New Scope Help!!!!

[SidecarFlip]

I'd be afraid to crank anything to 80x and look through it....

Might roast my eyeball....

Frankly, I wasn't aware that any optic was capable of 80x.....

 

[bruce_ventura]

That scope is a 8-80x56mm March scope. The picture was taken at 80 power with a cell phone.

joseph

Haha! That's funny right there.

0.7 mm exit pupil. You probably know this, but the eye doesn't work too well at that aperture. You tend to get high magnification blur.

I don't even own a spotting scope that goes to 80X. I would have to pull out my 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain to get to that magnification. Of course, I wouldn't bother unless I was on a mountain top during a cool windless night. And even then I would be looking up!

I thought 32X on a rifle was over the top!

 

[sp6x6]

My bench buddies shoot 12-42x56 NF, 2 have world records.The one guy had a S&B AND to his eye he could resolve better with his NF, AND WENT back to it,@ like 1/2 the cost. I have spotted for him w/ 60x80 ziess and he has called bullet holes, 6mm @ 1000 and been right, under ideal conditions

 

[rdt270]

Yep, your thread got hijacked. See another thread for more info on optical quality: http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f18/hawke-sidewinder-vs-vortex-viper-vs-falcon-menace-84839/

I'm not a fan of any of the scopes you mentioned - they're all below average in optical performance for their price point. I would put Pentax at the bottom, followed by Sightron and Vortex PST (about the same).

There are better options out there for optical performance, however.

Bruce,

What would you suggest? I am trying to get Scope ,Bases, and rings all for no more than $1k? I figure $150 on the bases and rings should be close and the rest on the scope. I want to stay with moa/moa( I like the PST EMR-1 retical). I would like good mechanically sound target style turrets and as gooda glass as this will get me. Illuminated retical isnt necessary but would help during our night time huntng (crop preservation outings).

Thanks for all the input guys.

 

[sp6x6]

If you watch classifieds here you can save some coin. Ziess has some nice glass in your budget

 

[joseph]

Haha! That's funny right there.

0.7 mm exit pupil. You probably know this, but the eye doesn't work too well at that aperture. You tend to get high magnification blur.

I don't even own a spotting scope that goes to 80X. I would have to pull out my 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain to get to that magnification. Of course, I wouldn't bother unless I was on a mountain top during a cool windless night. And even then I would be looking up!

I thought 32X on a rifle was over the top!

You ought to take a look through that March scope at 80 power. You can hold that target dot on a bullet hole at 1,000 yds. and with the addition of a filter for satellite camera lenses used in outer space the mirage is practically eliminated. Long range record holders use them and especially at high powers really work.

You can HaHa all you want.

joseph

PS: I have one of those filters and they make it so good you have to strain your eyes to see any heat waves.

 

[SidecarFlip]

.........PS: I have one of those filters and they make it so good you have to strain your eyes to see any heat waves......

In my case it's not the eyes that I'm worried about, it's my wallet.....

 

[joseph]

Haha! That's funny right there.

0.7 mm exit pupil. You probably know this, but the eye doesn't work too well at that aperture. You tend to get high magnification blur.

I don't even own a spotting scope that goes to 80X. I would have to pull out my 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain to get to that magnification. Of course, I wouldn't bother unless I was on a mountain top during a cool windless night. And even then I would be looking up!

I thought 32X on a rifle was over the top!

Hey guys read closely what bruce-ventura wrote. I think he blew his cover about what he knows about scopes.

joseph

 

[bruce_ventura]

My bench buddies shoot 12-42x56 NF, 2 have world records.The one guy had a S&B AND to his eye he could resolve better with his NF, AND WENT back to it,@ like 1/2 the cost. I have spotted for him w/ 60x80 ziess and he has called bullet holes, 6mm @ 1000 and been right, under ideal conditions...

...You ought to take a look through that March scope at 80 power. You can hold that target dot on a bullet hole at 1,000 yds...

...You can HaHa all you want.

Joseph,

I didn't mean to offend you and your sport, really. I was just being humorous.

This is a hunting forum, not a benchrest forum. So please don't take offense if people here think that an 80X riflescope is a bit extreme.

But now I think you're pulling my leg. Those "bullet holes" in your photo look to me like they're actually target pasters, which are a lot bigger than 6 mm. They're probably about 1" diameter. They also have good contrast against the blue bull, but not so good contrast against the buff paper. High contrast dots, even when they're smaller than the resolution limit, can be located visually. Just look at the stars at night, for example.

