There are several 4-14 power VX3s Leupold sells with AO or side focus adjustment, there's also one that doesn't ....whats the impact of not having that adjustment on higher power scopes?

Don't buy a 4-14 without a focus. I shot one the other day and it was very dissapointing. I like the side focus feature but the both get desired affect. shayne

Agreed. Anything above 9 or 10 power should have an adjustable objective.

+3

Thanks for the replies ... I was thinking that was needed above 10x....

Are you going to use it at 14X for 25-yard shots? Well, in that case you need one of the "focusing" (parallax adjusting) mechanisms.

But assuming that your use of maximum power is typically well beyond 100 yards, then, particularly if the scope is intended for game hunting, you are better off without the focusing mechanism. A focusing mechanism is a potential source of moisture infiltration and an additional complication which can (1) break and is (2) sure to be set at the wrong distance when you actually see the game you want to shoot.

Varminting/target use is where the focusing mechanism makes a real difference and improves the performance of the scope. If your gun is a varminter or target gun, then by all means insist on parallax adjustment.

Thanks Stonecreek that makes sense and also explains why Leupold has so many VX3 options in 4-14 without the parallax adjustment....and also why some of the varminter scopes have an AO in 4-14.

Its a hunting scope for Deer sized game...

quote:

Originally posted by Boss Sauce:
Thanks Stonecreek that makes sense and also explains why Leupold has so many VX3 options in 4-14 without the parallax adjustment....and also why some of the varminter scopes have an AO in 4-14.

Its a hunting scope for Deer sized game...

In that case I would definitely opt for the non-adjustable objective with the 1" tube.

It's your gun, your scope, and your hunt, so do as you please, but you may want to reconsider whether you actually need so much magnification. Do you really anticipate that you will shoot at a deer so far away that you can't see it well enough to accurately aim if it is only magnified 9 or 10 times instead of 14? The higher power scope will be a bit heavier, bulkier, and more expensive; and it will have less FOV at the low power setting than a lower powered variable, thus somewhat limiting your close/fast shooting capabilities. The highest power scope that I have on any of my hunting rifles is a 3.5-10X, and I have opportunities (and have taken some of them) at shots at 450 yards and more. At that range on deer (and similar sized animals) magnification is not your limiting factor. In fact, high magnification can just fool you into thinking that your target is closer than it actually is.

All of that said, a 4.5-14X isn't an impossible scope for hunting use, just more than you need.

stonecreek...I am reconsidering...I'v never used anything higher than 10x in the past as well and have owned quit a few Zeiss, Leica, and Leupold scopes in different flavors below/at 10x...I currently have low powered variables and some fixed scopes on my heavy rifles but thought I might give higher power a try on a Sako 85 300 wsm I may use for Deer, hence the first post about the parallax adjustment....they make a VX3 in 3.5 x 10 and that was also on my list of "maybes" its probably the one I'll end up with....thanks for the advice and follw-up post...Mark

I'm a Luddite but wonder about these bigger and bigger variable ranges. Hemingway managed to shoot a running rhino at 300 yards using a peep sight and Elmer Keith got game at 600 with nothing more than four magnifications, so do we really need 14x unless shooting rabbits at half a mile?

The side parallax knob does help focus but the proper use is complicated and there's a good chance you'll forget all about it when the big one pops up.

If you are making long shots where you have time to set up and do range finding, the parallax correction (focus) will help for any variation you might have in your sight picture. It is just another tool to more precisely place the shot.

The longer the shot, the more parallax is an issue for hunting. If all of your shots are < 200 yards it doesn't much matter for game hunting.

If I have to adjust it, the side focus is a lot more convenient.

I use a Leupold 4.5-14x on a 7 RM for hunting deer-elk size game. I don't want an adjustable parallax adjustment. When hunting big game and a shot is going to be taken, it's time to press the trigger and not time to start fiddling with your scope. I try to have my scope power set for the expected range and don't even consider changing power.

quote:

Originally posted by rodell:
The longer the shot, the more parallax is an issue for hunting.

Not necessarily. Non-adjustable scopes in the Leupold line are typically set to be parallax-free at 150 yards. The potential parallax error at extended yardage (for example, 400 yards) is less than the potential parallax error at 40 yards.

I use the word "potential" since there is zero error at any distance if your eye is placed in the same position with each shot. It is only when the eye is at the extreme of the sight picture that significant parallax shows up.

Focus is a different thing, but again, out-of-focus is minimal beyond 150 yards since the 150 yard focus is virtually the same as infinity focus. At very short range (under 40 yards), you'll find a fixed parallax scope to be a tiny bit fuzzy.

In other words, the scope manufacturers knew what they were doing when the set the parallax on non-adjustable models for 150 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

Originally posted by rodell:
The longer the shot, the more parallax is an issue for hunting.

Not necessarily. Non-adjustable scopes in the Leupold line are typically set to be parallax-free at 150 yards.

The Leupys are set for 100 yards these days, or so I'm told.

As you've noted the problem comes about with an inconsistent eye placement. To the extent you can control this variable in all situations, the better off you are.

I like having the side focus, but, I don't adjust it just before the shot. I set it to what the likely shot is going to be from wherever I am and live with that. Some scopes get fuzzy very quickly. (I have a Vortex on a .223 that is really bad in this respect.)

I hunted deer for many years with a 3X9 with AO. I sighted it in at 3X with the scope set parallax free at 200 yards. I consider the maximum range for shooting deer to be about 300 yards due to the lack of energy, wind drift, less than perfect shot placement and a number of other things. The 3X magnification was never too little magnification.
I never dinked around with the AO while I was hunting. I regarded it as a feature for varmint hunting and load testing.

When I started hunting in the early 60s scopes were looked upon as a gimmick by most hunters in the area. Their primary benefit is in poor light. Now days the magnification has grown so high that the bulk of the scope and poorer low light performance can detract from the rifle.

Most of our shooting (most number of times the trigger is pulled) is done at the range. Its nice when you can see the target clearly at 100 yrds with your new 14 power scope. My experience is that is that it will not be in focus if you do not have some kind of adjustment on your 14x scope. The scopes parallax is pre-set at the factory but not neccesarily for you. "Give in to the dark side Luke" get the focus and be happy.

The 3.5-10XAO was my favorite all-around scope.......until Leupold brought out the 4.5-14XAO(only lose 1 power at the low end...but gain 4 power on the upper). The newer 30mm tube model, with side-focus is nice...as there's no more reaching down the barrel to adjust the AO.

Note that our coyotes are a pretty small target.....when you find one sitting out there facing you. I'm just say'in.......

BTW.....I'm pretty sure that the 3.5-10X is the same physical size as the 4.5-14X.

Just my $0.02.
Kevin

Kevin: There's not much difference in the 3.5-10 and the 4.5-14 in the regular 40mm lens -- the 14X is a tad longer and about 2.5 oz heavier according to the Leupold specs. But if you ad AO, its weight climbs more, and the SF with the 30mm tube and 50mm objective is several ounces heavier still. Also, according to Leupold, field of view at the low-end shrinks from 29.5 feet with the 3.5X (actual magnification 3.3X) to 19.9 feet with the 4.5X (actual magnification 4.9X) at 100 yards. That could be a real problem if you were to jump a trophy buck close-in.

Regardless, Boss Sauce wants a scope for "deer-sized" game, so a 10X is much more than adequate.

I like high power and adjustable parallax when I'm shooting at young prairie dogs that are about the size of a bottle of Tabasco sauce at 400 yards, but for deer and larger I think the high power, complicated scopes are just in the way.

By the way, I have several 4-12's, 6-18's, and 6.5-20's, but like you, I think that the 4.5-14 may be just the ticket for many varminting uses. At 14X you still have enough FOV not to lose your target in the recoil with a gun like a .223. The 18X and 20X scopes won't always let you do this unless your rifle is pretty heavy.

Might I note there is no such thing as "side focus" and the people and scope companies that call it that are IDIOTS!

An AO, knob on the side, moving the turret on an old steel tube Weaver or loosening the tube screw to move an interior lens on an old straight tube scope (like a Unertl Small game) all serve ONLY one purpose, that is to correct the parallax.

A scope is focused by using the eyepiece (ocular lens end) as anyone who can RTFI knows.

End of rant.

You're absolutely correct, .45-70. However, adjusting the parallax also impacts the focus, which is obvious to the eye as the adjustment is moved. As with a number of other optical qualities, this is much more apparent at higher powers than lower ones.

I marvel at how misfocused many people's scopes are. They seem not to understand the function of the eyepiece adjustment. I'll often hear someone praising the optics of a cheap scope over those of a higher quality scope simply because the cheap scope has been properly focused and the expensive one has not. Well, duh, I guess the cheaper one does provide the better image. Imagine that.

Stoney,

Properly "focusing the reticle" instructions have been around for how many decades now???? Amazing!!......

Total elimination of parallax, at a specific distance, results in a perfectly focused object, at that distance. Fair statement??

P.S. the 4.5-14X40,30mm,SF,VHR.....is still my favorite!

Kevin

quote:

P.S. the 4.5-14X40,30mm,SF,VHR.....is still my favorite! Smiler

A good friend I hunt with has one of these on his .22-250 sporter which he uses mostly for coyotes and occasionally cycles it into the rotation on prairie dogs. It's a great scope for these uses. I would like it better with a 1" tube, but I've got to assume that the SF mechanism requires the space of the larger housing. No question that the SF adjustment is much handier to use than the AO way out on the end of the scope.

People will almost come to blows arguing the subject, but I like the VHR (varmint hunter reticle) much better than the CDS system. For one thing, it's faster since the appropriate holdover is always immediately available to you (instead of first having to check where your dial is set then move to the proper position as with the CDS.)

Another issue for me is just how fast the adjustment mechanism can be worn out by clicking it up and down many times during a PD hunt. Normally, the adjustment mechanism of a scope is only moved a couple of dozen times in the useful life of a scope. A CDS could this much use in a day. I assume that the manufacturers account for this and have tested the mechanism for endurance and loosening/slackening due to constant use, but being something of a Luddite it still bothers me. Mechanical wear is unavoidable, so it's just a question of how many "clicks" can be accumulated before something doesn't work the way it's supposed to.

Oh well, way off subject here, so I'll stop before I instigate a war between the factions.

For a BG rifle I have used Leupold 3X9X40 and 3.5X10X40 NON-AO scopes and have taken pronghorns out to 600+ yards with no trouble. Just need to know your rifle and use a rifle with a flat trojectory.
I believe in the KISS principle for BG rifles. The less things to adjust to make a shot the better. I have a buddy who thinks he needs the Hubble space scope and 47 things that need to be adjusted to hunt with. Drive us crazy and part of the time I end up shooting the animal for myself or finish off the animal he wounds.

My 2 Cents