|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
82 members (Epalm88, scrape, CAM, Joe4majors, AU338MAG, BAMA RUGER, 25-20, Longtine, jarcher38, hallb, mw2015, Ray_Coon, Red Fox, Lvlhdd, Turkey_neck, lectrode, BCLC, donia, Big Al, 44MAG, Ron A., Turkey, Livintohunt19, BPI, JohnG, Bamajoz, Chiller, BigA47, Coosa buck, XVIII, Jus_me, jmj120, Turkeyneck78, Ken Crumpton, bfoote, Mennen34, ECO25, HURRICANE, Tree Dweller, Cedar, Remington270, taggedout, AU coonhunter, Young20, Parker243, eclipse829, geeb1, dirt, chrismims, thayerp81, Ten37, Turkeyhunter81, Catbird, Paint Rock 00, DGAMBLER, joe sixpack, kyles, Scooter7, johnv, RidgeRanger, Bigem1958, GomerPyle, KnightRyder, Darrylcom, Ridgehunter36, blade, WPZJR, Ryano, 7PTSPREAD, square, outdoorguy88, J_Martin, 10 invisible),
1,105
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 20,174 Likes: 3
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 20,174 Likes: 3 |
Is there a difference between light transmission and being able to see better late? I have googled a ton of articles all saying the bigger diameter scope lets in more light or you can see better late with larger diameter. Any small scope I hav used - I could not pick up deer great at last light. This is the only site where I have heard people saying these small scopes bring in light better. I also called one of the top of the line scopes and asked for tech support. I asked if the larger scopes were an advantage to be able to see better late (i hav always heard this from large numbers of really good hunters as well as what I hav seen for myself). After the guy got thru laughing - he answered of course - that why we made the larger diameter. That’s what I thought
I hav seen a few articles - one was by Ron Spomer and he was touting the smaller scopes over large 56 diameter and how the smaller was better and hating on the larger - But at the end - he said - ok - yea - the large diameter brings in more light - we all know that - but the diff is so minimal - you would be crazy for the trade off. Maybe this is what you guys are saying
I will call a different large scope manufacturer and ask the same question tomorrow and I already know the answer I will get
Last year somebody on here posted an article supporting their view - i don’t know how to post articles - but there ton of articles saying exactly what I am saying. I May call all the large scope manufactures and talk to tech support - bet I get some answer from all. Somebody in this thread mentioned a sales rep said as supporting proof on better light transmission - a rep can say whatever he feels like saying - there sales.
I May be miss understanding what you guys are saying or maybe you prefer the lighter weight
Anyway - maybe the smaller scope is better for long range shooting
Read this thread... http://www.aldeer.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=59474#Post59474
Dying ain't much of a living boy...Josey Wales
Molon Labe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,682
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,682 |
I had a long conversation with a Leupold engineer about the big objective craze. He said always spend your $ on better quality glass other than a big objective. Going from a 40mm -50mm adds only about 2% and he said the human eye can't see that small increase. I look for a killing reticle , quality glass and exit pupil. I don't crank my scopes up on the highest power , only to about 3/4 .
"Why do you ask"?
Always vote the slowest path to socialism.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 13,359 Likes: 2
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 13,359 Likes: 2 |
^^^^ I don’t crank mine up usually 2dogs when it’s late
I hav same scope in certain brand and the 50 is not quite as good as the 56 late - seen this w diff scopes and the 50 i got cost way more and the 50 is a top end scope - about $2200 total cost
All I will say to guys looking for info - test em yourself side by side and with out touting a particular brand (I hav 2 that work great for me) in field tests for over 30 years - the luepold has consistently got its butt kicked with diff brands when I test em. I use to think they were best cause eveybidy said they were - then I started comparing myself in the field at last lite. I spent lot $$ last year listening to guys in here on a loupy [it was not great late and would get cloudy late - what it’s always done for me]- I had to sell it - just go test them side by side and determine for your self
I will read your article now AU. When I google - most every article says what I was saying above and in the field testing has confirmed what they say. Like i said above - lot of guys done like the big cause of only minimal gain and its heavy. I will take minimal for the last 2 minutes
Good luck
Hunt the wind - leave it better than you found it - love your neighbor as you love your self
We need prayer for our country now more than ever
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 54
spike
|
|
spike
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 54 |
I have all manner of Optika5/6, MeoPro and MeoStar scopes and I have never noticed any tunnel vision with any of them. Can you get it to disappear with a different eye relief? I have had scopes that were very picky about that but not the Meopta's that I have.
Bart
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 8,855
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 8,855 |
The way I understand it a larger objective allows you to maintain a larger exit pupil as you turn up the magnification. I also think a smaller objective with good glass beats a bigger one with lower quality glass.
My two best low light scopes are my Minox zx 5 3-15x50 on a 30mm tube and my Nikon monarch 3 4-16x50. It's surprisingly bright in low light, but I struggle to find a deer in the woods with it for some reason. It's strictly a green field scope for me. And it doesn't do as well above 12x. The Minox I can zoom right up to 15 in very low light and study a deers head for spikes.
My Zeiss duralyt is bright. Heck even my 40mm Nikon monarch ucc does pretty well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 3,089
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 3,089 |
I set my Remington 700 up this year as a low light stand rifle for powerline type distances. She now wears a Trijicon Credo HX 2.5-10x56. I do believe it’s brighter than the 40 mm Accupoint, but only with the magnification cranked up and in really low light. It’s a specialty rig and the big objective does deliver in a narrow operational range. Don’t plan to carry it very far…
Last edited by RidgeRanger; 10/29/22 06:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,477
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,477 |
I was out this evening from 5:45 until dark comparing my Leupold 2-10x42 VX5HD to a Burris M-Tac 1.5-6x42, both at 2x, 4x and 6x. They both are pretty comparable as far as brightness is concerned, the Leupold was more clear the darker it got. I had my wife look through both and she said that both were about the same. The object we were looking at was about 225 yards. Once it got almost dark and the 225 yard object was unable to be seen, I switched to a white top t-post at about 100 yards. It was easily identifiable through both until dark.
The big difference in the two was the reticle. Both are illuminated, but the Leupold reticle was MUCH more visible all the way to complete darkness. The Leupold has the Firedot and the Burris has an AR/BDC style reticle. The Burris was practically invisible in its unilluminated state while the Leupold was visible for probably 10 minutes or so longer. In their illuminated state, I could have easily killed a deer well after shooting light. The Leupold does not have a heavy duplex reticle.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 281
4 point
|
|
4 point
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 281 |
Hevi, how much for the Meopta you bought ??
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,854
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,854 |
Are we about to go through the whole thing again? about how max 7mm pupil on the scope is all the usable light your human eye can process.... so you take a 56mm objectiv and divide for 7. On the 56mm that's 8x power. Light transmission at 8x is the maximum for the human eye. On a 50mm that's roughly 7x power and so on.
That's all valid and the reasons for the larger objectives.... but IMO the most important factors are contrast and field-of-view. Those make or break every scope.
No government employees were harmed in the making of this mess.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 3,417
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 3,417 |
I have all of the scopes mentioned except for the hawk. All good scopes but the vx5HD is the most clear. By far!
Hunting brings out the worst in people.
|
|
|
|
|
