Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Scope magnification preference

What’s everyone’s preference on magnification for a deer hunting scope where the range could be anywhere from 50 to 450 yards? I use to not have anything above a 3-9 and several 2-7 and 2.5-8, the last few years I’ve expanded to some 4-12 and 4-16s. Mainly just wondering what some of y’all go with when the range could be very close but on the same hunt could also be more considerable.

I used and liked my 2.5-8 for many years, used under similar ranges. After moving and finding that 50 yard shots were less likely, and realizing that the opportunity for longer shots had substantially increased…..we changed over to 3.5-10’s. memtb

A 3-9x40 has always been my go to. With the right reticle, shooting out to 500 is a breeze. If wanting a little more magnification, I step up to the 4.5-14x42.

I like 3.5x10 on Savage 99’s, 4.5x14 on bolt guns.

Like a vx5hd field of view. 10x

My sporter weight deer rifles have a 2-7 or 2.5-8 on top. There is one 30-06 with a 3.5-10.

I only use the higher magnification on those at the range.

Because of the woods I usually find myself hunting in, having really high magnifications is not required so I prefer having scopes with lower ranges. My Nikon 1.5-6x42, Schmidt & Bender 1.5-8x42 Stratos, Swarovski z6 1.7-10x42 or Redfield 2-7x33 are good examples. My most powerful scopes are my Swarovski z5 2.4-12x50 and my Schmidt & Bender 3-12x42 Klassik but their purchases are more a reflection of the good prices I got them for and not a particular need. These choices also reflect the fact that I don't think I'll ever take a 450 yard shot. 300 would be stretching it.

I have 3x, 4x, 6x & 8x fixed as well because I favor simplicity and I'm rarely zooming much anyway.

Those Redfield Revolutions in 2-7 are nice little scopes. I have two.

Have used 4X Leupold’s exclusively for the last 50 years

I prefer the 2x7, just wish someone made a quality one.

I started out with 3-9x40s and then made the mistake of trying a larger scope on sporters. That was a mistake in that 1) it wasn't needed and 2) it upset the weight and balance of the rifle. Give me a quality 3-9 on a normal sporter and call it a day. I'm also not opposed to having a BDC reticle. Simple enough out to 500 yards provided you play with it and don't assume subtensions align with dope.

Since 450 ain’t gonna happen here, but 10 might, I’ve come to appreciate ones with 1x or 2x on the bottom. A 2-10 offers a lot. A 1-6 is great in close cover.

OTOH, 3-9x40 Accupoints ride on two of my first-stringers because they’re light and reliable, and have great illuminated duplex reticles with excellent dimensions.

3.5-10

3x9 3.5-10, maybe even a 4-12 with a BDC type reticle but anything much more than that gets into turrets, A/Os etc. The less stuff you have to mess with on a serious hunting scope, the better.Point and shoot.

Strictly for big game hunting I think a 2-7x is about perfect for me. I'm old school and don't dial. 300 yards is a long shot and I've only shot one game animal at over 400 yards in my 50+ years of hunting. That said, I like to shoot and make many trips to the shooting range. When I'm shooting from the bench I get better groups with more magnification. A half inch group is much more satisfying than one that is an inch and a quarter. Most of my rifles wear variables with 12-16x at the upper end. I find 6x magnification very useful in most of my hunting terrain. In tighter cover 2x or 3x is plenty.

I guess some of what got me to thinking about this is, I’ve got a 300wm model 70 I haven’t done anything with in a long time that needs a scope, I’ve got 2 good 3-9x40 vortex scopes new in the box ready to go on anything, in the past I wouldn’t have thought anything about putting one on of them on it, but I keep talking myself out of it. Am I slighting a 300wm that will strictly be used for hunting whitetail in southern MO with a 3-9? The more I think about it I think it will probably be just fine. I’ve got other 300s with 4-12 and 4-16s.

It depends on the rifle for me. My Marlin 1894SS has a fixed Burris 4x.
My BLR 358 Win has a Redfield 2-7×33. My Rem 673 in 360 Rem mag has a Burris 3-9×40.
I have a 1.5-4.5× sitting that may end up on the Marlin. I don't set magnification any lower than where the front sight "ghosts" but the bigger bell will give me better light than the straight 4x with just the 28mm tube.
I don't get long shots. Last 5 have all been under 45 yards with 2 at less than 20.

6x

I think an argument could be made that 3-9x is a good all-around range for the vast majority of whitetail hunting especially in the southeast. If I was in your situation, I would mount one of your available scopes and only consider something else if you find that choice to be lacking. My guess is you probably won't. I have one hunting buddy who uses a 300 Win Mag with a longer zoom for whitetail in Arkansas. But that's only because he originally set the rifle up for a New Mexico elk hunt where he expected to be shooting at longer ranges. The general impression is that what he's carrying is more than adequate for deer in central AR. I don't think he's ever used the max zoom range around here.

For a long time 2-7's and I had some Leupold 2.5-8X's. But once I figured out that the TRUE magnification of any scope is never exactly what is printed on the scope I stopped worrying about small differences. A scope labeled as 2-7X might actually be 3-8X or 1.5-6X. A 3-9X scope might actually be 2-8X or 4-10X, and the same scope can vary depending on how you focus it.

You can almost always get more scope for the money if you stay with the basic 3-9x40's and 1X to 3X on either end doesn't make any real difference. I do have some 1-4X scopes on AR's and a few 4.5-14's on 22's and a 6.5CM where I want more precision. But for general big game hunting a decent quality 3-9X40 does it all. And I can't remember ever shooting at game with any scope adjusted anywhere but the lowest magnification. A fixed 4X scope is too much magnification for where I hunt.