

I think they're both great value for the money right now. You can find them for $200 brand new. I like the Fullfield because I know it.

Here's a review.

http://www.opticsthoughts.com/index...mparison&catid=4:rifle-scope-reviews&Itemid=4

This guy liked the Vortex the best with the Fullfield II second place. The Vortex Diamondback is only a couple dollars more ($25) and has received excellent reviews. I haven't tried one personally. One thing I have noticed however on the specs was that only the Viper model of the Vortex claims 95% light transmission which is significantly more expensive. Yes I know there's more to it than just the light transmission rating. However I've found this to be a decent starting reference.

An interesting note was that the POI changed on the Redfield when you changed magnification. That's not good.

Sniper Central has a review of the Fullfield II. It was favourable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom