- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Scope debate: 2-7x33 vs 3-9X40 - OP UPDATED
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:13 am
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:13 am
Decided I'm just going to revamp my primary deer gun and put a Leupold VX-R on it. I've always shot either 3-9x40s, 2.5-10x50s and the like.
If I chose to go the 33mm route, will there be that big of a drop off from the 9x power to maxing out at 7? I would think not, but I thought maybe some of you had already tried out a scope this size. I like the idea of the larger FOV and the handiness of the smaller profile but just have a little concern about longer shots and the extra magnification.
FWIW I'll rarely have a shot over 350 yards and very comfortable with any scoped rifle. Several of the plots I hunt are no longer than 250, but there is an occasional opportunity for shots up to 400. However, I can't remember the last time I actually had to attempt one.
Eta:
Ended up going with the 2-7x33 and am glad I did. Lightweight. Clear. And looks great on the A bolt. The reticle pic shown is set on 2 looking at a light pole 75 yards away. It's Leupold's "firedot 4."
If I chose to go the 33mm route, will there be that big of a drop off from the 9x power to maxing out at 7? I would think not, but I thought maybe some of you had already tried out a scope this size. I like the idea of the larger FOV and the handiness of the smaller profile but just have a little concern about longer shots and the extra magnification.
FWIW I'll rarely have a shot over 350 yards and very comfortable with any scoped rifle. Several of the plots I hunt are no longer than 250, but there is an occasional opportunity for shots up to 400. However, I can't remember the last time I actually had to attempt one.
Eta:
Ended up going with the 2-7x33 and am glad I did. Lightweight. Clear. And looks great on the A bolt. The reticle pic shown is set on 2 looking at a light pole 75 yards away. It's Leupold's "firedot 4."
This post was edited on 11/22/14 at 11:23 am
8
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:17 am to beHop
I'd go with the 3-9x40 for the extra light.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:18 am to beHop
3-9x50
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:19 am to Yellerhammer5
quote:
3-9x40 for the extra light
Won't supply extra light. Neither will the 50 mm fwiw despite popular belief.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:19 am to beHop
I would get at least 3x9x40 if you have a chance at 300+ yard shots. The main thing for me is the amount of light drawn in.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:21 am to Dylan
Light is not the issue here. I was really wanting to hear from someone who uses the smaller size scope and how the magnification worked out on longer shots.
This post was edited on 10/17/14 at 9:22 am
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:25 am to beHop
I use a 2x7 on my muzzleloader and a 3x9 on my rifle. If all of my shots were going to be inside of 250 yards I'd have a 2x7 on my rifle. Past 250 I feel I need a 3x9 only because I have a couple of stands that are a single lane and there are times I don't have time to use my binoculars.
This post was edited on 10/17/14 at 9:28 am
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:28 am to Raz4back
They the same scope just different sizes?
Eta: I gotcha
Eta: I gotcha
This post was edited on 10/17/14 at 9:29 am
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:29 am to Hermit Crab
quote:
maybe that is just their marketing tactics.
You'd be correct.
Eta
quote:
Variable-power scopes also offer a light management advantage over fixed power scopes. As you change magnification, you also change the exit pupil, a measure of the light passing through the scope to your eye. Exit pupil is derived by dividing the diameter of the objective lens by the magnification of the optical device. The human eye can dilate from about 7mm for a young person in total darkness to 2mm in bright sunlight. Ideally, the exit pupil of the scope should match or slightly exceed the dilation of the eye’s pupil so that the eye receives as much light as possible.
An example of exit pupil: if a hunter goes out with a 3.5-10x40mm scope early in the morning, he can dial his scope down to 5x, and he will receive an 8mm exit pupil (40mm divided by 5x equals 8mm exit pupil). Later, when the sun is high and bright, he can turn his scope up to 10x and still receive a 4mm exit pupil (40mm divided by 10x equals a 4mm exit pupil), which is excellent for bright conditions. As evening approaches, he can turn the scope back down to 8x or so to receive a 5mm exit pupil (40mm divided by 8x equals a 5mm exit pupil) and still have plenty of light to make a shot at the end of legal shooting hours.
The thing is, the human eye is only capable of gathering around a 6 on that exit pupil scale. So acquiring an "8" is useless. Clarity and sharpness become more important. So unless you're super-human it doesn't really matter.
That being said in not knocking anyone. To each his own. Hunt with what you're confident in.
Alx: Thanks for the input
This post was edited on 10/17/14 at 9:35 am
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:30 am to beHop
2-7. I like the low power for times where I know I would never have a long shot, and I doubt I would ever use 9. Obviously YMMV.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:34 am to JAB528
quote:
3-9x50
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:36 am to beHop
I just rescoped my 270 with a Vortex Crossfire 4-16x50, I have been extremely impressed with my Vortex scopes.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:36 am to swanny297
quote:
4-16x50
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:43 am to beHop
quote:
The thing is, the human eye is only capable of gathering around a 6 on that exit pupil scale. So acquiring an "8" is useless. Clarity and sharpness become more important. So unless you're super-human it doesn't really matter.
33/7 = 4.7mm.
40/7 = 5.7mm.
Not a huge difference, but there's not a huge difference between either scope anyway. Sounds like you've got everything figured out though, so good luck with your choice.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:45 am to Yellerhammer5
quote:
Sounds like you've got everything figured out though
Far from it. I just know that the light transmission will not be an issue. I was really just wanting to hear from anyone who has used the lower magnifications.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:47 am to JAB528
quote:
3-9x50
Posted on 10/17/14 at 9:51 am to TigerDeacon
quote:
3-9x50
Yeah, well I'm not even considering this. But thanks to all that have suggested.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 10:00 am to beHop
I'd go with the 3-9x40, with my luck a big one would walk out just outside the range of the smaller scope. Better to have it and not need it. The 3-9 is the most popular for a reason.
Disclaimer: I've never used a 2-7x33, so take my opinion for what it's worth.
Disclaimer: I've never used a 2-7x33, so take my opinion for what it's worth.
Posted on 10/17/14 at 10:14 am to beHop
looking at the leupold website, the msrp on them are both $625, unless you get the CDS 3-9.
With price being equal, the only difference is .2 inches in diameter and 1.5 inches in length. I wouldn't think that size differential would be a deal killer to get the extra magnification. but maybe you are really wanting a more streamlined look.
With price being equal, the only difference is .2 inches in diameter and 1.5 inches in length. I wouldn't think that size differential would be a deal killer to get the extra magnification. but maybe you are really wanting a more streamlined look.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News