Rifle scope power for elk

[CA Karen]

I have a Bushnell Elite 4200 2.5-10 X 50 on my 30-06 and its dropped alot elk and deer.

 

[sdnative13]

I agree

i thought the Zeiss conquest was a $299 scope?

3x9 is just about perfect. when i killed my elk, i used a leupold 3x9 VX2..i briefly worried that i didnt transfer my VX3 from my .257 which is a 3.5-10x. when i looked thru my scope at the elk at 200 yards..it was HUGE in my scope. they are big as horses! i could have hit the animal with a 4x.

i have been very interested in Vortex stuff. i am almost kicking myself for spending leica money on binos..when i could have gotten high end Vortex binos AND a spotting scope for the same money..probably have cash for a tripod too. vortex is built to hunt. you can easily mount it on a tripod. i have to "break" my leicas to do the same.

Yeah I have also been looking at Vortex as well. I was thinking about getting the Viper HD seeing as I dont have the opertunity to hunt as much as I would like to justify spending much more.

 

[sdnative13]

The glass (as in binoculars) you want to use, can depend on the country your glassing. If your glassing big open country, you"ll want 10x40s or larger; if your glassing thick country with few if any long views, 8x32 would be a good choice. But as has been said, good glass is a key factor.

Keep in mind that Bugle is an archery mag, so not only are they trying to sell a product, but the product is specific to archery hunting. My comment isn't particularly against Bugle or any other hunting mag, but promoting products is simply a fact of how that make a profit.

And I must say I have to disagree with you. The article I am refering to is simple just trying to explain the whole optic concept. Not once did the writer single out one company or another. The only mention he made was to offer mid-price suggestion as compared to the big money companies.

 

[ltdann]

i thought the Zeiss conquest was a $299 scope?

3x9 is just about perfect. when i killed my elk, i used a leupold 3x9 VX2..i briefly worried that i didnt transfer my VX3 from my .257 which is a 3.5-10x. when i looked thru my scope at the elk at 200 yards..it was HUGE in my scope. they are big as horses! i could have hit the animal with a 4x.

i have been very interested in Vortex stuff. i am almost kicking myself for spending leica money on binos..when i could have gotten high end Vortex binos AND a spotting scope for the same money..probably have cash for a tripod too. vortex is built to hunt. you can easily mount it on a tripod. i have to "break" my leicas to do the same.

Yeah, your right, for some reason i was thinking of one of the high end Swaro scopes.

Yeah I have also been looking at Vortex as well. I was thinking about getting the Viper HD seeing as I dont have the opertunity to hunt as much as I would like to justify spending much more.

Vortex has come a long way. If they'd been around when I was shopping, I'd probably have bought the Vortex Razor HD's and saved myself around $600-800. Not saying I don't love my Swaro's, but the Vortex glass has gotten REAL good.

When you buy the high end glass, you'll find you'll spend more time glassing because it's more comfortable. You'll glass more and equally important, you'll see more.

I probably went through at LEAST 5 sets of bino's before I finally admitted that the high end glass WAS worth the the money.

When asked, I use to say that the best were (no particular order) Zeiss, Lieca, Swaro. I add vortex to that list now.

 

[sagebrush]

I'm a Leupold fan myself and they're about the same money as a comparable Zeiss. Just looking at Cabela's the Zeiss Conquest 3-9X50 is the exact same price as the Leupold VXIII 3.5-10X50 with the CDS turrent. I prefer a 40MM objective. I just don't see the difference in light gathering in the 50MM, but I do feel the difference in weight and how they handle in hunting situations. I also prefer 10 power binoculars over 8 power.

