Hello,

Can you guys tell me what you think is the maximum optical magnification for deer hunting, eg for shooting a moving deer that suddently appears in a forrest? I´m asking this because I want a scope with high magnification but it will have lower end at the magnification point you guys think is max for quick shots on moving targets.

jonj

A 4.5-14X would be ok. I could use a 6X if I had to but I don't want to as it would be a disadvantage.

In the trees for quick shots, nothing bigger then 2.5X. Larger then that you get in trouble. Sooooo...............your variable could be the 1.5x4 or the 1.75x6, or the 2x8.
In the trees for fast shots on running/trotting deer you need a wide field of view for fast pick-up. If you do not pick-up the target the very instant you point your gun at it, the shot is lost, simple as that.
When hunting moose/elk/deer in the trees I always keep my scope on 1.75 or 2x.
Also keep both eyes open when shooting, yes even with a scoped rifle.
Both 4x and 6X magnification belong in open country in my opinion. 4x will serve you well out to 400 yards on deer. A looong way out for shooting from typical field positions.
Invest in a good set of quality binocs or spotting scope for long range trophy identification, rather then spend money high magnification scopes, unless its main use will be varminting or target shooting..
Good luck

I use less magnification on hunting guns as time goes by, 1.75-6x or 2-7x is plenty.

If you are well practiced in aquiring a target in your scope as soon as you shoulder your rifle, 4-12, 4-14, or a 6-18 would be fine. If it takes you a few seconds to aquire your target in the scope, you might want to go w/ a 3-9 or a 2.8-10.

Good Luck!

Reloader

There are ver yfew times I have wanted more magnification than 8-9x. I like the Leup. VXIII 2.5x8 for general purpose. If I hunted alot of thick stuff, then a 1.5x5 or 1.75x6. The 4-12 are just getting too big to hang on a trim rifle.

I currently use a leupold 3-9, but it stays on x3 when in the scrub. But a leupold 2.5-8 or 2-7 would be ideal, its up to you which one suits your budget and needs.

cheers cc

I use 3x10 variables and would not want any more magnification.

Handleing your rifle and getting on target is more important then the power of the scope.

When I was doing a lot of combat rifle shooting running jungle lanes ect. I tryed everything from open sites,peep sites, to scopes set on the highest power I didn't not find much differants in speed of shot placement up to about 12x.

But then I was shooting many a thousands of rounds a year perfecting my CQ battle skills. The more time spent practiceing on makeing a good first one hit the faster one will make it when the time comes for real.

quote:

Originally posted by jstevens:
I use less magnification on hunting guns as time goes by, 1.75-6x or 2-7x is plenty.

Amen brother. I started out with 6-24X50s, 3.5-10X50s and realized one just didn't need all the extra weight and magnification to hit the target.

I now own two 2-7X33 Leupolds, a Burris 1.75-6X33, and the power house os a std 3-9X40.

If one works on their shooting fundamentals and has faith that the bullet wil streak down range and do its job when the shooter does his, they won;t need to overcompensate their poor shooting skills with high magnification.

Somehow people get the impression that marksmanship is linked to magnifying the target. To a point, magnification can help, but it takes proprer shooting fundamentals to make the kill. A shooter can kill deer at the typical hunting ranges with iron sights if he employs the standard marksmanship fundamentals correctly.

I think you are getting good answers. I don't shoot at running deer (or I should say I've never hit a running deer). I shot two this year, one at 220 and one at 200 yards with my 2.5x10 set on 2.5 and one at 70 yards with it set on 4x. Only target shooting from a bench does it go above 4x. If I have to leave before dark I dial it back to 2.5 for the walk home and sometime forget to set it back to 4x.

Count me as 2-7. In the kind of deer hunting I do shots vary from 10ft to 400yds. I have had 4X be too much (sold it to a freind) but 2X focuses close enough on the running shots in the brush and 7X is enough for the long shots. Keeping it down on the lowest power setting allows fast target aquisition. Your mileage may vary.

In old days when variables were not the rule,the debate was usually between 4X and 6X being max. Plenty of variables covering that range.

If your rifle fits you well and your scope is mounted properly for your shooting style AND your scope has a fairly wide latitude of eye placement (non-critical), then you can successfully "get by" with a higher power than otherwise. I say "get by" because a higher power is of no benefit. A variable with a lower range no higher than about 3 or 3.5 is usually okay for close quarters deer. Animals that run at you instead of away from you are better sighted through even lower magnification .

I helped a friend clean up his depredation tags this year, and in the last two weekends of antlerless season, I shot 14 deer. Of those, two were standing shots, the rest were running shots at 10 - 70 yards in thick timber. This was with a slug gun with a 2.5 power scope, all but two required only one shot. I think the comment about practice making the difference is really right on. I have been shooting running rabbits with a .22 all my life. I have also seen my preference in scopes go down in power. I think a 3-9 is a good balance, I own several, and nowadays most of them never make it off the 3X setting.

DGK

A Leupold 4.5-14x is my practical maximum for any big game hunting, including deer. I tried a 6.5-20x for a few years and hated it.

But a 4.5-14X is a very practical scope. Some guys will say that even that is too much glass, but it really isn't. Let's face it, if you can hunt deer in any kind of cover with a 4x (nobody'd utter a peep against that selection), you can hunt deer in close cover with a 4.5-14x with the scope turned down to 4.5x.

There are time when that extra magnification at the high-end comes in very handy, especially when you hunt open-country a lot, as I do........

AD

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
A Leupold 4.5-14x is my practical maximum for any big game hunting, including deer. I tried a 6.5-20x for a few years and hated it.

But a 4.5-14X is a very practical scope. Some guys will say that even that is too much glass,

I guess that I'm one of them, Allen.

I tried a 4.5-14 on a 7mm STW on the theory that this long-range caliber needed a long-range scope. I pulled it off after one season and replaced it with a 3-9X, finding that a 3-9 or 3.5-10 has a somewhat (to me) more forgiving eye placement and is just generally faster and more comfortable to use. The difference in 9x and 14x on even a smallish deer at a quarter of a mile isn't enough to influence whether you hit or miss (although you probably shouldn't try in most instances).

I had an even more pronounced problem with a Leupold 4-12 Vari-X II, but this was before Leupold made some optical changes to that model that made the eye relief and placement less critical. I now own a couple of the VX-I's in 4-12 and I don't think that they would give a problem in hunting situations (but they are on what are primarily varmint guns).

The only thing worse than too much power in a hunting scope is a 50mm objective. The only thing worse than a 50mm objective is an adjustable objective. And the only thing worse than an adjustable objective is a sight picture junked up with all kinds of trick reticles and range-finder gimmicks. I guess I could mention "TV"-shaped occular lenses, but most manufacturers gave up that Rube Goldberg idea years ago, so I'll let it rest in peace with the Hoola Hoops.

I actually would utter a peep against using a 4x scope in heavy cover if given my choice. I think the difference in perspective comes from how and where our formative hunting time was spent. Growning up hunting swamps and thickets for whitetails my preference is for a lower power scope. Especially when driving deer or jump shooting them out of thickets. In those situations where the action is fast and close I prefer a low end of 1-3x. I want as big a range of eye relief and as much field of view as possible. My favorite scopes are the 1.75-6x or 2.5-8x Leupolds. I've never felt handicapped at any range I would care to shoot a big game animal on a western hunt with that level of magnification. I have witnessed many times hunters blowing a chance on a nice buck because they couldn't find it in time in their scope. Some of that is practice, learning to keep both eyes open, etc. but too much magnification can contribute as well. Just my opinion.

Jeff

I've never been able to figure out why people think they need these 4-12x, 4.4-14x, etc. for hunting. I use 1.5-5x mostly, have a few 2-7xs and a few 2.5-8x. Even have a few of the old standby 2.5x and 3x. 8x in plenty for any big game at any sane range. 4x can be too much in close, brushy shooting.

quote:

The only thing worse than too much power in a hunting scope is a 50mm objective. The only thing worse than a 50mm objective is an adjustable objective. And the only thing worse than an adjustable objective is a sight picture junked up with all kinds of trick reticles and range-finder gimmicks.

I'm going to have to second this...

On close running in the brush you might try a aim point or red dot sight. I have tried 4x12 and 6.5x20 at close range running deer and have not had good luck picking up the deer. Up close or at a distance on standing deer the lower end scopes will let you find them easier. I have seen a lot of deer walking through (on the other side of the trees) and have not been able to find them even with a 4x12 at the low end.

quote:

Originally posted by 9.3x62:

quote:

The only thing worse than too much power in a hunting scope is a 50mm objective. The only thing worse than a 50mm objective is an adjustable objective. And the only thing worse than an adjustable objective is a sight picture junked up with all kinds of trick reticles and range-finder gimmicks.

I'm going to have to second this...

Sorry but I will have to dissagree about the adjustable objective. I try not to buy a scope without one because scopes without an adjustable objective have the parallex (sp) set to 100yrds by the factory and if you are shooting closer or farther than 100yrds the cross hairs will be blurry. It is not so critical on a deer but if you are sighting in your rifle it makes a lot of difference.

I have one scope with an adjustable objective lens for use on a coyote gun. I may be wrong but the adjustment to the objective is not to elliminate blurry crosshairs. That is done by the focus adjustment of the rear lens. The forward or objective lens is used to reduce parallax . This is the apparent movemnet of the crosshairs on the view of the target on ranges other than that to which the scope has been set.
Place your rifle in a solid rest, aim at a target then move your head slightly up, down or sideways. If the parallax setting is not correct for that range the crosshairs will appear to move in relation to the target. Of course if the gun is steady this can not be actually happening It is the phenomenon known as parallax. The adjustable objective lens allows you to get rid of this for any range you are sighting.If in doubt or if expecting a quick shot I dial mine in mine for 100 yards. Most scoeps designed for centerfires are set for 100 yards while rim fire scopes are more likely set for 25 or 50 yards.

2x7 is the most I would say anyone typically would need on a deer/elk rifle. I'm sure under some conditions more is better, but for most hunting that's sufficient. Anything larger is very bulky to me and I don't like excess bulk on my rifles personally.

I also wonder sometimes whether having super high magnification, in addition to being absurdly cumbersome, would also tend to give you the illusion that since you can see him so well, by gosh you can actually hit that deer at 400+ yards. I say few sportsmen should be shooting much over 300 yards under field conditions most of the time - of course there are those who can, but most people's shooting really gets erratic beyond that in the field.

My M77/MkII 30-06 wears a fixed 4x Burris compact... my M77/MkII .375 wears a 1.5x5 Leupold and my .458 #1 wears a compact Burris 2x7. I do have a Model 700 in 6mm Rem with a Redfield 3x9 widefield scope that was on the rifle when I bought it. It's primarily a coyote and bobcat rifle though so that's where the higher magnification does come in handy.

quote:

I try not to buy a scope without one because scopes without an adjustable objective have the parallex (sp) set to 100yrds by the factory ...

Not so, a number of the 1.5-4.5x and 1.5-5x scope are parallax free at 50 and 75 yards (Nikons 1.5-4.5 and Weaver 1.5-5x for example).

My deer rifle is a .308 with a leupold vari-xII 2x7 My back up has a 3x9 My shotgun has a fixcede 2.5. My sons first deer hunt will be this fall i gave him a remington pump 30/06 with a weaver 1.5x4.5 varible Right around 2 power does it for me for those close shots