Hello friends who think leupold VX-II 4-12x40mm Adj. Obj. It is advisable for a 300 win mag thanks

CZ, you should not have any problem with the scope on a 300 win mag.

if you plan on hunting med. to big game with your .300 i would avoid the adj. objective. when game is spotted it's time to shoot, not start fiddling with your scope while they walk out of sight. i would take a hard look at the 3.5-10x leupold.

I totally concur with swampshooter. Adjustable objectives are out of place on a game hunting rifle. Save them for target-varmint applications.

Higher magnification is "nice" when zeroing your rifle at the bench and for testing loads on paper. But it is of no real value in the game field. A variable scope with an upper magnification of somewhere from 7 to 10 power is as much as you'll ever need for hunting deer-sized and larger game, even for shots that are well beyond the dependable range of your .300 Magnum.

All of that said, there is nothing about the VX-II 4-12 scope that wouldn't do fine on your rifle, just that the AO is a superfluous feature that adds a little weight and bulk and provides no tangible benefit.

Thank you for your advice and answers a question I say of vii 3-9x50 300 win mag

zeiss conquest 3-9x40 Vs leupold vii 3-9x50 ??????

Just as with the AO scopes, the 50mm objectives really have no place on a hunting rifle:

The outsized objective forces you to mount the scope so high that your eye will not naturally align with the scope's sight picture when your cheek is properly resting on the stock comb. This very much slows target acquisition and hinders quick shooting when called for.

The large objective is also heavy and of course more bulky, not features desirable in a rifle you carry most of the time.

The necessarily high mounting position amplifies the aiming error from canting.

Except for extremely low light conditions the 50mm objective offers no optical advantage over the 40mm. A 40mm objective provides all of the exit pupil your eye can use at moderate magnifications during legal (in most jusrisdictions) shooting hours. For European-type night time stand shooting illuminated only by moonlight, the larger objective might exhibit some optical advantage, but unless you anticipate that type of usage, the extra 10mm of diameter is just dead weight.

As between the Zeiss and the Leupold, you will find advocates of each. The Zeiss is said to have very good optics. It is heavier than the Leupold. It is typically priced more than the Leupold. But the most important difference is that many users report that eye placement with the Leupold gives you some bit more latitude. This can be important if you find yourself shooting from an awkward position or making a hurried shot. Either scope will work nicely -- buy the one you find most appealing to your tastes.

As some have already said, the magnification range is perfect for a 300 Winnie (maybe even all hunting rifles), but the A.O. is not. They make the same scope without the A.O., but with a 50mm objective lens. As Stonecreek said, 50mm lenses don't really fit on working hunting rifles.

Take a look at the VX-III 3.5-10x40 or a good old 3-9x40, like the Zeiss Conquest. They've got plenty of magnification for all the hunting you'll do with that rifle, and they look good to boot.

You can also look at the Conquest 3.5-10x44. My give you the best of both worlds. I am not a big fan of 50mm objective scope for hunting either, but the 44mm might be a compromise.

just get the 4x12 Adj.Obj. when hunting just set on 200yds.if you want to shoot at
500 you have the time to sit it or just shot as is.But the Adj.Obj. is a big help
when sighting in and running your groups at long range.Anyone that thinks this is
not true,thinks 100yds. is long range shooting....

Concur with the 40 to 44 mm objectives being best on hunting rifles.
The guys above nailed it!!

Don