Vortex vs. Busnell

kuntao said:
First let me ask you if you've ever tried holding a scope at 12x in your own trembling hands?Your movements become magnified as the scope power increases. You'll find yourself all over the target if you're able to find the target at all. As you increase scope power your field of view also becomes smaller and smaller. This makes finding the target equally difficult.
Unless you plan on sitting yourself on a high hill with a bipod or something similar for support, in my mind, a high power scope is a total waste.
Get yourself a high quality low powered scope, set it at 2x like the majority of us do and realize you made the right choice.
Click to expand...

Ever hear of a sling? It's more than a strap to carry your gun. ;) I use my scopes up to 16x in my "own trembling hands" very well thank you. :rolleyes: How about a 6x scope and a 2x clarifier peep on a bow shooting 90 meters? It's a wonder us old FITA archers ever hit the target..... try shooting between heartbeats. It's a learned skill with tons of practice.

-Jason
 
I hunt in all types of terrain with a 6-24X50 scope. Heck, my .22 grouse gun has a 3-12X40 on it!
How much magnification you like is personal preference. I like lots of magnification. I can still hit a 12" gong at 800 or 1000yd dialed back to 6X, I just don't care for it.
To each, their own.

Vortex all the way for me.
 
I have the Vortex diamondback in 4-12 without the AO.
IMHO, the AO is not worth the extra hundred.
I have compared my friends' AO vs. my non-AO 4-12 version and for some reason the non-AO seems brighter, maybe less lenses, not sure why.
It is easily my favorite scope of all my scopes.
When I was at Wholesale sports, I looked through many of their scopes and the Diamondback were definitely better than the bushnells. I think they would compare better to the 4200 series than the 3200 series.

My Vortex has taken probably 1000 rounds on the top of my SKS without issue.
For a hunting rifle, I can't see why you'd want AO anyway. At close range, you'll be on low power-clear image. At 50 plus yards, you don't need AO, even at 12x. It's just one less thing you don't have to fiddle with when you're hunting.
And for shooting offhand at 100 yards, I'd much rather have it on 12x. It's not jiggling that bad. I seem to shoot better that way.
I do alot of practicing at 100 yds offhand with my sks, it really works better for me than a lower power scope, insofar as group sizes and consistency.

Everyone has their preferences. I have used low powered variables for years on my hunting rifles and at this point, I see them as a handicap for long range shooting. Now, it's 3-9 as a minimum, except on my 12gauge / 308. The key is finding a combination that allows you to shoot consistently.
 
LarryG said:
I have used low powered variables for years on my hunting rifles and at this point, I see them as a handicap for long range shooting.
Click to expand...
Long range shooting is a lot different than what the OP specified. He mentions deer and moose hunting, both of which are usually shot at under 100yds. He also mentions that shots expected to be under 200yds. In eastern Canada, you will encounter this game at close range more times than not and a high powered scope even at low magnification will still be a hindrance with the low FOV.

For general hunting in eastern Canada, a lightweight 2x7 or 2.5x8 makes a lot of sense over the heavier/larger scopes mentioned.
 
My apologies, I used the terms shooting/hunting interchangeably.

At the range, the higher power settings help me to shoot better off-hand on paper (some are the deer sized ones!). I assume it will work the same way when hunting.
Later on in the thread, Rich has mentioned shots may be up to 320 yards.
I would feel handicapped with a low powered scope in that situation. If faster target acquisition at close range is more important to you, and you wouldn't, that's ok.

My opinion for Rich, go with the vortex 4-12 AO. If you don't like it, sell it, and get what you want. I'm thinking you'll be very happy.




SuperCub said:
Long range shooting is a lot different than what the OP specified. He mentions deer and moose hunting, both of which are usually shot at under 100yds. He also mentions that shots expected to be under 200yds. In eastern Canada, you will encounter this game at close range more times than not and a high powered scope even at low magnification will still be a hindrance with the low FOV.

For general hunting in eastern Canada, a lightweight 2x7 or 2.5x8 makes a lot of sense over the heavier/larger scopes mentioned.
Click to expand...
 
I have been a huge fan of Vortex. I use their Diamondback 10x50 binos and love em. I just ordered the Dimondback 3-9x40 BDC. Can't wait to put it on. I currently have the elite 3200. Hands down Vortex is the better value. Their warranty hands down is the best.
 
LarryG said:
At the range, the higher power settings help me to shoot better off-hand on paper (some are the deer sized ones!). I assume it will work the same way when hunting.
Click to expand...
Don't assume that what works well at the range will always work well while hunting. There are too many variables involved with hunting and game very close at hand is one that can and will trip you up eventually. Too much magnification at close very range will not help make a successful shot on game. I've been there and learned the lesson. Better to have a low powered variable for these shots while 7x is lots for longer shots, which actually don't happen that often in Ont and here in the east.

LarryG said:
Later on in the thread, Rich has mentioned shots may be up to 320 yards.
I would feel handicapped with a low powered scope in that situation.
Click to expand...
While in the Yukon in 2010, I was shooting silhouettes at 500m with a 375Magnum topped with a 1.5x5 VXIII and hitting them with no problem once I had the range figured in the scope. Any moose or caribou would have been in deep doo doo after that. Lots of practice helps a lot.

If a hunter cannot hit a big game target @ 300yds with a 2x7 or 3x9 set on the highest setting, he might have to take up knitting. Try it, it's not that hard. ;) :)

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom