Which is better...a 40mm or 50mm front objective scope?

[ARshooter]

I'm considering getting a 36X scope for load testing only. The company offers this scope in 40 and 50 mm front objective sizes. I know that the larger one will allow more light to come in but since I will not be using it near dusk or dawn, is it really an advantage? Are there any disadvantages?

Thanks

 

[ArmySon]

Moving to the Accessories Forum. Check for this thread there.

The 50mm scope will give you a slight advantage in field of view. The key issue to a scope allowing more light is not the size of the lense but the quality. Plus, the different types and quality of coatings prevent glare. With a cheap scope, light is reflected inside the scope, eventually joining the light intended to be viewed. This results in a washed-out look. So basically, whether you're going for a 40 or 50 is not as important as the quality of the scope. If you list the brands you're interested in, I'm sure we can give you a better breakdown on the scope.

FWIW
Son

 

[ARshooter]

The scope I'm looking at is the BSA Contender (36X fixed) that Midway is advertising for $60-70. Normally I would not buy this scope for field use (and I wouldn't get a scope that powerful), but it will be used ONLY for load development off of a bench, will not be subjected to rough treatment and will be fixed power so there are very few moving parts. After the load testing is done, the Leupold goes on the gun. They offer this scope in 40 and 50mm sizes.

[Edited by ARshooter on 01-29-2001 at 09:10 PM]

 

[hk_cqb]

36x advantage?

At 36x, the 10mm difference in the objective won't give you much. At the lower resolutions you'll have a greater FOV up to about 16x after that, it's moot point.

At the low to mid range quality scopes, you really won't see the advantage from 40 to 50 mm objective.