SFP - how much magnification is too much?

[Mikecr]

Is it field of view that limits so many on use of higher power?
This should not be a problem beyond 200yds

 

[jrock]

For long range hunting, I've found 20x to be a good number. I would not shy away from scopes with 20x as the max. 16x is getting small for LR work if the target is small like an antelope. If lower powers are used, I like finer cross hairs.

 

[Rich Coyle]

I don't mind 30X.

 

[dfanonymous]

There's nothing beneficial to it. You don't need to see the pimple on a gnats *** at a light year away unless you are bench shooting. Most of us that come from a military background and or competitive background, specifically PRS, use the least amount of magnification we can get away with. I rarely use over 18x, in any situation of 1200y or in, unless the target is less then 10in. For military work there are other aspects like PID, that is a separate component to shooting, but requires magnification and is beside the point.

FOV, specifically finding a target with haste, and tracking a target
The shakes
Mirage kind of
Reticle obscuring the target
Don't care about spotting your own impacts or follow up shots on the fly.
Chromatic aberration on the cheaper scopes
…are indeed limiting factors and reasons not to go full mag.

If the target: isn't going anywhere, you're not in a hurry, is marked or identified by a number, lane or whatever, and you don't use or need reticle for anything…then I reckon max mag, especially beyond 16x will be a dandy.

 

[jarnold37]

There's nothing beneficial to it. You don't need to see the pimple on a gnats *** at a light year away unless you are bench shooting. Most of us that come from a military background and or competitive background, specifically PRS, use the least amount of magnification we can get away with. I rarely use over 18x, in any situation of 1200y or in, unless the target is less then 10in. For military work there are other aspects like PID, that is a separate component to shooting, but requires magnification and is beside the point.

FOV, specifically finding a target with haste, and tracking a target
The shakes
Mirage kind of
Reticle obscuring the target
Don't care about spotting your own impacts or follow up shots on the fly.
Chromatic aberration on the cheaper scopes
…are indeed limiting factors and reasons not to go full mag.

If the target: isn't going anywhere, you're not in a hurry, is marked or identified by a number, lane or whatever, and you don't use or need reticle for anything…then I reckon max mag, especially beyond 16x will be a dandy.

Probably not a good comparison, or analogy, but my preference for long range scope is somewhat like a television. A 20" TV is usable and OK until you compare it to a 75" TV. Much easier to see detail and fine points. The draw backs to large screen TV used to be that projection TV would not have as clear of picture as a smaller TV. But not now. Projection is gone as high quality definition has replaced it. Somewhat like scopes. A comparison can be made. Top quality scopes with good glass have a good picture when viewing long range. Granted, if sight acquisition on moving target is important I can dial down to 7 power which is plenty low enough at distance. Seldom need to do that and more times I am at 30-35 power. Certainly wouldnt want to go back to a 20" TV. Lol

 

[Mikecr]

Aim small, miss small
Minute of Toyota while shooting until finally hitting(military, shooting steel) - is nothing like single head shots on groundhogs(LRH).
For field of view, higher resolution, and laser ranging, use good LRF binoculars.
Power makes zero difference about mirage. It's not caused by glass, and is just the same at 9x as it is at 32x..
You're better to have a reticle aimpoint inside the killzone than obscuring it. So go SFP
Forget 'follow-ups' and focus on hitting your mark to begin with.
When you miss a LR hunting shot, you shouldn't have shot.

 

[dfanonymous]

I think you some of you guys come from the bench rest world and that's what you're comfortable with.

That doesn't make it more efficient or effective for field work or shooting LR, ELR, or "LRH."

A ground hogs head is not all defining to "LRH." Hunting animals at long range is "LRH." And it's not so different then military…there are similarities in hunting humans. Average kill zone of a deer is say a 10 inch diameter. Elk 14 inches. A human head is 10 inches. A ground hog with it's head is 20 inches. I myself can hit a 10 inch milk jug at 1000y any day of the week. I dare say in any condition with a .308 or greater. It's not that crazy. Plenty of people can. I'm sure the ground hog cares not if I hit it in the head or the ribs at 1000y when a 150gr 7mm hits it, or a .30 212gr eld hits it. Etc. I can not only do it but prefer it between 10x and 15x. And I'm not the only one. I agree if you're intended target is small, like 3 inches you would want to increase magnification.

No one said you had to miss and correct, but these things happen. My point was more to see if the animal was down and where it went. But even so, this group is pretty garbage when it comes to wind. I don't reckon 3x or 32x is going help anyone with that. So, you ought to follow your shot. I thought bench guys liked there spotting shots anyways lol.

