Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
40 v 50 v 56 mm Objective Lens
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ricka0" data-source="post: 76901" data-attributes="member: 3086"><p>[ QUOTE ]</p><p>My conclusion is that if your eyes are going downhill then spend money on optics to compensate plus anyone who has ever tried to put horns on a deer or elk late in the day knows that it is not the determination that the animal is a deer or elk, it is the resolution of the antlers. </p><p></p><p>[/ QUOTE ]</p><p> <font color="purple"> <strong>buffalobob </strong> </font> - exactly. My comparision was just between lenses of identical quality. Cheap + Big will not resolve betwen that big spike elk and a two point. (Montana now looks at horns).</p><p> [ QUOTE ]</p><p> <font color="brown"> If your eye can only use 6mm of light (your max dilation), a larger column of light at the ocular lens will allow you to align your eye with the center of the scope easier and faster. </font> </p><p></p><p>[/ QUOTE ] </p><p>Excellent Point!</p><p>I've alway been a big beliver of getting the best optics you can afford (then going up one nothch /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif)</p><p>Varmint Hunter writes:</p><p> [ QUOTE ]</p><p> <font color="brown"> I'll start by stating that in my experience, optical resolution far outweighs magnification in a hunting scope, </font> </p><p></p><p>[/ QUOTE ] No question.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ricka0, post: 76901, member: 3086"] [ QUOTE ] My conclusion is that if your eyes are going downhill then spend money on optics to compensate plus anyone who has ever tried to put horns on a deer or elk late in the day knows that it is not the determination that the animal is a deer or elk, it is the resolution of the antlers. [/ QUOTE ] <font color="purple"> [b]buffalobob [/b] </font> - exactly. My comparision was just between lenses of identical quality. Cheap + Big will not resolve betwen that big spike elk and a two point. (Montana now looks at horns). [ QUOTE ] <font color="brown"> If your eye can only use 6mm of light (your max dilation), a larger column of light at the ocular lens will allow you to align your eye with the center of the scope easier and faster. </font> [/ QUOTE ] Excellent Point! I've alway been a big beliver of getting the best optics you can afford (then going up one nothch [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) Varmint Hunter writes: [ QUOTE ] <font color="brown"> I'll start by stating that in my experience, optical resolution far outweighs magnification in a hunting scope, </font> [/ QUOTE ] No question. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
40 v 50 v 56 mm Objective Lens
Top