THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM OPTICS FORUM


Moderators: Canuck
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Can you give me an advice?
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
Picture of ovny
posted
Since I have bothered asking for the rifle to buy for the 300 RUM cartridge because I ask you to tell me to put the rifle display. My budget will be very small so that viewers can aspire to are modest, and I've put it:

Leupold VX-I-(4-12x40)

Redfield Revenge-(6-18x44)

Well that's all thank you very much,

Ovny.


I am Spanish

My forum:www.armaslargasdecaza.com
 
Posts: 1131 | Location: Spain (Madrid) | Registered: 11 June 2008Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Son casi los mismos en calidad (y creo que los dos son buenos). Prefiero un poco la marca Leupold sobre la marca Redfield (los dos son de la misma compania) pero, si quieres tirar un 300 UM a distancia larga, la magnificacion 18x de el Redfield parece mas importante que la preferencia de lar marca Leupold que puede ser un poco mas fino o acabado un poco mejor.

Steve
 
Posts: 1739 | Location: Maryland | Registered: 17 January 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of sambarman338
posted Hide Post
Ovny,
Maybe ski1 has said it already, but I would NOT get any 6-18 scope, even one made by Zeiss or Swarovski, no matter how flat-shooting your rifle is.

All magnification robs us of vision roughly equivalent to the field of view multiplied by the magnification - and many times that when you calculate it as area - so I would not want a scope that started at 6x in case something dangerous/close jumps up in front of you. Also, big scopes need constant parallax adjustment and that's something you may not think of in the heat of the moment.

So, why not settle for a Leupold VX-1 3-9 instead?
 
Posts: 5188 | Location: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: 31 March 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Get the VX-I. The Revenge is hecho en China and is not of the same quality as the VX-I. The VX-I is a more appropriate magnification, also.

But as Sambarman says, the VX-I 3-9x40 will provide all of the magnification you can use in hunting.
 
Posts: 13274 | Location: Henly, TX, USA | Registered: 04 April 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I agree that Leupolds are tough to beat for the price. Feliz Casa!
 
Posts: 925 | Registered: 05 October 2011Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of zimbabwe
posted Hide Post
When you get as old as I am and your vision goes the way of the wild goose you can use all the magnification you can get. If you are hunting Dangerous game it is one thing but North American game is another. My favorite rife for Prairie Dogs when in Gunsmith school was a 220 Swift with a 2" Unertl Ultra Spot in 20 powerand it had the old front focusing objective. The new Tactical scopes with the side wheel are far easier to use. Actually my favorite 375 H&H has a Leupold 3-9 on it and is usually set on 9x. The binoculars I carried all over Africa are my favorites 10x56 Swarovski's. My last custom rifle was 257 Roberts on a Mdl 70 action. The scope is a Zeiss Diavari Z 3-12 x56 MC. Only problem it has is it's expensive and it's heavy.


SCI Life Member
NRA Patron Life Member
DRSS
 
Posts: 2786 | Location: Green Valley,Az | Registered: 04 January 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of sambarman338
posted Hide Post
Sorry to hear your vision has got that bad, Zimbabwe. How do you see the game to shoot at in the first place? I have reasonably bad myopia but find updating my specs every few years makes up for it to the point where I'd risk a 200-yard shot on a deer-sized target with a peep sight. Have you discussed the matter with an ophthalmologist?
 
Posts: 5188 | Location: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: 31 March 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ovny
posted Hide Post
Thank you friends, it seems that the Leupold is a quality front Redfield Viewer. I know the range of increases 3 - 9 x is the "universal" say it somehow. But as I need something more because I also have myopia and enough diopter (9-9.5) and all help to improve vision is low.Thanks a lot

ovny.


I am Spanish

My forum:www.armaslargasdecaza.com
 
Posts: 1131 | Location: Spain (Madrid) | Registered: 11 June 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of sambarman338
posted Hide Post
Ovny,
As said above, I too have myopia but I had not noticed the problem you mention. That diopter you refer to would appear to be what we call exit pupil, the bead of light you see, which should more or less correspond to the size of the pupil or centre, black bit of our eye. I have heard myopics' pupils may open wider than in people with ordinary eyesight, say 9mm rather than the 7mm or 8mm of ordinary mortals. However, it is the size of the objective (front lens) that governs this, not the power range.

The Leupold 3-9x40 has an objective diameter of 40mm, of course, which means in poor light you can wind up to 4.4x at least before the exit pupil shrinks below 9mm. (To calculate exit pupil, divide the objective lens diameter in mm by the magnification, hence 4x32 gives 8mm; 4x36 gives 9mm.)