Seems that FFP is pretty popular on here. For those that use the reticle for holds, 32x and 3 mils of wind would look pretty silly. A way to not obscure your target with a ffp is to keep down your magnification. I can see 10 inches at 1000y at 10x just fine, I'm sure everyone else can too.

This has been the same argument on here for YEARS. I don't expect that to change anyone's mind, but there are other ways of shooting Long range.

As far as hunting, I'm not going to waste time with finding a animal at 32x out west here. Once spotted, I typically build a shooting position and start gathering dope, range and wind and shoot. Then spend two days packing the thing back 10 miles usually, and breaking my back even more than it already is.

 

[xsn10s]

I haven't used 32X in a rifle scope, but have close to that in my spotting scope. For me out here in the West that high of magnification doesn't work well for hunting situations. I even had trouble locating a chuck at 583 yards with my fixed 10X due to some rocks and terrain looking the same. FOV, color, and clarity trumps magnification with my eyes. I don't have alpha glass but even in mid range scopes like Leupold Mk4's imo this holds true with me. It's faster for me to locate game/ targets through movement on lower mag, then adjust up to shoot. Even on my fixed 10X I can see chucks moving around at greater than a mile. I won't see their eyeballs though lol.

 

[lancetkenyon]

I regularly shoot long range steel, at least twice a month, with several different rifles each day.
My drills are start at 580, and go out to 1386 on the range I frequent. One shot at each. Moving across a hillside, acquiring the target, range and dial, and taking the shot as quickly as possible to make a good hit.
580, 641, 733, 881. Let the barrel/suppressor cool. Then the longer shots at 980, 1004, 1181, 1386.
15x is a little high to very quickly aquire the target at the closer ranges. Even at 733. So I try and start on 7x. When I get to 881, I will crank up the power to 12-15x. The only target I crank up to full power 15-25x) is the 1386.

Elevation dialing is a must. Reading and accurately holding for wind is a science and an art form.

 

[Doom2]

Don't believe anyone mentioned this, but SFP scope subtension vary inversely with power, so a 1 mil/moa subtension at 18x will be 2 mil/moa at 9x. 3@6, 1.5@12. This assumes the scope is correct at 18x.

 

[Rich Coyle]

I think you some of you guys come from the bench rest world and that's what you're comfortable with.

That doesn't make it more efficient or effective for field work or shooting LR, ELR, or "LRH."


No one said you had to miss and correct, but these things happen. My point was more to see if the animal was down and where it went. But even so, this group is pretty garbage when it comes to wind. I don't reckon 3x or 32x is going help anyone with that. So, you ought to follow your shot. I thought bench guys liked there spotting shots anyways lol.

I'm not "from the bench rest world" so my high magnification "doesn't make it more efficient or effective for field work." With a good brake I can see hit at 100 yards with the scope set on 20X. And that is firing a .264 Win Mag type of 6.5 wildcat. Perhaps your vision is better than most people. I hunted with a guy who could see better with un-aided eyes than I could with 7X binoculars. He used a 4-16X scope and thought more was unnecessary. For him and you I agree. For most of us, we will continue to use higher magnification to see what you see with less.

 

[dfanonymous]

I'm not "from the bench rest world" so my high magnification "doesn't make it more efficient or effective for field work." With a good brake I can see hit at 100 yards with the scope set on 20X. And that is firing a .264 Win Mag type of 6.5 wildcat. Perhaps your vision is better than most people. I hunted with a guy who could see better with un-aided eyes than I could with 7X binoculars. He used a 4-16X scope and thought more was unnecessary. For him and you I agree. For most of us, we will continue to use higher magnification to see what you see with less.

So you have no opposing habits from a discipline, you're just ignorant?

I know you need a brake. It from poor recoil management and assuming no disabilities..poor fundamentals.

My eyes are 20/20 uncorrected. Near and far.
Nothing special. The only difference is you like a small aiming point really close. The kill radius is my small aiming point. You minimize things like PRS but a 8 inch plate at 800y still requires to be within a moa of accuracy to be competitive. That's more than enough accuracy for a deer's vitals at the same distance. As far as seeing, no one placing at ko2m is using more than 30x. When John Buhay took second, the dude was using a nightforce 5-25…for a 48x60in target 2 miles away. The qualifier being a 16 inch circle at 1600.

This isn't just a me thing.

 

[hunterdan]

For me the 5-20 range has always been the perfect setup that covers most situations.

 

[Rich Coyle]

So you have no opposing habits from a discipline, you're just ignorant?

I know you need a brake. It from poor recoil management and assuming no disabilities..poor fundamentals.

You discovered my strong suite: Ignorance. One of my often used concepts to defend my beliefs is ignorant prejudice. It makes life simpler.

As far as you vision goes, I would be surprised if you aren't a little like my hawk eyed friend.