Given a choice going from most expensive to least expensive. Not sure if this question has been asked. From my understanding there is not much of an advantage going to a 50mm scope. How does a Leupold III stack up to Zeiss, Kahles, swarovski. I am presently using an elite 4200, good optics. tks in advance
Who has the brightest scope for the money?
- Thread starter Gohome2
- Start date
- Location
- Coquitlam, BC
Most expensive: March. It's a pipe dream for most of us.
From my understanding the larger the light gathering capability the lens has (bigger objective) the brighter the view will be. This is a factor of a few things though. Eyepiece size etc. Big lenses focus more light on smaller spots.
advantage of 50mm over what?
BrotherRockeye
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Rural Saskatchewan
I put a cheap Pentax Gameseeker 4-12x50 on my cheap H&R .204 and those dusk yodel dogs aren't just black shapes anymore 
- Location
- Saskatchewan
For the money, Zeiss Conquest 3-9 x50. Better than my Leupold vari-x 111 3.5-10 x 42. Of course the specialized Euro scopes with big objectives 30mm tubes and illuminated reticles are "best" but cost $,$$$.00
IMO, there is a significant difference in going to a larger objective, don't know why you would think otherwise...
IMO, there is a significant difference in going to a larger objective, don't know why you would think otherwise...
350tracker
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Interlake Manitoba
That’s not necessarily so. I had a Leupold Euro 3-9 x 50 mm c/w 30 mm tube and my Swarovski was better in low light condition with a 42 mm obj. lens. Has more to do with quality and coating of lens...
depends on a lot of things, quality of glass coatings, exit pupil size etc etc etc. typically the high dollar optics are high dollar for a reason and one of the main reasons is durability to get you to that lowlight shot. I use NF for that very reason, better than my mark 4 leupold
Farlsincharge
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Saskatchewan
Wasn't the 6500 bushnell being marketed as the brightest? Not sure if that is true, but I have one in 50mm and I am impressed with it thus far.
Like I said, factor of a FEW things
There are always exceptions. But generally its like a magnifying glass, the bigger it is and the smaller the spot the light focuses to, the brighter it is. glass perfection, coating type/application/quality, objective size, ocular size, etc
lots of ways to lose light along the way from entering the device to entering your eye. But they don't make telescopes as big as they can for nothing. Its not to see further, its to see brighter.
Gotta disagree with that part. Optimum light transfer is achieved with an exit pupil as large as the pupil of the eye can dialate. Normally the magic number is considered to be 7mm. Exit pupil can calculated by dividing the objective diameter by magnification which explains why 8 x 56s and 6 x 42s kick ass. Larger objectives enlarge the exit pupil, smaller objectives shrink it, as do higher powers.
- Location
- Canuckistan
I'm in for Nikon. Their lenses are fantastic.
And for some reason, I really like the Burris Black Diamonds. Really clear for me.
And for some reason, I really like the Burris Black Diamonds. Really clear for me.
A couple things to consider...exit pupil as previously described is a calculation involving magnification vs dia. of objective lense. The bigger the objective lens the bigger the exit pupil but remember the higher the magnification the smaller the exit pupil. All magnified optics are determind by these factors no matter the quality or cost. The other thing to consider is percentage of light passing through the optics. Every time light passes through a lense some is reflected back as glare. Putting several high quality coatings on all the lens surfaces allows a greater percentage of light to pass through and this is where the quality and cost of the optics come into play. Leupold and Zeiss in their premium optics claim around 98% light transmission through the entire optic (not just one lense as some manufactures fail to state when they give their numbers) This is near the theorectical maximum for current optics production. Many companies do not even have the capability to measure this accurately. The final thing to remember in sport optics is resolution as you can have a lot of light transmission but if the image is not crystal clear with sharp edges and good color seperation, then you have wasted your money. Phil.
Last edited:
