Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics How much magnification before 50 mm objectives seem brighter

Out of curiosity, how much magnification does a scope need before a 50 mm objective starts to have an advantage in light gathering. I've looked through some 10X scopes in both 50 and 40 mm and seen no differance even in low light. On the other hand, at 20X the differance is noticable to me. At what point do you see a differance?

Depends upon the quality of the glass,more than the diameter of same.

As a rule,I hate 50's and copious X's................

Can't answer your question because each scope is likely different, but from my experience you get more if you take the money you'd spend on a bigger objective lens on higher quality glass.

I'm with BS though... I tend toward lower magnification. Believe it or not, I have found my 6x to be as easy to hit with at long range (reactive targets) as my 14x.

I run various Europran scopes with objectives from 32mm to 56mm, depending the application.

As already said, quality of the glass and coatings count for a lot, as does how the glass is looked after once purchased...

For me, right on very last light, a quality 50mm lens will usually give me a few more minutes shooting time, or let me crank the scope from say a x5 to x7..

As for magnification, I used to run a 6x42mm and it was a great all around scope. However, when it came to threading shots through cover to get a crack at our small Muntjac and Roe, I found a little more magnification helped...

For general deer stalking, my favorite scope up is a 2.5-10x42mm Zeiss followed by a 3-12x50mm Swaro, but while I fully intend getting more Zeiss, I can't see me buying another Swaro of that type as the Zeiss is that much nicer in so many respects...

I should mention that the gun is a target rifle. I too prefer 40 mm scopes as the 50's require the scope to be mounted too high. I also don't shoot any better with higher magnifiaction then lower, but I do enjoy having a good view of my target without using a spotting scope. My hunting rifle on the other hand has a 1.25-4X and I wouldn't have it any other way so don't worry, I'm not one of those guys who thinke he needs a 20X for deer:)

With an increase in X's...comes an increase in concessions..............

All else being equal, with my eyes, for low light I tend to find the best balance and sweet spot when I'm at a magnification level that allows around a 7mm exit pupil. From this point, If I crank the magnification any more, the low light image begins to degrade from too little exit pupil; or if I crank the magnification down to increase the exit pupil, the low light image begins to degrade from having less magnification. But this is for me in low light during the first minutes of shooting in the AM or during the last minutes of shooting in the PM.

Best:)

I've had a few 50's and never seen an advantage whatsoever. I hear they give you street cred at the indoor range however.

bloodworks,

Have you compared any 50's with 40's of the same quailty side by side after sunset or before sunup?

Street cred does not do much for a hunter in the woods or fields.

Ha.

Ha.

Not...

Yes on some 4.5-14 Leupys I had and the difference at only the highest powers was minuscule at best if even discernible. That's more magnification than I've ever needed hunting big game anyhow. It'd be the crazy day that I found myself needing upper mag levels in the dark to put the smack on. Past the correlation resulting in effective exit pupil it's all related to big rims on your G-ride anyhow.

What does the above mean?

Uh huh...and not having enough exit pupil means your G-ride is up on blocks, and your wife has planted a fairy garden in the front and back seats.

What about when trying to take a shot at an animal in deep shadow say 8am in the morning?

Everybody seems to equate "dark" to dawn and dusk, but I stalk places which can be "dark" at mid day simply because of the canopy cover...

And while you may not need a lot of magnification to see the critter you're shooting at, a little extra is always welcome if your trying to thread a shot through cover to hit a beast
mouching about in the thick stuff...

Pete: This is absolutely true,and not mentioned often...but peering into deep shadow from bright sunlit areas,or with a facing sun, is to my eyes a far tougher test for any rifle scope than the uniform and monolithic conditions of gradually fading light....and at least in the west,far more likely to thwart a shot opportunity.

I don't know much about optical glass, but can tell you there is a difference in the way some scopes handle these conditions vs others.I frequently see this at my home range,which faces east/west roughly,and conditions of bright sunlight and peering back into deep shadow demonstrate this to me constantly.

Out west it can be a real bugger if you are in open sunlit areas peering onto a west-facing slope with the early morning sun shining in your eyes....you can easily lose your sight picture on an elk or mule deer under such conditions.

Bob,

When I was looking for my first "quality" rifle scope, I ordered a secondhand 6x42 Swaro Nova, and a new 6x42mm Leupold M8 on the understanding I would keep one and return the other.

I kept them for a week and tried them out side by side in various "difficult" light conditions, a long with a 7x50 Meopta I already had...

There were pro's and cons to all the scopes, but optically, the Swaro was noticably better than either of the other two when it came to glassing into deep shadow or glassing towards an object with the sun low in the sky behind it ie what i would call difficult light conditions. It was also better at dawn and dusk, but the different was perhaps not so marked, with the Meopta in particular being very close to it.

In the end, I kept the Swaro and sent the Leupold back and never regreted that...Had I needed longer eye relief, the Leupold would have probably got the nod or if I was looking to fit turrets, but I wasn't...

People need to try stuff themselves and judge it against their own applications and preferences and then re evaluate as they actually use it...

Rarely can you buy an item that is "perfect" and some form of compromise is normally in order, but if something lets me down on a hunt or is otherwise not suitable, it will be gone, whether its boots, optics or a rifle...

Regards,

Peter

I agree with you 100% but until I find the scenario where a 2.5-8x36 or fixed 6x ruins a hunt I can't see toting around that much objective and weight. On a range only rifle I couldn't care less but for hunting purposes I've yet to find the advantage. All of the ones I've owned have eventually found their way into someone else's hands. Binos and spotters are a different matter however and I'd rather put the $ and hassle there than on my scope which only sees a few seconds of my time.

Old eyes react different to fading light than young eyes. It seems to me like 50mm helps more in the last light of the evening than the same amount of light in the morning. Might just be my eyes. I have had cataract surgery with lens implants and will see how that affects them. miles

I'm in the same boat - early onset of cataracts and excessive floaters made the bigger glass very nearly a requirement. The implants worked (never thought I'd be talking about getting implants!!!) and after a year or so the floaters have diminished too. I likely could use less scope, but now that I've got it I'll likely just keep it.

I guess you don't hunt shaded areas or look for game if you're facing east or west.