One piece of advice I will offer. Spend more than you want on optics. Far better to over spend up front than buy three items before you get what you need. You will be money ahead in the long run and I can attest from personal experience. The worst thing that can happen is when a hunting companion says "What to you think of that bull?" and you can't even find him in your binos/spotter. If you're looking at $500 binoculars, look through some $800 ones before you buy. If you are considering a spotting scope, look through one from Swarovski and judge everything else against it. I did buy a Swarovski spotter as my fourth scope. With the money I spent on #2 and #3, I could have bought a second Sawrovski and been money ahead. If you think you will save up and buy something better next time or "this one is good enough", just put the better unit on a credit card and make the payments as if you were saving up. Good optics will last you a lifetime as long as you give them reasonable care. I carry my binoculars in a Badlands bino system and my spotter in my back pack. I never set them down where rocks can come into contact with them. I use a quality optics cleaning system and follow the directions. My optics have been on many hunts, many more than the average hunter, and have seen every kind of weather, dust storms, snow, rain, temps way below freezing and well over 100. They are as clear and bright as the day they were bought. A good rifle scope is all you need, but a great set of binos and a great spotter is more important. I would also recommend a quality rangefinder, one that will read hard targets out to 1,000 yards or more. You will more than likely never be able to take an ethical 1,000 yard shot, but a 1,000 yard rangefinder will range an animal at 500 yards under less than ideal conditions, and you will want to know when an elk is within 500 yards. You will want to know exactly how much closer you need to get before you start to set up for a shot. Many times I have ranged an animal, then ranged a bush or rock that would put me within my effective range. Now I know where I need to be and I can plan on how to get there. Way better than guessing and moving repeatedly.

Finally, spend a lot of time at the range. Making a clover leaf at 100 yards is not the same as hitting a 14" plate at 600 yards with the scope power dialed up and the range dialed in. When you can be in the kill zone 100% of the time at 100 yards move up to 200. When you can do it at 200, move to 300. When you get past 300, move up in 50 yard increments. Do a little research on long range shooting form and most archers can kill reliably out to 500 yards with enough practice, and many out past that. Just like a 30 yard bow shot is easy when you practice at 60, a 300 yard rifle shot is easy when you practice at 600.

 

[ltdann]

:good post sign:

 

[easymoney]

I completely disagree, and can easily prove it. An 8x32 has an exit pupil of 4mm. The human eye pupil is only about 4mm during pure daylight. But in low light, ie the best glassing times, the human eye can be anywhere from 5-9mm! Why limit yourself with 4mm of exit pupil with your binos when the eye can make use of more? 8x32's will limit you when glassing in all of these scenarios: Long range, low light, and field judging. They will also offer a smaller FOV. They may be right that our eye cannot see a difference in image quality under optimal conditions when comparing a Swarovski 8x32 to a 10x42, but the eye can definitely see a difference in FOV, magnification, and light. Say it's getting dark or it's first light and you're looking at a bull a couple miles away and trying to decide if he's a 320 bull or a 350 bull or something in between... what would you rather be glassing through? The 10x42 of course!

Bigsurarcher is spot on here. The amount of light let in by the objective side of the glass is only part of the equation. The exit pupil size is most important regardless of price of the glass. Get binos that allow you to see in low light, and scopes as well. Simple test is take your gear out at sunset and look away from the sun into the dark, what do you see?
I have some old Zeiss 8x32 binos that have a 6mm exit pupil that allows maximum light into my eye. They are not as good at long distance but excellent at glassing into the trees and shadows at dawn or dusk.

 

[Railguner]

I completely disagree, and can easily prove it. An 8x32 has an exit pupil of 4mm. The human eye pupil is only about 4mm during pure daylight. But in low light, ie the best glassing times, the human eye can be anywhere from 5-9mm! Why limit yourself with 4mm of exit pupil with your binos when the eye can make use of more? 8x32's will limit you when glassing in all of these scenarios: Long range, low light, and field judging. They will also offer a smaller FOV. They may be right that our eye cannot see a difference in image quality under optimal conditions when comparing a Swarovski 8x32 to a 10x42, but the eye can definitely see a difference in FOV, magnification, and light. Say it's getting dark or it's first light and you're looking at a bull a couple miles away and trying to decide if he's a 320 bull or a 350 bull or something in between... what would you rather be glassing through? The 10x42 of course!

HUH? with the 10x42 you still only get 4.2mm. So you've stepped up from 4.0mm to 4.2mm? not a big step. 8x42 will give you over 5mm's of exit pupil and still keep you a more compact size. Also, 10x42 will give you a SMALLER FOV than the 8x42. RG

 

[BigSurArcher]

HUH?

They were talking about 8x32's... And no it's not a big step until you're trying to estimate tine length on the hoof from 1/2 mile at o'dark thirty.