|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065 |
If the reticle is appropriate for the job, are are saying that a 32mm scope of said quality would not be adequate to use throughout legal shooting hours in low light?
Defend the Constitution
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,278
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,278 |
"If somebody bolted you to Einstein, you would still be a imbecile." I like your style! BTW I have the 12X42 and the 5.5X22. Fantastic scopes. I was all hot to get a 2.5X10 and like you a friend let me use it for a couple of weeks. I just couldn't warm up to it, the eyebox seemed small and it was a lot darker than I though it should be. Lefty C
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,731
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,731 |
I have one Nightforce scope that I put on my Remington 700 SPS tactical .308. Now that being said I have only had it for a few months now, but I really like it. It's a really clear scope and as soon as I can afford another one, I will buy one. It also illuminates for low light conditions. The first time that I took it to the range I was pleasantly surprised.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508 |
If the reticle is appropriate for the job, are are saying that a 32mm scope of said quality would not be adequate to use throughout legal shooting hours in low light?
There is adequate and there is optimal. 2 different things with a lot in between.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065 |
well, there you go--a 32mm in low light certainly is adequate.
as to the optimal side of things--what is your low light scope pick in considerment of your vast experience?
Defend the Constitution
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
Jeff, I hear you, I'd bet HEAVY if/when NF makes a 40-42 obj. in that size, ALOT of 32 scopes will be up for sale There must be a reason 40/42 is the common size and many opt for 50, though prefer low and compact. The former will fit well low like the 32 and I think will transmit more light. NO Doubt about it, optics is something that is not 'cookie cutter' as we all see different, and have different needs for how each uses their rifles. No doubt some equipment works better/worse for various individuals.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527 |
Funny thing about the 'campfire... Attitude on this site is, a 32mm is not big enough for low light, but if you run a 50mm you are an idiot because it is too big. So I guess only a 40mm is good for lowlight?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
Can't KNOCK a 50 for low light, if one accepts the higher mounting and bulk/weight that goes along with it.
In a 4-14 a 50mm beats the 40s at 10x and higher at Dusk, based on my samples. As mentioned above, at 10x and higher, my fov blacked out at the end of a Tx hunt w/a 4-14x40. Texas unlike LA here, is much more open and light seems to be more available vs deep woods around here. Used a 6x42 w/HD to good effect long ago - a good combo for woods hunting.
Yet for me, most of my hunting has gone well w/simple 4 and 6x scopes so 10-12x is all I'd want for a game rifle.
Baskin Robbins sold many flavors...ALL made customers happy.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796 |
50mm at 3.5 X is pretty damn good. If you can't use that setting it's to dark to hunt.
It is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508 |
well, there you go--a 32mm in low light certainly is adequate.
as to the optimal side of things--what is your low light scope pick in considerment of your vast experience?
Tom, if you don't want me using anything but Nightforce 2-10x36, buy me one. Obviously, you are one of those people who are satisfied with "just getting by". I'm not. I don't want to barely feed my family, I want to provide a good home for them. I don't want to just get by at work, I want to do the best job I can. I don't want to use marginal equipment for the way I hunt, I want what works well for my eyes and hunting conditions. Are you able to follow this line of thinking Tom? I have my doubts. In the service, we had a name for folks who chose to get by doing the least possible. "Rag-bags". Are you a Rag-Bag Tom? JM
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,210
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,210 |
I will stick with my 50s and 56mm scopes, despite the opinion of the masses. Hunting deer that are almost completely nocturnal in deep woods on overcast days requires more light. Especially if you are hunting a certain age class of deer and not just any dink.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,882 Likes: 10
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,882 Likes: 10 |
I've done fine in dark conditions with the 7mm exit pupil afforded by a 6x42. I'm not really keen on shooting far enough to need more magnification than that when it's dark enough to need the 7mm pupil at the same time.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508 |
42 and 44MM objectives have worked well for me over the years.
They provided enough light and mounted low on my rifles.
