Looking for optic help.
 

Thinking about buying a better scope for my Win. mdl 70 300 mag. Considering Leupold VX-III 6.5-20X 50 However they are pricey, also looking at the Bushnell 4200 2.5-10X50. Which leads to my main question
A) "How important is the higher magnification for long range shooting?"
The local range max's out about 500yrds. I know the rifle is capable of longer distances and would like to buy a scope that will eventually let me shoot further while staying accurate.
I have noticed while watching various programs on tv that long range shooters don't always us high magnification scopes.
B) Is there a brand of scope thatwill give me quality at a more reasonable price?
I can't afford a swarovski or Zeiss. I know that the quality and clearity of the lens are important and with opics you should buy the best you can afford. Just looking for some helpful information from my fellow hunters and range shooters that might save me some time and money. THANKS,

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

A 6.5x20x50 is overkill for any big game hunting rifle.I use a 3.5x15x50 scope to shoot 1000 yard targets.If the same scope was available with a 40 mm lens,I would have it instead.I shoot out to 500 yards with 3x10x42 scopes.

Because they aren't necessary.

If you can afford a VXIII,you can afford a Zeiss conquest,as the prices are comparable.I would go with an elite 4200 2.5x10x40 if your budget is limited or a Zeiss conquest 3x9x40 or 3.5x10x44 if your budget is a little more.
You don't need huge magnification or a 50mm lens for that matter on any big game hunting scope.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

+1 regarding the Zeiss Conquests. Very good for the $.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

TRUST ME, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A NIKON!! They offer awesome optics at a value price.

I just bought a Nikon buckmaster 4.5 x 14for my 300 win mag and I couldn't be happier. I looked at everything from Leupold, Zeiss and the Nikon Monarch.

In the end, I couldn'tsee a big enough difference between the buckmaster and the higher end scopes. I was prepared to throw down $600 bucks on a good scope, but when I couldn't tell any difference in the"higher end" stuffI wentwith the Nikon. Go to cabelas, bass pro etc.. and read the reviews.

Lastly, I would go in and look at all of them, but I'm willing to bet you leave with the Nikon. Just my. 02 cents.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

I'll throw another shout out for the Nikons as well. I had buckmasters and still have a Monarch and they are great. Depending on your budget, I picked up my Meopta Meostar R1 4-16X44 for $525 shipped. That scope rocks! PM me for more info if you like. Good luck!

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

Going in and looking at them in a store will prove very little.The differences in a lit store will be marginal at best.The only way to see the differences in optical quality is at first or last light,with no artificial lighting.The best thing to do in most cases,is to go at dusk,on an evening when the store is open late,and have a clerk accompany you outside to compare scopes.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

Thanks for the response everyone!
Made a few calls today and learned a few things I would like to run by you all.
- A 40mm Obj. works better than a 50mm obj. due to the height it takes to mount the larger obj. on top of the rifle. Proper alignment when looking through the scope, Cheek to stock I believe. The larger obj. also shows more mirage in the field of view.
- The higher magnification is not needed. 12x to 14x is all the magnification that is needed even for long distance shooting.
- A 30mm main tube is better than the 1in. tube. Larger field of view.
So at this point a Nikon Monarch 3-12X42mm or 4-14X42mm is looking good. The Leupold 4.5-14X40mm w/30mm tube looks good also. But, I don't know if it is worth the 200. more dollars over the Nikon.
Does this information sound correct? Has anyone used these scopes or both by chance?
Like I stated before looking for the best Bang for the buck if you know what I mean. Thanks

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

Not necessarily.30mm scopes are generally used for long range shooting because they offer a larger adjustment range.If you sight in at 100 yards,you may only be able to adjust the elevation to hold dead on to say 600 yards with a 1" scope,and out to 800 yards or more with a 30mm scope.Depending on the cartridge,you may still need a tapered base to reach 1000 yards with a dead on hold.