You say your friend can call shots at 1,000 yds. Maybe so. I've shot with folks who can call shots accurately in the right conditions by watching the bullet "trace" or "vapor trail" and noting where it disappears into the target. I suppose if the target illumination conditions were such that the bullet hole was very high contrast, one could locate it in a low turbulence condition, but it seems unlikely. In either case, that's not the same as resolving bullet holes.

 

[bruce_ventura]

Bruce,

What would you suggest? I am trying to get Scope ,Bases, and rings all for no more than $1k? I figure $150 on the bases and rings should be close and the rest on the scope. I want to stay with moa/moa( I like the PST EMR-1 retical). I would like good mechanically sound target style turrets and as gooda glass as this will get me. Illuminated retical isnt necessary but would help during our night time huntng (crop preservation outings).

Thanks for all the input guys.

Sorry, your thread got hijacked again.

You don't have a lot of choices with moa/moa. Kind of locks you in to a few models and their optical performance is not great. I recommend that you reconsider moa/mil and mil/mil. If you plan on dialing for elevation and holding for wind, does it really matter? I use Ballistic on the iPhone and it outputs hold-offs in all those combinations. Remember, this is me talking and I value optical quality over features and minor convenience. You have a good case for going 5X or even 6X magnification range. So consider some of those options too. For hunting I don't recommend going above 4.5 on the low end.

That said, here are some options I evaluated at SHOT that had good optical performance and might be in your price range. Zeiss Conquest 4-14x are fine scopes in all regards. Bushy 6500 4.5-30x50. Burris XTR 4-16x50. Weaver Tactical 3-15x and 4-20x (no MAP pricing - good value).

Be sure to get Butler Creek scope covers and a lens pen. Also, use a 20 or even 30 moa scope base, or use Burris signature rings with the offset inserts. You want the scope near its optical center at all times.

Good luck.

 

[joseph]

bruce_ventura,

You included sp6x6's post with my post. If you are going to quote someone please give credit where it is do.

sp6x6 posted this: vvvv My name is on it, but I did not post it.

[Originally Posted by joseph
My bench buddies shoot 12-42x56 NF, 2 have world records.The one guy had a S&B AND to his eye he could resolve better with his NF, AND WENT back to it,@ like 1/2 the cost. I have spotted for him w/ 60x80 ziess and he has called bullet holes, 6mm @ 1000 and been right, under ideal conditions...]


That March 8-80x56 target scope is not mine and not focused on my target. How do you think the guys with records of around 2 inch 5 shot groups at 1,000 yds. do it if they cannot see the target good enough and they can not with the scopes you are trying to influence buying here that do not have the things that long range shooters need to make these long shots when hunting.

Actually I think you are a troll trying to lead people in the wrong direction,

joseph

 

[Len Backus]

Hey, guys, let's stay on topic in the threads.

1) Is the Sigtron SIII Glass that much better than the PST ?
2) How much better are either compared to the Pentax ?
3) Since must of my shooting/ hunting will be at 0 - 800yds(only steel and paper over 400yds) would I be better with the 4 x 16 or is the 6 x 25 to much at these ranges?

Len Backus

 

[sp6x6]

Sorry to deviate post. Yes my friend w/15 year younger eyes,spotted his bullet holes w,12-42 NF. I WAS right behind him ona 60x80 Ziess.I could till right then he has great eyes. I lookeD through the NF and could see them but now I new where to look.I have more than a few friends that run this SAME scope on there LR rigs, including the guy above, they have made kills to just under 1500 yrds. In there club, 1000 yrd., they dont even shoot speed goats unless they are 1000 +, I watch them shoot clay pigeions at 1000 for fun, they have 10-15 yrs at 1000 bench.

 

[bruce_ventura]

rdt270, You indicated you will be hunting and target shooting. IMHO, optical quality requirements differ for hunting vs target shooting at a range. Hunters often encounter poor lighting conditions at the target, but relatively clean (low-turbulence) air. This is where optical quality really matters.

At most ranges during daytime, target illumination and contrast are good, but turbulence is strong. That's because the optical path is close to the ground for a long distance. You won't see much difference in true resolution (as opposed to magnification) between scopes when turbulence blur is present.

I'm finding quite a bit of variation in optical quality at this midpoint of $500-1,000 price range. I think that optical quality is a cultural thing for most scope manufacturers. Some don't even have the equipment to measure optical quality, while others have decades of tradition that dictate high optical quality standards.