up to 20X magnification, 50mm - what scopes are you guys using?

[coyotezapper]

Originally Posted by pertnear

I agree with montdoug. The big 50's usually cost more & require higher rings with only minimal advantages. My favorite scopes are Leupold Vari-X III 6.5x to 20x 40mm. I have 3 & they have all been excellent. You can usually pick-up a slightly used one for $400 & with Leupold's warranty there are no worries.

FWIW...

I agree with this also. A 50mm bell will only give you a little bigger exit pupil advantage in low light which can also be equaled by the 40mm by just turning down the magnification a bit. 50/20=2.5 40/16=2.5 same exit pupil just slightly different magnification for low light scenarios.

I also like the 6.5-20x40 Leupold's. They have the right amount of size, weight and the optical quality can only be beat by much higher priced scopes IMO.

Let me give an example of what I think about properly sized scopes. My bro in law called me and said that he could not get his new Anschutz on paper. He said the dealer where he bought the 17hmr bore sighted it but he could not hit anything with it and asked if I could look at it. I almost laughed when he dropped it off. The Burris scope he had on top of the short barreled rifle reminded me of what Shaq would look like riding a moped. Don't get me wrong the scope was a nice scope but was too big for this rifle. When he picked it back up I showed him some of my rifles and how much better the rifles / scopes looked compared to his. He now has a Leupold VX6 2-12x42mm and now the rifle / scope are in proportion to each other.

[flashhole]

I currently have 50mm, 44mm (2), 40mm, 35mm (2). The 50mm is on my Rem 700 21 Fireball. The 44mm Conquest is on my Kimber 84M bolt gun in 223. I like the 50mm better than the 44mm and already have the rings for one. Just a matter of preference. If I'm walking around with a rifle hunting I like the low mount 35mm scopes but for varminting and targets where you don't move around much and usually have the benefit of a rest I prefer the bigger glass.

[kenbro]

A bit of googling appears to show advantages, and, disadvantages for both large and small objectives.
Ken.

[georgeld]

JohnHenry:

Yep, I misnamed that thing alright.
Thank you sir, appreciate the correction.

What I have are the Simmons, not Weaver as I said above.

Bigger picture for one thing. Plus my necks long enough to raise up
the extra half inch to look thru it!!

[bburrell]

not really sure yet what you are hoping to get for a varmint scope. Lots of good options. I personally see no need for a 50mm objective lens with a varmint scope. I have many vortex and weaver scopes on my varmint rifles. I do like the varmint EBX reticle in my weaver Grand Slam. The scope is somewhat compact and light to carry in the field. I believe the center dot is 1/2 moa at 10x which makes it good for more refined target work.

[Bayou City Boy]

http://www.opticsplanet.com/howto/ho...-diameter.html

-BCB

[coyotezapper]

Originally Posted by Bayou City Boy

http://www.opticsplanet.com/howto/ho...-diameter.html

-BCB

This is a subject that for the longest time really confused me. At shot Show a few years ago I cornered an optics engineer and called out him and his company for claims made about the large objective lenses. He admitted that it was easier just to say that larger objective lenses gathered more light when in fact the size of the lens had nothing to do with light transmission as it is a product of lens material and coatings. He then when on to give me quite a tutorial on scopes which was overwhelming to say the least. There is a lot of science in scopes.

Anyway it is good to finally see articles like the one above that dispel a lot of the blather out there on this subject.

Sorry to the OP if he see's this as a hijack.

[SmokinJoe]

Would agree with some others that the Leupold 6.5-20x40 EFR scopes are hard to beat. I have several & won't be getting rid of them. I also have a 6.5-20X50 Conquest that is great and a Swaro 6-18 that I like a lot. Interestingly, I shoot the smallest groups with the rifles that have the Leupolds which kinda tells me something if I will only listen, eh? When I am shooting PD's, I rarely use more than 12X and have no problem with brightness. I have also found that I shoot better with the standard fine duplex reticle. If I was shooting longer distances, the varmint or mil dot reticles might prove better, and I have some of those, too. Being an old benchrest score shooter, I guess I am just used to holding off to make shots instead of dialing it in, but I have twisted knobs a bit in bad wind, too. Good luck with your purchase.

[flashhole]

Good input and great dialog. Keep it coming.

I want a 50mm scope.

I want the reticle etched onto the lens.

The question I'm struggling with now is where do I want the reticle - Front Focal Plane or Rear Focal Plane?

The Scopes that are in my finalist category are:

Weaver Super Slam 4-20x50mm.

Nikon Black X1000 6-24x50.

Burris Veracity 5-25x50.

Not sold on the Vortex Viper.

[Gerald D.]

Those that don't like busy reticles won't care for it but right now its one of the best buys out there and works extremely well, the Sightron STAC 4-20x 30mm tube w/MOA2 reticle. I have it on my 6.5 Creedmoor and just purchased another for so rifle not yet built or purchased, a friend has actually mounted one on one of his CZ .22's set up for long range Squirrel/Vermin sniping and is pleased as punch by it.