As far a field of view is concerned,compare the 1" Leupold vxII 3x9x50 and the 30mm Leupold European 3x9x50.The 30mm tube is larger,but the field of view is the same.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

If you can go Leupold Vari-X III, look at the Zeiss Conquest series. Prices are close. I have both lines and like the Conquest better becauseit appears to me to be a bit crisper in very low light and has a bettercontrast, making it easier for me to pick out game in the brush.

I have no scopes in excess of 12X. And that one is a variable from 4-12X that seldom gets set above 6X. My shots are not long down here in the deep south so 4x to 6X is plenty for me. Frankly, most of the time I stay on 3X.

I have hunted in eastern Montana several seasons.Wide open. There my shots beyondmy "comfoprt zone" ... which is about 350 yards. I had , took and made two shots on mule deer rght at 325 yards. The 9X - 10X range came in handy on those longer shots. Guess what I am saying is, at least for me ... longer distances, I was better served by greater "X".

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

I much prefer the conquest over the VXIII myself.I have taken several big game animals at over 400 yards(verified with a laser rangefinder),and a couple of dozen at over 300 yards with 3x9 or 3x10 scopes.The longest was a pronghorn at 480 yards,and 9x was adequate even for pronghorn.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

I do remember one instructor talking about possibly needing a tapered base depending on the scope and tube size for shooting long yardage. I would like to eventually be able to shoot 1k yrds however, this is also my hunting rifle. I hunt here in Oklahoma where the long shot is around 300 and we also hunt Kansas where some of the shots can be much futher. That is why I would like a the capability of shooting the longer range andI know part of that is having the right optics.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

The optics is only one part,as is the rifle,and the reloading components,and equipment.The biggest part is learning how to read the wind,and practicing.Be well aware that if you intend to be really proficient at 500 yards,you need regular access to a 500 yard range,and hundreds of rounds per year of practice.If you intend to become proficient at 1000 yards.you need regular access to a 1000 yards range and the time and money to practice even more.You will be buying bullets 500 rounds or more at a time and powder in containers a lot bigger than one pound.Gas money to and from the range can add up.Then you have to factor in the cost of rebarreling every year or two if you use the 300 win mag.It can be done,but it requires a big commitment in time and a fair commitment in money as well.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

It appears as if you are taking your time, and you seem to be educating yourself very well. Most of what you say is correct. However if you go with a 30mm tube then the larger objective will help. Basically what I am saying is that it takes a larger tube to transmit the extra light from a larger objective. So going to a 50 mm OL is alright if you go to the 30 mm tube.

With scopes you basically get what you pay for. There is no doubt that with the better names you may be paying a bit of a premium for the name. But you are also getting some great glass.

It is hard to beat a Leupold. Even if the Nikon was as good(which I personally do not believe it is), the Leupold would still be a better buy. IF for no other reason than the name, the warranty, and the resale value(if ever needed).

Please do not fall prey to the "Brightness" and "Clarity" posts. These terms are subjective, and not really pertinent to the scope purchasing procedure. It is not difficult for a scope to be bright or clear in a showroom.

The Leupold 4.5X14X40 with the one inch tube is a hard(reasonably priced) scope to beat. I have one on my Knight LRH, and for the money I would prefer it over the Nikon.

If I was going to pay the extra money for the more expensive Leupold then I would also consider Zeiss Conquest, and the Swaro. A-Line one inch scopes. The Nikon is not in this league. Tom.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

With identical lenses and coatings,a 30mm tube will not transmit more light.That ability is limited by the lens sizes and lens coatings.And several companies,including Leupold actually use 1" lenses in 30mm tubes.
A post from an optics forum.

Brightness and clarity are indeed subjective,but they are real qualities that can be seen in the right conditions which as I previously posted,do not include the inside of a store.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

[quote] Basically what I am saying is that it takes a larger tube to transmit the extra light from a larger objective. So going to a 50 mm OL is alright if you go to the 30 mm tube./quote]

Stubble I think you and I are agreeing mostly, with just a slight difference. Please notice I did not say that the tube transmits more light. I am saying the tube allows more light to flow through. The couple of extra mm's in a circle can substantially increase the square area. The lense and lens coating still has to produce and transmit the light. That is why I always chuckle when I see thebig 56 mmOL's on a $100 scope. But then people buy them, so some marketer did his or her job.

