Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics 6x36 vs 6x42 Leupold.

I like em both.

To my eyes (I'm 39 and have always had perfect vision) the 6X42 isn't really brighter. I just feel it has a bigger box and more FOV.

I need a big box.




Dave

Two has always been a problem for me to. Congrats...

W

Wow

I have Leupold 6x36 and 6x42's. Nikon 6x42's, and sightron 6x42's. Maybe it's just me but I see a difference in them all with the sightron having the best glass and edging out the Leupold and Nikon when it's starts to get dark. The leupold 42 is the most forgiving to get behind for me. I also see a difference in the Leupold 42 over the 36. To each their own.

If anyone of you 6x36 lovers has a 6x42 w/a m1 ele turret I'll gladly trade you a 6x36 w/m1 ele turret. I'll cover the shipping cost on both ends.

Same 'view' here Dave except I'm blind as a bat without contacts.

For a hunting rifle it's pretty much a tie(IMHO).


This thread reminds me to send in a 6x36 that went to hell last year.

I have one of each, won't be throwing away the 6x42, but if I need another it will be a 6x36, not enough difference in glass to make up for how much easier it is to mount the 6x36 low on a long action.

That's interesting.

Even at 55 I have 20/20 vision (which is of course not the same as perfect).

Side by side I see no difference between the eye-relief or FOV of the 6x36 vs 6x42. To my eyes they feel identical compared to each other.

Just went and looked up the specs on Leupold's website, assuming I'm missing something. Apparently I'm not:

6x42
ACTUAL MAGNIFICATION 6X
FOV 17.3'
ER 4.4"

6x36
ACTUAL MAGNIFICATION 5.9X
FOV 17.7'
ER 4.3"

I think the "eye box" mantra of the 6x42 has been repeated so long on this website no one questions it. My eyes say there's no difference. Leupold's website says there's no difference.

Again, I had both to look at side by side over several days, which is cheating

I don't doubt someone younger than me can use the additional mm of exit pupil. I do doubt anyone could find any difference between them in terms of Eye Relief/Field of View (ie, "eye box").

I just put on a new FX-II 6x36 LR Duplex #63085 on my 84M .308. Immediately I notice that the two dots appear smaller and closer together than previous owned models. Also I observed that the length of the thinner crosshair for the bottom is shorter as it transfers to the thicker line.
Now unfortunately I do not have any earlier version to compare against. But my impression was immediately made.
Anyone else have a similar observation or am I hallucinating?

Joe, I've got three of them from three different years, including the most current that's still in its plastic wrap. When I get some time I'll pull it out and compare the three and get back to you.

Great! It'll be good to get a second opinion. I don't know if small variances are possible with their production methods. Look forward to your analysis.

Low light maybe? Dunno. I ain't parting with M8's.

I've got both like both. Serious rifles have 6x36.
Coyote AR has a 6x42 for night hunting.

Joe, they're all the same.

Well dang it Brad I got a heavy one



My first fixed scope so far. My thought is thought if I am stepping up to a 40 or larger objective it'll be on a variable power scope that I can take advantage of the larger objective with a higher magnification.

LOL, you got the wrong scale... it's making you pack around untold extra ounces

Likely cause of the LRD reticle Had it been standard duplex it would have made weight

You stop down a camera lens to improve visual acuity i.e. sharpen the image.

If your eye pupil does't expand to 7mm, the scope is effectively "stopped down" to your pupil size. Depending on the individual samples compared, the 6x36 may render a sharper picture

There is so little difference between the two it comes down to personal preference. Do also prefer the 6x36's creature features.

Increasing power would make a bigger difference in low light performance.

Probably the only advantage to growing older is smaller objectives perform better than they used to in low light and thin reticles no longer fade before it is too dark to shoot...:)

Ok, well that settles that!

To answer your question,I guess I could think of a few. One, if your (buyer's) eyes can see a difference and you prefer that, that could be a reason. Two, if your (buyer's) eyes can utilize and notice the larger exit pupil, that could be a reason. Three, if you like the look of that scope better, that could be a legitimate reason. Four, although I don't see it, what you refer to as the "much vaunted "eye box" superiority of the 6x42 (by others, not you) clearly exists to others and if it exists to a buyer, that would be a reason. Finally, if you can find a good deal on one and you're able to carry the extra weight without hurting yourself or don't care about the extra weight when you find a good deal, I suppose, that could be a legitimate reason.

I will agree that, if your criteria involves a lack of a need or desire about anything contained herein and you care about the extra couple of ounces, then, by all means, as you said earlier OP, "steer clear". I've been pretty lucky though. There are so many things on this forum that so many experts on this forum say to "steer clear of" that have worked for me.