I would go with a Pentax Lightseeker II in a 3-9X42, or the Vari-X III 3.5-10X40. Good luck.

I have never had a 50mm bother me in open country and it does have a bigger field of view . But for myself I prefer a smaller scope on my hunting rifles . I own some 50mms but like the size of a 40 mm better . The quality of the optics is what is important to me as much as anything.

[Deleted by Admins]

On a whitetail hunt a few years back i had both my Leica 8x42 binos and was using a borrowed rifle that had a Leupold 3.5x10x50 on a it. Right at last shooting time I found a shootable deer with the binos in a little clearing about 150 yards away. Now mind you this is real thick stuff where I hunt and very dark at all times of the day . I put the rifle up to shoot, the scope simply could not resolve the deer...looked like some sort of grey blob in the scope. I had shot deer from that stand other times with a 2.5x8 and a 3x9x33 at more or less the same time and I could not see a whole lot of difference between those scopes and this 50mm leupold. I think quality of the optics has a lot to do with it and maybe you would be better off with a 42mm Swarovski ... 44MM zeiss scope or 45mm LPS or something in that order if you have to have every last bit of light. IMO the drawbacks to having it(50mm objective) outweigh any advantages it may possess ...sitting higher on the rifle it is subject to more hard knocks...you have to use higher mounts which doesn't allow a good stock to cheek fit,it has a higher center of gravity and that big objective is vulnerable to being hit in real tight places not to mention it would be pretty useless in a scabbard if the need ever arose . I think the VXIII is a tougher scope because of the one piece tube and it has better coatings on the interior of the lenses where the VXII has multicoat just on the exterior surfaces.

I have Objective lenses from 32 MM to 50 MM

I'll not buy another 50 MM lens.....I can't see the advantage over the 40MMs I have.....and I can mount the scope lower with the smaller diameter Lenz!!!

When I was young, I used to have trouble finding deer with my 32mm scope at the time. The problem was not with the scope but with my natural skills of putting my gun up and naturally being on the animal. After almost two decades of using that gun, I don't have that trouble any more. I have a few 50mm scopes, but decided I don't like them. It looks retarded on a gun. Has extra wieght, which recoil can can effect its zero. Cost a bunch more. I mean if I need to see animals, I will use my binocs. Not a rifle. Thats alot of movement for those who use thier guns as binocs. As far as 40mm scopes, thats about what I want. Its all tradeoffs. You can mount it pretty low. Have decent light gather. Decent FOV. So thats about right with me.

QUALITY NOT QUANTY THIS ISNOT ALONG RANGE WEAPON...2X8 /38 IS A GREAT CHOICE. EVEN A 40MM IN THE SAME POWER...IT WILL ALSO REDUCE THE WEIGHT. 300W.M. HAS 2X7/33 NIKON I WOULD LIKE THE 38 OR 40MMM VERSION

I have a 3x9x50 Vari-x II on my 300 and a 2x7x33 vari-x II on my muzzleloader. At anything but the extreme ranges of the 3x9, the light gathering abilities between the two are not that substantal. At some point the ability of the human eye to gather and utilize the available light reaches a point of diminished returns. Unless you feel the need for a 50mm, "in my opinion" a 40mm will do the job.