I personallybelieve the 30mm tube allows me to see longer into the evening, and in bad conditions. So we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I do know one thing for sure. A lot of the new IOR'sand top grade Zeiss scopes are coming out with tubes that are larger than 30mm. Is that a pure marketing ploy, or is itneeded for better performance?? I am sure they will not tell us.Tom.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

We are not saying the same thing at all.

There are some 34mm scopes on the market.They are made with the large tube to allow even more adjustment for long range target shooting.

What they are telling us:

I have seen actual e-mail replies from both Zeiss and Swarovski that stated what I quoted above,although I can't find them since it has been a while since I saw them..

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

I stopped by BPS today at lunch and like I expected it is almost impossible to tell the difference looking through the scopes from the counter. I looked at the Nikon, Leupold, Zeiss and they all looked crystal clear however, when I was looking through the Zeiss I noticedwhat seemed like a beavled edge around the lens until I got thecorrect focus point then it was a full sight picture crystal clear.
I was planning on buying one from BPS since they are running their 6 payment special but, I don't want to rush myself into buying one until I know exactly what I need. So since the special ends today I guess I will be learning alot more before I purchase one.
I do my own reloading and have a good round that is accurate in my rifle and with my current scope 300 yrds is my comfort zone and with more practice that will increase.
Thank you all for the info. and any shooting tips and advise is appreciated.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

Well, the first thing I wish to address is the idea that folks are saying longer magnification scopes are completly unnecessary......

What they mean actually is that they are unnecessary for themselves.... Since they are the only ones they can speak for.

I have some higher magnification scopes..... several in the 4-16 range and some in the 5 - 20 range, and I absolutely love them. Sure, I can shoot 600 yards with a 9 power,...... but I don't have to. I can be much more accurate with a higher magnification scope, and I can have a much better defined sight picture at a higher magnification.

Is everyone the same, NO. Does everyone need higher powers, NO. Is there anything wrong with higher powers , NO. Do some people love using them, Yes. Do people have to use them , NO. It is the choice of the individual.

And Yes, I own the New Nikon Moarchs in the 4-16 X 42 and 5-20 X 44. I also own the Nikon in a 4-12 X 50. They are great scopes. They are really good values for the money. I could buy more expensive scopes, but why should I. I will pay half as much for a Nikon than a Leupold and have every bit as good of a scope.... in my opinion..... But a lot of people agree with me too. And yes, some will disagree. WHich is better ... Ford or Chevy ? ..... I own a lot of different scopes , and 9 are Nikons. Some of those Nikons are 16 years old, and work like new.... never a problem...

Check Out www.theopticzone.com website. I buy a lot from there. Good prices and good folks.

I have seen some decent prices on e-bay too.

MET

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

What a person needs,and what a person chooses to use are not dependent on one another at all.
I personally want at least 15x for 1000 yard target shooting.Some 1000 yard target shooters do use 40x scopes,but 20x to 25x is also quite common.Then again these are dedicated competition guns that aren't normally used for hunting.
The military snipers are normally issued either 10x or 3x12 scopes on their standard sniper rifles,which are considered effective to at least 800 yards.Even the 50 cal barret sniper rifle is issued with a 4.5x14 scope,and it has been successfully used out to over 2000 yards.Either these magnifications are sufficient,or the military snipers are very poorly equipped.Then again based on their very successful record,that doesn't appear to be the case.
Carlos Hathcock for one,was very successful with a 10x scope.

