Cheating on scope magnification

[mapsjanhere]

I'm in the market for a new short range scope, so I was browsing the offers in the 1.5 - 8 range. It came down to the Nikon Monarch Gold in 1.5-6 and the Leupold VX7 in 2-7. When I went for the fine print, I noticed something very strange. Nikon lists the actual magnification as 1.55 - 5.9, a zoom range of 3.8 instead of the advertised 4. Well, we all know that from buying monitors, there's always a bit of rounding going on. Not until I looked up the specs on the Leupold I realized how much: The Leupold is actually a 2.5 - 6.5, the zoom ratio goes from 3.5 advertised down to 2.6, and checking the rest of their offerings it didn't get any better; the trend of maximizing advertised zoom range to delivered performance staid that bad for all of their low magnification offerings.

 

[wogpotter]

This has been normal practice for the last 30 years or so.
That's why the phrase "nominal power" is used so much.

ON the bright side I doubt you'll ever actually see the difference. If you check your existing scope I bet it's no better in this respect.

 

[mapsjanhere]

Well, it seems to be normal practice only with a limited number of companies. And you do see it, I actually have one of those Leupold 2-7, and always thought you didn't get quite as much difference in magnification than what I saw in my Zeiss glasses of nominal similar zoom factor. That is what got me started on researching in the first place instead of just ordering another Leupold.

 

[taylorce1]

Are you happy with your current 2-7 Leupold?

Doesn't sound like you are and if so you shouldn't buy it again. If you are ready to step up to a great scope then get the VX-3 2.5-8X36 still it is 2.6-7.8 magnification a 2.6 factor as well but it works great. There is always the Vortex Viper 2-7 out there as well, I've looked through a few of the Vipers and have been highly impressed. Call me brand loyal though I keep gravitating back to what works for me and that has always been Leupold.

 

[Scorch]

The standard for many years was a nominal 3:1 zoom, mainly because you could make that ratio with only one moving lens, increasing repeatability and holding zero throughout the zoom range. The lower the zoom range, the better the scope will hold zero as you zoom. Weaver once made a 3-6X scope, and few people complained about them, but they had to keep up with the Joneses so they went to 3-9X.

Recently there has been a trend towards higher ratio zooms, 4:1, 5:1, 6:1, and even an 8:1. I see these mainly as selling the scope based on magnification, many of the scopes are unusable at the higher magnification due to loss of FOV because of light scattering and exaggeration of slight misalignments in the lenses at the higher zoom power, so a 4-32X scope that cannot be used above 12X is on the same level of usefulness as a paper towel tube.

I cannot find a 2.5-7X VX7 on Leupold's site, only a VX-II in that power range. Leupold's VX7 offering in that approximate range is the 2.5-10X. Hmmmmm.

Leupold generally uses a nominal 3:1 zoom ratio because it can consistently deliver good optical performance, their main selling point. Some of their newer scopes offer higher zoom ratios.

If you buy a higher zoom ratio scope, buy a good quality scope (Swarovski, Zeiss, etc), otherwise you are paying for unusable numbers and carrying extra weight.

 

[mapsjanhere]

you're right, I messed up the models, the 2-7 was the VXII. Too many open windows trying to make sure I had the right numbers.

Edit: Looking over the numbers again, what I was really looking at was the European-30 2-7x33mm

 

[wogpotter]

I usually only trust Leica, Zeiss or Leica/Zeiss so I'm picky about optical performance. I also work with high end optics for a living so I have an idea what Im looking at.

Take a look at the Nikon Monarch 2~8X32. Yes it is Japanese.

Its also kick-butt good to beat a Leupold hands down in a side by side contest & oh yes it really is 2~8 not 1.995 to 2.998 It has better contrast, sharper edge definition, edge to edge throughout the magnification range. The flare resistance is excellent, you need to have an intense light source actually in the FOV before there is an unacceptable loss of contrast.

I just did the side by side comparison intending to buy the Leupold but changed my mind when I did the testing.

Actual magnification: 2X~8X
Actual Obj Dia: 32mm
Actual Exit pupil: 16.0~4.0
Actual Eye relief: 4.0~3.8
Actual FOV @ 100Yd: 46.2~11.5

If you shop around & do your homework its $299.90 out the door, including the 1/4MOA target knobs. (This includes sales, coupons & shipping.)

There are hands on knobs included or you can have the 1/8MOA set as an option BTW.

 

[mapsjanhere]

I found a refurbished version of the Nikon Monarch Gold 1.5-6x42 for $320 and I'm giving it a try. Will be interesting to compare to my Zeiss and Leupolds in that same magnification range.

 

[wogpotter]

My new 2~8X32 Nikon Monarch with the BDC reticule arrived yesterday & I got to examine the whole package, not just the scope itself 2 days by UPS ground! Wow they must be really quiet. Very impressed, not that the accessories have diddly to do with actually shooting with the scope though.

The target knobs are on a 10-day back order, but looking at the scope the original turret knobs are fine, I'm guessing if I zero with them & swap the turrets out later It'll even hold zero as the turret is separate from the actual adjusting mechanism!

Once they arrive & I get to the range I'll do a real range report but so far it's looking excellent. Just a nit pick but I wish the freebie pop up lens caps were a tad better made. I'm going to have to get some Butler Creeks as the front one is pulled off the scope body before unlatching.