How big an Objective Lens do you need?
- Thread starter BrianBM
- Start date
MeekAndMild
New member
My 2 cents worth:
1 to 3 power fixed = 20mm
1.5-4.5 power adjustable or 4 to 6 power fixed = 32 mm
3-9 power adjustable or 8 to 10 power fixed = 40 mm
4-12 power adjustable = 50 mm
But, and this is a big but...getting a scope with expensive coated lenses can reduce the need for size. A good 32mm 3-9 may be brighter than a cheap 40mm. Also there are conditions looking into a sunset when bigger cheap scopes seem to have more internal white-out.
1 to 3 power fixed = 20mm
1.5-4.5 power adjustable or 4 to 6 power fixed = 32 mm
3-9 power adjustable or 8 to 10 power fixed = 40 mm
4-12 power adjustable = 50 mm
But, and this is a big but...getting a scope with expensive coated lenses can reduce the need for size. A good 32mm 3-9 may be brighter than a cheap 40mm. Also there are conditions looking into a sunset when bigger cheap scopes seem to have more internal white-out.
Last edited:
Anthony Terry
New member
definetly, better quality optics go a long ways. what size scope are you wanting to get and whats the average distance youll be shooting?
Mannlicher
New member
I believe a larger objective lens helps on low light, but there are limits as to how much light your pupil will pass. I have had good results over many years with 20mm tube scopes, and only see a down side to those in late evenings. Frankly, I have killed more deer around 10am, than at sunset though, so to me its not really a factor.
Anthony Terry
New member
alot of beginners buy huge objective scopes not realizing that the eye cant use but so much light. and they sacrifice a lower mount to have a big bell. definetly not a good tradoff. if you dont have a good cheek weld on a heavy cal. gun you will end up with a sore cheek
Anthony, at the moment, I'm just informing myself. I will take no shot beyond 200 yards, unless I have a rest (mechanical, or a well-settled sandbag on a well-placed stump) and a deer that stands still for a silhouette portrait. In that case, I might reach out to 300 - if I'm holding a sight picture well, and I like the picture. As a leg amputee, I'm not climbing trees, or stalking, or going more then a couple of hundred yards from where the horse or ATV drops me off. Neither can I track a wounded animal. More then most hunters, if I do this, I need to set myself up to reliably get that bang/flop.
The best way to deal with a deer's sensitive nose is to be somewhere with some fairly long sight lines, probably farm country or former farm country. That dictates a rifle that's useful out to my 300 yard maximum, and it dictates a scope (so do my eyeballs.)
The K-31 sounds like the ideal poor man's route to an accurate .30 rifle, certainly enough so for the kind of deer hunting I have in mind, and heavy enough that recoil shouldn't be a problem for practice - especially once I've started doing moderate handloads, another new hobby to get into. So ..... right now ...... my thoughts are: a K-31, some Prvi Partizan ammuntion to get started and provide Boxer-primed brass for reloading, one of Darryl's clamp-on mounts, and a scope. A VX-II is the baseline purchase. A good pair of binoculars to monitor my surroundings, orange blaze camo for some idiotproofing, and lots of caution in taking the shot. I can sit quietly for awhile, say, from mid-afternoon to the following dawn. Bang/flop.
I have some experience with cameras. I can see advantages to a large objective that haven't been mentioned in this thread or other threads. F'instance, those yellow Alumina filters that Leopold sells for its' scopes? You can sharpen contrast with a filter that way, but the filter will significantly reduce light reaching the eye, enough to make a difference in marginal lighting. Add the filter to better penetrate haze or dust, or add a grey filter if you're overlooking a lot of snow, or sand. A big enough objective makes the light loss irrelevant. Putting the filter on the scope, as opposed to wearing tinted glasses, means the filter'll be under the lens hood, where it should be to avoid complicating vision with reflections.
The Leopold VX-L would be perfect. It's too expensive to buy if you don't know you need it, but I doubt Leopold can patent the idea of a notched lens. The day it first hit the market, optical engineers at every other scopemaker in the world looked at each other and said "why didn't we think of that? ... it's so OBVIOUS ... now let's do it." Leopold's methods for securing a notched objective group in the lens tube may be proprietary and protectable, but the basic design idea is not. Within a couple of years there will be several different notched-lens scopes on the market, and most of them made with cheap, highly skilled Chinese labor. So, for now, Darryl's mount on a K-31 with a midrange Leopold, VX-II, that I'll purchase used. If I need more then that, I have time to wait.
I'm sure most guys here who hunt will be able to think of times and places where they had to decide to forgo a shot that they'd like to have taken. These are just my notions for how to deal with the problem.
The best way to deal with a deer's sensitive nose is to be somewhere with some fairly long sight lines, probably farm country or former farm country. That dictates a rifle that's useful out to my 300 yard maximum, and it dictates a scope (so do my eyeballs.)
The K-31 sounds like the ideal poor man's route to an accurate .30 rifle, certainly enough so for the kind of deer hunting I have in mind, and heavy enough that recoil shouldn't be a problem for practice - especially once I've started doing moderate handloads, another new hobby to get into. So ..... right now ...... my thoughts are: a K-31, some Prvi Partizan ammuntion to get started and provide Boxer-primed brass for reloading, one of Darryl's clamp-on mounts, and a scope. A VX-II is the baseline purchase. A good pair of binoculars to monitor my surroundings, orange blaze camo for some idiotproofing, and lots of caution in taking the shot. I can sit quietly for awhile, say, from mid-afternoon to the following dawn. Bang/flop.
I have some experience with cameras. I can see advantages to a large objective that haven't been mentioned in this thread or other threads. F'instance, those yellow Alumina filters that Leopold sells for its' scopes? You can sharpen contrast with a filter that way, but the filter will significantly reduce light reaching the eye, enough to make a difference in marginal lighting. Add the filter to better penetrate haze or dust, or add a grey filter if you're overlooking a lot of snow, or sand. A big enough objective makes the light loss irrelevant. Putting the filter on the scope, as opposed to wearing tinted glasses, means the filter'll be under the lens hood, where it should be to avoid complicating vision with reflections.
The Leopold VX-L would be perfect. It's too expensive to buy if you don't know you need it, but I doubt Leopold can patent the idea of a notched lens. The day it first hit the market, optical engineers at every other scopemaker in the world looked at each other and said "why didn't we think of that? ... it's so OBVIOUS ... now let's do it." Leopold's methods for securing a notched objective group in the lens tube may be proprietary and protectable, but the basic design idea is not. Within a couple of years there will be several different notched-lens scopes on the market, and most of them made with cheap, highly skilled Chinese labor. So, for now, Darryl's mount on a K-31 with a midrange Leopold, VX-II, that I'll purchase used. If I need more then that, I have time to wait.
I'm sure most guys here who hunt will be able to think of times and places where they had to decide to forgo a shot that they'd like to have taken. These are just my notions for how to deal with the problem.
kingudaroad
New member
Some people just gotta have it now!
http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19441&d=1152983356
http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19441&d=1152983356
Anthony Terry
New member
brian
youre on the right track bro. since you will be still hunting, the heavier gun will not affect you. and it will be easier to steady up on shots. id go with a 4x12 40mm. those k-31's have alot of drop on the stock so youll need to get the scope as low as you can. that will make shooting easier and funner. i really dont think youll need a 50mm bell. but if you want one, then go for it. id invest in a set of shooting sticks if you are sitting while hunting. they will help you out alot, especially hunting in feilds and such. i would really look into a modern bolt action firearm myself. maybe a used remington 700 bdl. maybe in 30-06 or 270. youll would like the feel better id say. k-31 are made for killing people. remington 700's are made for hunting. you can find used ones for 300-400 in perfect shape. you would like the way the stock fits your cheek better i bet. but it is your rifle so do what you want. just some suggestions to help out.
youre on the right track bro. since you will be still hunting, the heavier gun will not affect you. and it will be easier to steady up on shots. id go with a 4x12 40mm. those k-31's have alot of drop on the stock so youll need to get the scope as low as you can. that will make shooting easier and funner. i really dont think youll need a 50mm bell. but if you want one, then go for it. id invest in a set of shooting sticks if you are sitting while hunting. they will help you out alot, especially hunting in feilds and such. i would really look into a modern bolt action firearm myself. maybe a used remington 700 bdl. maybe in 30-06 or 270. youll would like the feel better id say. k-31 are made for killing people. remington 700's are made for hunting. you can find used ones for 300-400 in perfect shape. you would like the way the stock fits your cheek better i bet. but it is your rifle so do what you want. just some suggestions to help out.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Repeating myself again--and again--I think that if low light is an issue, quality binoculars are The Deal. I don't like the idea of somebody using a scope to see whether or not I'm a deer.
I've never had a problem seeing a deer in that last light before dark with a 40mm Leupold, or even with a Weaver K4. The binoculars take care of judging the quality of the deer. Most any old scope will let you hit it.
Art
I've never had a problem seeing a deer in that last light before dark with a 40mm Leupold, or even with a Weaver K4. The binoculars take care of judging the quality of the deer. Most any old scope will let you hit it.
Art
Anthony Terry
New member
brian.
shewwee! (wipes forhead) thank god!
shewwee! (wipes forhead) thank god!
MeekAndMild
New member
Art you've got to admit both the Leupold and Weaver would probably have better coatings than a Wally World Special 40mm. All things being equal a 4x Weaver 28mm would probably be easier to see through than el cheapo scopes.
BTW, Art, I think the question is more how many horns the deer has rather than whether or not it is a deer.
BTW, Art, I think the question is more how many horns the deer has rather than whether or not it is a deer.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Aw, no argument that a lot of scopes of the El Cheapo variety are, at best, marginal. From comments here over the years, though, dealing with recoil is the biggest problem.
Look: My first '06 scope was a Weaver K2.5. Years later, it was a K4. Later on, I traded into a Leupold Vari-X II, and have mostly stayed with Leupold since around 1970-ish.
I've seen all kinds of scopes show up at hunt camp, and folks seemed to be able to kill their deer. My deal is that I've never had a problem; I guess that's why I don't particularly get excited about it. My father used an old Stith Bear Cub 4X on one '06, and a Weaver K6 on the other. He probably killed more deer than most folks ever see.
Common sense says avoid the El Cheapo stuff, on general principles that you generally get what you pay for. But, if a Rolls Royce type of scope makes for more confidence, go for it!
Y'all might have noticed that there's a lot of stuff that I don't get all worried about.
Art
Look: My first '06 scope was a Weaver K2.5. Years later, it was a K4. Later on, I traded into a Leupold Vari-X II, and have mostly stayed with Leupold since around 1970-ish.
I've seen all kinds of scopes show up at hunt camp, and folks seemed to be able to kill their deer. My deal is that I've never had a problem; I guess that's why I don't particularly get excited about it. My father used an old Stith Bear Cub 4X on one '06, and a Weaver K6 on the other. He probably killed more deer than most folks ever see.
Common sense says avoid the El Cheapo stuff, on general principles that you generally get what you pay for. But, if a Rolls Royce type of scope makes for more confidence, go for it!
Y'all might have noticed that there's a lot of stuff that I don't get all worried about.
Art
I DID notice that, actually. A dollar for every time you heard this discussion, you'd be rich. The hazard of letting NGs like me in is that you get to hear it again.
Anthony Terry, you make a good point about stock fit, and such, and the probable better suitability of a modern sporting firearm. There's food for thought in that ... OK, maybe go check the auction sites again.
A dollar for every time you heard this discussion, you'd be rich. The hazard of letting NGs like me in is that you get to hear it again. Anthony Terry, you make a good point about stock fit, and such, and the probable better suitability of a modern sporting firearm. There's food for thought in that ... OK, maybe go check the auction sites again.
I personally believe lens quality is much more important than objective size. I have seen quality 36 mm objective scopes that are much brighter than cheap 50 mm objective scopes.
Fixed power are generally brighter than variable power scopes.
That being stated I would rather have a quality 4X32 scope (Leupold ect) than any 50 mm objective scope made.
I am a deer hunter, not a deer shooter. I find no joy in sitting in a box stand and trying to shoot deer from as far away as possible. I do find great joy in stalking, hunting in the deep woods and being successful.
I prefer a 40 mm objective on a scope of 3-9, but I really prefer a smaller objective. My current favorite scope is 2.5-8X32 mm objective for general purpose hunting. 1.5-6X32 for hunting in the woods.
Charles
Fixed power are generally brighter than variable power scopes.
That being stated I would rather have a quality 4X32 scope (Leupold ect) than any 50 mm objective scope made.
I am a deer hunter, not a deer shooter. I find no joy in sitting in a box stand and trying to shoot deer from as far away as possible. I do find great joy in stalking, hunting in the deep woods and being successful.
I prefer a 40 mm objective on a scope of 3-9, but I really prefer a smaller objective. My current favorite scope is 2.5-8X32 mm objective for general purpose hunting. 1.5-6X32 for hunting in the woods.
Charles
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Brian, a primary purpose of this forum is to explain WHY a bunch of us Old Farts have the opinions we do. Sometimes the reasons even make sense. If a New Guy can pick up some help, great!
Art
If a New Guy can pick up some help, great!Art
A suprisingly good low cost scope for late evening shots is a 50mm Tasco Worldclass pluss. Im pretty shure they still carry an over the counter warranty as well. During deer season exspecially in this region alot of nicer bucks are seen right at dusk. Currently I shoot a Kahles 56mm fixed 8 and I love it. The world class pluss I used to shoot is suprisingly close in low light conditions. I reccomend the tasco for the money, and I have compared it with 2 56mm kahles, and a 42mm swarovski. It should surprise you.