You may choose to use a 6.5x20 scope for big game hunting,but it isn't necessary.If you decide to use one it is because you want to,not because you need to.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

Sure on a high end optic, a 40mm is the same as far as a human can tell in terms of brightness, but on a medium quality scope, especially at low light, this can make a difference. It also depends on your acceptance of additional weight. 50mm is heavier than 40mm. Also, it depends on your stock shape. On an AR for example, bell diameter is not a limiting factor as much as sight height.

1" vs. 30mm - Simply put, this is about adjustment range. 1" scope will generally zero 0 - 600 yards. 30mm scopes will generally zero to 1000 yards. 34mm, 35mm will go beyond. These numbers are misleading, because the depend on caliber, bullet, load, etc. Also, if you want to dial windage, you need to be closer to the optical center. They do make canted bases, but even though a 20MOA base will get you on target at 1000, it may not also be able t

Magnification - Depends on target size and distance. Snipers can use 10x at 1000 yards because people have a large target area. 10x is probably closer to ideal at 600 yards. For Benchrest guys shooting for .090" groups at 100 yds, 36x is required. 1000yd BR guys may use 40x. IMO, for field position use at 1000 yds, I would like 20x, but the 12x of my Burris XTR is fine, but probably the low end of fine. Also, consider your rest. A stable rest lends itself to higher than needed magnification. Offhand, or other unstable rests lend themselves to 3x or even 1x magnification. A good hunting variable IMO, has a low end of 3x - 5x and a high end of 20x - 30x. That high end is nice for judging the animal at long range. Shooting an Antelope at 600 yards is one thing, but knowing it is a trophy first, would be nice!

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

That is what spotting scopes are for.One of the most important rules of firearm safety,is to never point a firearm at any object,unless you intend to shoot it.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

I am of the sameopinion and teachings that a Scope is an aiming device and is not to be pointed unless firing. Another golden rulethat applies is "know your target and beyond". If your field judging/glassing use bins or spotter, and not the riflescope.[&o] Safety first!!!!!

As far as X(mag) I use 3 -10's for biggame hunting I have shot gamein the 400'swith no problems. Tonight I was putting in some time with my 338wm load and shot out to 500 yards. It has a 3x9x40 zeiss ontop. I don't expect to shoot that far withthis rifle, morecurious how the Rapid Z reticle does beyond 300 yards with my hunting load. So for me 9(ish)x for longer range and 3(ish)xfor short. Intypical huntingsituation I have my scope sitting in the middle power range (6x), however if the situation should change a simple twist down or up & "golden".

I chose the 3x9x40 conquest for this gun b/c eye relief, mounted closer to the barrel and fit (head/eye position and cheek weld).

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

PSSolda 2.5x10x42 Nikon Monarch, I found the sight picture bright but lacked clarity and tracked poorly. Also had a stiff power ring that never eased upany,which IMO is no good for hunting. In it's place sits a 3x9x40 bushnell 4200 elite, which I think is a dandy scope minus the shorter eye relief.

I have 3 leupolds left in my cabinet, M8 & Vari X III -older but proven and a VX III (OK butnot reallyimpressed,just buying time till I can justify replaing it).

My biggame main stay rifles all have zeiss conquests on top...I like:D.

Stillgot a couple elite 3200's, hada #of these and nothing bad to say.

Plusa banter of low end scopes one collects over the years, that see duty on safe queens, rimfires or act as paper weights.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

YMMV I always try to be sure I'm shooting what I want to shoot.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

You just very plainly stated that you use your scope to judge game to decide if it is what you want to shoot.Unless you remove the scope to judge that animal,you have already pointed the gun at something that you haven't yet decided to shoot.

RE: Looking for optic help.
 

I have two leupolds, vII 3x9, and vIII 1.5x6. I like the vIII better but the II has been excellent for years. I also prefer a wider field of view for close shots andpick up a moving animal. I am consistently within200 yards on most shots-- however, having said that,I am hoping it'll be enough for elk this fall-- agree on spotting scope as your primary tool for long range judging--cant say enough good things about the leupolds. they have stood up to lots of abuse and still deliver.