Author Topic: 40 or 50mm (Read 688 times)

buckslayer · « **on:** October 12, 2004, 08:13:07 AM »

is the the 50 mm scopes alot brighter in the last LEAGAL lights of shooting???. will a 40mm do ok?thanks for any info!!!!
~ :twisted: buckslayer

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 12, 2004, 11:32:49 AM »

I prefer the 50mm myself, they seem to let in a little more light than the 40mm. JMHO.

iiibbb · « **Reply #2 on:** October 12, 2004, 12:09:14 PM »

Technically it lets in 50% more light. If you have bad eyes, maybe it'd make a difference, but if you're shooting at light levels that are "legal" then I don't think there'll be a difference.

Pick up a pair of binoculars... the difference between 40 and 50 isn't noticable until it is quite dark out.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 12, 2004, 01:31:57 PM »

Quote from: iiibbb

Technically it lets in 50% more light. If you have bad eyes, maybe it'd make a difference, but if you're shooting at light levels that are "legal" then I don't think there'll be a difference.

Pick up a pair of binoculars... the difference between 40 and 50 isn't noticable until it is quite dark out.

When you are in the woods, the light level is different than hunting on an open field. So I don't think it has anything to do with "Legal" light levels. But you are correct about letting more light in.

Coal River Rat · « **Reply #4 on:** October 12, 2004, 03:51:04 PM »

Check out the Nikon Monarch 3.3-10 x 44mm, good compromise between the two lense sizes-great glass at a good price. Another great scope I've got is a Leupold 6 x 42mm, this scope has great low light performance, and the same multi-coating 4 that's on the Vari-X IIIs, plus 4" of eye relief, in my opinion, it is one of of the best scope values on the market, this scope is frequently compared to scopes that cost twice as much on low light performance. One of the reasons I like these two scopes is that you can use medium height mounts(with sporter weight barrels) so the scope is not so high that you have too strain your neck when shooting(I'm only 5'8" tall, so that can be an issue with high or x-tra high mounts that are needed with 50mm objective lenses). I would say the quality of the glass and coatings mean more than the objective lense size. Just my 2 cents. Good Shooting!

jeff · « **Reply #5 on:** October 13, 2004, 09:29:00 AM »

Had a 50mm and sold it after a year or so, I just did'n like having to Turkey neck while using it. I like the scope mounted lower and with the likes of B&L/Bushnell Elites things look pretty bright to me.

Coal River has it figured right, "the quality of the glass and coatings mean more than the objective lense size".

Bullseye · « **Reply #6 on:** October 13, 2004, 02:34:25 PM »

I will take quality glass and coatings over a huge objective lens. Any quality scope I have ever used with a 32 mm objective or up is more than adequate for legal hunting light.

Thebear_78 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 13, 2004, 07:05:27 PM »

I think a lot of it depends on what power the scope is. Lower magnification scopes don't require as big an objective to let in all the light that your eye is able to utilize.

jeff · « **Reply #8 on:** October 15, 2004, 05:10:06 PM »

B&L 6-24x 40mm is plenty bright thru the entire range. I usually run it cranked to the max all day long.

Burris Signature 8-32x 44mm is a ditto sometimes it's almost too bright. Then again maybe punching paper from a bench with a roof overhead is different.

Thebear_78 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 16, 2004, 12:19:08 AM »

It seems to me that I read someplace that there is a multiple of 5 is all the light you can see with the human eye anyway. So a 10x50 binocular is the most light your eyes can use with that magnification. Anything in the 4-5 range are good but when you get to the 3 and lower you notice that the scope is getting dark. With that logic a 4x scope would need at lease a 20mm objective to get all the light you would need. So anything 9x and above would really see advantage with a 50mm objective over a 40mm.

To test this I did some comparing with some quality glass that I have on hand. My 8x42 binoculars are as brite as my buddies 10x50s and my 1.5-5x20 leupold VXIII is as bright on 3 or 4 power as my 2-7x33 at the same power, and thats a 40% bigger objective. I know my test isn't very accurate but I couldn't notice a difference and either could my buddy.

I don't know how accurate my statement is but it really seems to make a lot of sense to me.

iiibbb · « **Reply #10 on:** October 16, 2004, 01:35:39 AM »

I think that ratio applies to binoculars telescopes, and spotting scopes, but I'm not sure about rifle scopes. The Objective/MAgnification in binocs will give you the exit pupil size. In low light the human eye's pupil expands to about 5mm, in pitch dark it will expand to 7mm. You basically don't want the exit pupil to be smaller than how much your eye's pupil has expanded.

However, rifle scopes definitely seem to have larger exit pupils at the eye piece.

hh4064 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 15, 2004, 07:41:31 AM »

I have messed around with this for a few years. I always go back to the same thing. I like the 50mm. I believe that it lets in a little more light. One night I brought along a 40mm vari III to really test it
It was dark enough that with the naked eye I could not see the deer. With the 40 mm I could see them standing there. With the 50 mm I then could see that there was a buck with them too.......................

robk · « **Reply #12 on:** December 16, 2004, 09:57:23 PM »

been looking at the bushnell 3200 elite and the burris full field and they are both at 95%light transmission so they will gather much light and i am looking at the 50mm but i have looked thru the 40mm and i was able to see very well. both were good scope and great prices
rob k