I'm about ready to try a 50MM though.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,882 Likes: 10
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,882 Likes: 10 |
The last time I was able to get out the 44mm Z5 Swaro and 45mm VX-7 Leupold held up extremely well when it got very dark. A good bit past legal light. No 56mm stuff needed for me, even 50mm really.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395 Likes: 2 |
You can't make this chit up....... Looking at a U.S. Optics SN-3 model 1.8-10x44 on their website.
Can't find where it says these are 1st or 2nd focal plane scopes. Also, not much info in general.
I am also looking at a Nightforce 2.5-10x32 NXS.
Just wondering how the two compare and wanted some feedback from anyone who has used either or both.
Thanks,
Jm Common knowledge that Nightforce has no parallax adjustment on the 2.5-10 rifle scope.
I was looking at this and noticed they do not list where the scope is set to be parallax free.
I understand parallax adjustment is not as crucial on a 10X variable as it is on higher power scopes, but if you stretch it out with this scope, parallax will come into play.
On their site they claim that the 2.5-10 scope has no parallax concerns????
Are they doing something with this model that helps eliminate parallax or is it just marketing?
Is the scope easy to get behind (generous eye box)? I fall into the clueless category about newer scopes.
A month ago you knew nothing about the Nightforce. Not only that you admit you are clueless about "newer" scopes. Where's my instruction? Originally Posted By: Boxer What are your low light engagement distances typically?
35 to 100 on the deer (primary)
So you are worried about brightness on a 32mm objective when you wont shoot past 100 yards? When I need a 50mm scope to shoot deer at 35 yards I won't call you. I just like the larger numbers on the Kenton format and the fact that nothing can get between the housing and dial. Kenton is 7/8" but it slides over it's housing, where the M1 knob slides inside it's housing.
My rifle get's laid in some pretty chitty places on occasion and I'm not fond of rain (moisture) and small debris getting in between the housing and the turret.
Priceless. Worried about "stuff" getting in the housing on an M1. You going to provide instruction on your zero experience on your actual use of M1's? Looking at picking up a 7/08 and was wondering what folks opinions are on this caliber for elk.
140 grain boolits...Max effective range? I'd never shoot at one past 300 yds if I get the chance to go. I'm the limiting factor there, not the cartridge. Again, you are so worried about "brightness" at 10x when you won't shoot an elk past 300 yards? Laffin.
I don't night hunt. Half hour after sunset I'm done. I don't shoot at Whitetails past 400 yds. and I certainly ain't gonna try that shot at dark.
The two clubs I whitetail hunt at, there are only 2 areas that I can see that far. Where we shoot hogs, the range is never over 150 yds. usually in the 40-50 yd range. I thought "brightness" and exit pupil were so important to you???? However, A gent in our club has the velocity reticle I mentioned, he was nice enought to let me look thru his scope one evening and I had no trouble seeing the reticle or the surrounding area in legal shooting light.
This was with a 2.5-10x32 correct? Showing my ignorance again.
I've read that variable or fixed scopes over 10X benefit from having parallax adjustment. I understand parallax, but there seems to be conflicting info regarding this by scope makers and gurus'.
I have a Zeiss Diavari & Nikon Tactical, both in 2x10 that have the feature and of course I use it.
Many scopes without the adjustment claim to be parallax free at say 110 yds.
The two statements don't seem to jive.
Can someone explain? If I'm understanding this right, parallax free @ 100 yds does not make the scope parallax free at longer distances?
Makes sense as that was the question that was bugging me...
If a scope was parallax free @100 and beyond, then why the hell would you need an adjustment?
Thanks.
JM Jesus titty christ! You don't even know what parrallax is yet you call people names and offer instruction? Just wondering how some of the long range guys deal with wind.
I won't take shots at game past 450 or so (cept for yotes), not because of any moral dilema, that's just far as i can reliably poke something. I'm new to the long range scene, can you please help me? Maybe some instruction on wind drift, Mils, MOA, dialing, parrallax, shooting deer at 35 yards, reticles, turrets, US Optics, and "newer" scopes??????? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508 |
Laffin, You can take things out of context and post half quotes till the cows come home. I was interested in possibly buying a NF 2.5-10, so I asked some Q's, then I tried one before I spent 1200 on something that wouldn't work. Only an idiot like yourself would not understand the logic here. Sorry, but It still doesn't change the fact that I used your beloved NF 2.5-10 and didn't like it or that other scopes provide better low light capability. Something you still fail to understand. Meds wearing off again? As far as shooting at bucks past 450 yds. that's a personal choice. I'm not big on wounding bucks and take high percentage shots within my ability. Another lesson you have failed to learn. If you had ever done any LR shooting you'd understand reading wind starts getting very difficult past that range. One more lesson you obviously haven't learned. The parallax comment was addressed at someone who had earlier claimed that adjustment was not needed at longer distances..It was a stab at him, like I've done to you on here.. The 2 clubs I deer hunt at do not include the farms we yote hunt every year. Once again you assume schit that is incorrect. Never hunted elk, wanted to get some opinions from those who had and and used the 7-08. Not sure what asking a question about how a certain caliber performs on game has to do with a NF scope, but I'm sure you will figure it out. "I hunt public land and killed 2 deer. I can't understand why someone would want to use a scope that provided better light gathering capability in certain applications, even when it is explained to me repeatedly. Am I just a dumbass?"Afraid so. Funny how you left this one out of your search... Based on the target dimensions I gave above, I just make up a range card in 50 yd increments out to 850 that has Elevation in MILS/MOA and wind drift in inches for each range increment @ 1 mph.
This way, you can hold or dial if the range is not to extreme.
Example:
You know your target is 2 yds tall (man size) you read 2.5 mils @ target.
2 yards x 1000 = 2000/2.5 mils = 800 yds.
You refer to range card and @ 800 yds it says 24.2 MOA/6.9 Mils
Dial and shoot. Bingo.
When you have wind it takes alot more time, but is very accurate. You multiply the range wind speed drift of 1 mph (800 in this case) x the actual wind speed, say 10 mph.
The 800 yd line on your card shows 3.3" drift @ 800 for a 1 mph wind.
You have a 10 mph wind so you multiply 3.3 drift x 10 wind = 33" of drift @ 800 yds for a full value wind.
If it is a 3/4 value wind, then multiply 33" x .75 = 24.7" drift.
To get the MOA ajustment divide 24.7" wind drift by distance 8.
24.7 / 8 = 3.08 MOA. to get mills divide your MOA by 3.5.
3.08 / 3.5 = .88 mils.
The wind sounds like alot but it ain't. It can be done in 30 sec. The card is really quick on elevation, the wind takes longer and a calculator is a must for me.
JM
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508 |
427 yds. with an H&R handy rifle no less. Spectacular! Points awarded for the stock ammo sleeve...nice touch. laffin 95gr BallisticTip 427 yards shoulders/spine. For normal hunting shoot 95 Btips and forget the rest, along with any thought of whether the 243 is "enough". It's spectacular....
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 220
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 220 |
I have a couple nightforce scopes, 1 2.5X10X32 with the mildot and 2 3.5X15X50 and love them. The 2.5X10 I love it and have had no issues with its light gathering morning or evening. I did however switch to the mildot from Np r1 reticle because the mildot for me anyway shows up a little better. I love the Nightforce scopes and IMO they a far superior to Leupold and the like. I know that they are heavier but they are more durable, better lenses and better made than most anything else unless you want to drop a grand more for S&B or the like. If a few ounces kill me on a scope, then I am not going to a lighter scope I'll just get in better shape. Also with the right rings bases like say Badger I have no issue with the mounting height. Their regular one or two piece bases and their low rings and the 50mm bell will clear no problem, at least with my Remingtons. I have also used the the 2.5X10 that is my buddies he has on an AR while spotlighting yotes and varmints and have never had an issue with it in that role either for what its worth.
Last edited by GAP243; 11/28/11.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 24,653 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 24,653 Likes: 1 |
I wouldn't mind trying a 2.5-10x32 with the NP-1 reticle but the thin hair is a bit of a deal breaker for me.
WWP53D
|
|
|
|
529 members (007FJ, 1lessdog, 160user, 01Foreman400, 1badf350, 1Longbow, 55 invisible),
2,166
guests, and
1,138
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,240
Posts18,504,551
Members73,994
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|