Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Fixed Power Scope Recommendations

Not when you cant see out of them.


dave

Not all that long ago someone posted here about their new S&B 4x giving up the ghost pretty quick. No brand is dud free.

It is interesting that nobody is really posting about the 6x42 Schmidt & Bender - I skimmed the whole thread and I think it was briefly mentioned in one post. Where I am I can get one for about $450 more than a Leupold VX3, so the price difference isn't earth shattering.

Are folks not using it just because of the price? Anyone with first hand experience have any comments on it?

Pretty hard to beat a fixed 6X leupie. I recently returned from Alaska where I fell down pretty hard and actually dented my talley LW as well as the fixed 6X42 Leupie. Thought OH, Oh....2 shots at a 200 yd. rock..right on! At home on the bench it was still right on. And this is on a .375 which isn't exactly a maidens touch with recoil.

Damn tough scope and the FX optics are certainly good enough for anything I will ever hunt.

LC


Lefty C

Thank you. This will work fine for 99% of my shots on deer or pigs, so I dont have to get a gloss one.

I have an S&B 6x42 (German) that I purchased a few years ago on an auction site for $550. It's a great scope. I love the #7 reticle on that scope, esp low light conditions. That said, for the money, I'd go with the Leupy 6x36 or 6x42 rather than pay $1100 for a new S&B 6x42.

Re: 4x Conquest, they are oustanding, and if Zeiss made a 6x w/Z plex, I'd be all over ...a few!

The 4x does have a wider spacing between post, and it is on the thin side for the outer post, so it may not jump out and grab your eye, but neither does the WD on the matte FXII and FX3. I too noticed that looked thu the 4x Zeiss gave an image to my eyes more akin to a 6x in magnification. Wondered if the true magnification were not a little more than 4x. Great resolution.

Zeiss would convert ALOT of Leupold owners IMHO w/a 6x in the Conquest line.....sure would like to see it happen. Not a slam on the Leupold, but the 3-9 Zeiss is cheaper and rivals the more expensive VX3 3-10 and all w/a very sharp etched reticle.

But for now, as per above, for hunting, my Leupolds have done fine. Having looked thru many scopes, there does appear to sometimes be a little variance in scopes of many brands, whether fixed or variable so I can understand if -

A) someone gets a scope of any brand that has aberrations/distortion in glass or

B) needs better focusing - E can comment here.

If I had a problem scope of a reputable brand, I'd send it back for service. It should return right.

I'd be 2nd in line!

I wouldn't say that $450 is an easy pill to swallow for most people for what little if any difference there is in the performance.

Just ran some of my unpatented brightness tests on several fixed-power scopes. Not so surprisingly, the 6x Leupolds of any size or vintage (including the M8 6x36's) did pretty darn well. This is what I noticed 20 years ago when comparing the 6x32 Zeiss with the (single-coated!) Leupold 6x36 M8.

The optics in Leupold 6x's have only gotten better since then. I haven't yet tested one of the latest 6x42's but plan to soon.

Do you all use your fixed 6x Leupys at the rifle range often? How do you like them there? I'm talking a .30-06 that goes to the range once a week or once every two weeks, and then also goes hunting two or three weeks a year.

I read Mule Deer's article about hunting scope magnification, and I even ordered some of the recommended diamond targets (I needed some anyway).

I was thinking of the 2 - 12 VX-6 illuminated, if they ever come out. Use the 2x to 6x setting for hunting, and the 12x setting at the range. Opinions? I could also get a fixed 6x for hunting and a fixed 16x for the range, and switch a couple of months out from hunting season.

Tested my 6x36 last night ten minutes after sunset, in the woods, 100 yds, drilled both shoulders of an 8pt....

Same morning, shot a .15 CtC group for 3 shots, 100 yds...

Then to foul bbl later, rang gongs at 200/330/415 using the CDS.

They do seem to work....

In terms of brightness, how does the 6x36 compare to a 2.5-8 VX3 or say a Burris FF II 3-9 if they are on their lowest magnification?

Joel - take your choice

http://www.waterproofpaper.com/targets/

My brightness tests are done with every scope set on 6x. This levels the field, because magnification is a major factor in apparent brightness.

Don't disagree with that. But if I have a 3-9 (for example) on my rifle vs. a 6x36, I have the option of selecting 3x which (in theory) should help low light performance. Just trying to get a feel for the limitations of having only 6x vs. 2.5 or 3x on a variable. I understand that's outside the scope of your test.

Contrary to popular belief, lower magnification does not improve low-light performance.

The myth of low-mag brightness is based on a larger exit pupil. But if the exit pupil is large enough (at least 6mm) more magnification will provide a MUCH brighter image. This is because you're essentially twice as close as with a 3x scope. Get closer to anything in dim light and you'll see it better.

The Leupold 8x40 is on my list.

Learn (or are reminded of) something new every day. And given that the 6x36 is a 6mm exit pupil, that's about all my eye could take advantage of anyway if I understand correctly. Appreciate it.

Get a 3-9 or 2.5-8 and 'fix' it on 6X!

Have you looked through a Zeiss Conquest?