It has been said that there is another factor called 'twilight value' where you may get better results selecting a higher power in bad light, even though you've passed the optimum relative luminosity. I can't remember how that one is calculated but maybe it's what makes you think the 6-18 Revenge is better. Binoculars, for instance, often have exit pupils smaller than optimum without being considered inadequate for twilight usage.

There are other brands of scope that may give you slightly bigger front lenses (like 50mm) but they are more prone to damage if you bump them, especially if they have bigger power multiples (like 3-12, or crazy ranges like 4-28x), which probably have longer, heavier erector tubes inside.

However, those big scopes you mentioned don't help with gathering light because they still only have front lenses of 40 and 44mm to cope with higher powers. The 4-12x40 will give no better low-end light than the 3-9x40 and the 6-18x44 never gives you more than a 7.7mm exit pupil - and it gets much worse above 6 power.

So, there are bigger and more expensive scopes that may give you more light but high magnification will not help your perceived need of bigger exit pupils. Maybe you should look for a 3-9 with a bigger front bell.

Cheers
- Paul
 
Posts: 5188 | Location: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: 31 March 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ovny
posted Hide Post
Hi mate, the diopter of myopic I believe that refer to vision loss, to the extent that it affects the "disease". I know that most of the viewers in the eye carry a wheel on the back that is regulated to adapt to vision wear glasses. I do not know much about optics, so I have to seek advice and knowledge of others. To say that I see very blurry without glasses.

Ovny.


I am Spanish

My forum:www.armaslargasdecaza.com
 
Posts: 1131 | Location: Spain (Madrid) | Registered: 11 June 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ovny
posted Hide Post
Thank you very much Paul Wink .

Ovny.


I am Spanish

My forum:www.armaslargasdecaza.com
 
Posts: 1131 | Location: Spain (Madrid) | Registered: 11 June 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of sambarman338
posted Hide Post
You're welcome, Ovny,
As it happens I've just stumbled on an advertisement for Leupold scopes that showed they do make a VX-1 3-9x50 scope, which would let in more light than the 40mm version. I don't recommend going to that bigger scope but it only costs about $75 more than the smaller one.
 
Posts: 5188 | Location: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: 31 March 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I don't know why so many are against high magnification as long as you have a variable.... Most of my hunting rifles (not dangerous game) cary a 6.5x20 Luepold. Usually always set at 6.5, but when I need and can use magnification I have it.


.
 
Posts: 42532 | Location: Crosby and Barksdale, Texas | Registered: 18 September 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sambarman338:
Ovny,
As said above, I too have myopia but I had not noticed the problem you mention. That diopter you refer to would appear to be what we call exit pupil, the bead of light you see, which should more or less correspond to the size of the pupil or centre, black bit of our eye. I have heard myopics' pupils may open wider than in people with ordinary eyesight, say 9mm rather than the 7mm or 8mm of ordinary mortals. However, it is the size of the objective (front lens) that governs this, not the power range.

The Leupold 3-9x40 has an objective diameter of 40mm, of course, which means in poor light you can wind up to 4.4x at least before the exit pupil shrinks below 9mm. (To calculate exit pupil, divide the objective lens diameter in mm by the magnification, hence 4x32 gives 8mm; 4x36 gives 9mm.)

It has been said that there is another factor called 'twilight value' where you may get better results selecting a higher power in bad light, even though you've passed the optimum relative luminosity. I can't remember how that one is calculated but maybe it's what makes you think the 6-18 Revenge is better. Binoculars, for instance, often have exit pupils smaller than optimum without being considered inadequate for twilight usage.

There are other brands of scope that may give you slightly bigger front lenses (like 50mm) but they are more prone to damage if you bump them, especially if they have bigger power multiples (like 3-12, or crazy ranges like 4-28x), which probably have longer, heavier erector tubes inside.

However, those big scopes you mentioned don't help with gathering light because they still only have front lenses of 40 and 44mm to cope with higher powers. The 4-12x40 will give no better low-end light than the 3-9x40 and the 6-18x44 never gives you more than a 7.7mm exit pupil - and it gets much worse above 6 power.

So, there are bigger and more expensive scopes that may give you more light but high magnification will not help your perceived need of bigger exit pupils. Maybe you should look for a 3-9 with a bigger front bell.

Cheers
- Paul

2 completely different scientific terms, sambarman338.
 
Posts: 1935 | Registered: 30 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of sambarman338
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Norseman:

2 completely different scientific terms, sambarman338.


Could you explain what you mean by that, Norseman?

If you are thinking about diopter, I realise it usually pertains to focus - but I don't think that is what ovny wants to know about.
 
Posts: 5188 | Location: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: 31 March 2009Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia