Give Me Some More Scope Options...

[JustinBiscuit]

If low light performance is a big deal to you, get the largest objective in your price range. The larger the bell the more surface area for light. Large objective lens will also give you a better eye box.

The Minox ZA5 is by an order of magnitude better then any thing from Leopold or Vortex. German glass is hard to beat. My guess this scope will go up in price over the next couple of years.

 

[Boomer58cal]

If low light performance is a big deal to you, get the largest objective in your price range. The larger the bell the more surface area for light. Large objective lens will also give you a better eye box.

It's all about exit pupil size. The Pupil of your eye is only so big, So if the exit pupil of your scope is bigger than the pupil of your eyes it's wasted. The larger the objective lens the smaller the exit pupil, unless you go to 30 or 35 millimeter tube. With modern lenses 50 millimeter objective lens scopes are becoming unnecessary.

It doesn't matter how much light gets into your scope if that light can't get into your eye.

Spend your money on quality lenses. Clear and crisp beats big every time.

Boomer

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Well, partially true but not entirely....

An exit pupil larger than your own pupil is "wasted" in the sense that the portion not entering your eye is unseen. It's NOT wasted in the sense that any portion that is larger than your own pupil gives you "wiggle room" for head positioning.

In terms of "clear and crisp", Minox optics are very highly regarded.


In any case, I have the FedEx tracking number in my grubby little paws so I'll be looking forward to a reasonably thorough review in a few days. I won't have everything until at least Tuesday, unfortunately, so it'll be the following weekend before I get any shooting done.

 

[Boomer58cal]

Well you got me on that one. "Wasted" was the wrong word.

"Sarcasm" is my primary language, I'm working on this whole proper English thing.

I hope you enjoy your new toy let us know how she works.

Boomer

 

[JustinBiscuit]

"It doesn't matter how much light gets into your scope if that light can't get into your eye. "

This is fundamentally wrong based on how a refracting scope works. Light is BENT from the first lens to a focal point of the second lens. The whole point of which is to collect more light then the human eye could collect. Tube size is important based on the shape (convex) of the lens

http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=2078


In practice I find that my 56mm gets about 15 minutes of more useable field time then 50mm

 

[Boomer58cal]

I'd look at your picture again, it proves my point quite well. Once you get above about 44 millimeter( With a one inch tube ) on your objective lens you need to go to a larger tube diameter or your pupil size begins to decrease.

It doesn't matter if you're looking through the Hubble telescope the pupil of your eye can only take in so much light. With modern lenses above 95 percent light transmission a 40 millimeter Lens can max out the average human eye.

If scopes worked the way you're interpreting your pictures scopes would still be made with a cylindrical tube.

Boomer

 

[SSA]

The larger the objective lens the smaller the exit pupil, unless you go to 30 or 35 millimeter tube. With modern lenses 50 millimeter objective lens scopes are becoming unnecessary.

Once you get above about 44 millimeter( With a one inch tube ) on your objective lens you need to go to a larger tube diameter

Totally incorrect. Maintube diameter has nothing to do with how much light gets through the scope.
You might want to go to the Low-Light Performance Calculator at scopecalc.com and see how much weight that calculator gives to tube diameter.

 

[hooligan1]

Taylorce1 mentioned the Vortex Viper series, and you say you like a higher power.... now hear me out Peetz, The Simmons Whitetail Classic, in 6.5-20x50 is a steal at $110.00 at Midway, it does have an adjustable objective, however it works very well, you also mentioned you weren't sure how a power setting that high would say pick up a walking or even trotting deer at 50 yds,,, you have a point there, I haven't pointed my Simmons at a trotting deer yet but at the range its totally cool for my old eyes.... It's the highest quality scope for the price in that power range, I believe.... just my buckfitty.

 

[Huffmanite]

Might want to consider a Weaver Super Slam 4-20x50. Weaver has a $100 rebate on certain reticle models of it. Seems www.natchezss.com may have lowest price on Super Slams.....leastways Natchez did when I checked around several weeks ago.

Have a couple of these 4-20x50s, plus a lower power model. Very nice optics and you should like its pull up turrets and side focus.

Only complaint I'm aware of is its weight. Evidently its internals are built like a tank and not a scope you'd want for a light carry rifle. Oh yea, it is not a long scope either, so if you have some wide spacing between the rings on a rifle, you may need extension rings and etc.

Also, the Weaver Super Slam is made in Japan by a company that makes the higher end scopes for Bushnell, Sightron and other brands that I can't presently remember.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

I appreciate the input, gentlemen, but the scope is on the Fedex truck for delivery today.
I'll close this and report my results in another thread,