40mm vs 50mm objective for hunting scope.

[Reed104R]

If the scopes are otherwise identical, the 50mm will be a little brighter right before dark. The difference is minimal and not worth the added height in most cases. Generally, I say get a quality 40-42mm and you are set.

 

[KoolBreeze]

Exactly. I will never own another scope that isn't 56mm and that is strictly due to my hunting conditions. My thick hardwoods will block out the sun before legal time. So, during legal times, it gets tough to see, much less when legal time ends.

Do you need high magnification in the thick timber? Just curious because all else being equal the 56mm objective shouldn't offer any advantage over say a 44mm or 50mm at low magnification, according to my understanding. Never owned one though.

 

[Dented]

The 56mm I own is my first over 42mm. Absolutely love the scope, but I won't be buying another one. I had to look at it for 2 week's before I could mount it. The shear size of it was unnerving!

 

[sdupontjr]

Do you need high magnification in the thick timber? Just curious because all else being equal the 56mm objective shouldn't offer any advantage over say a 44mm or 50mm at low magnification, according to my understanding. Never owned one though.

I rarely mag up to 16x. I bought the S&B Polar 56 because I wanted one of if not the best low light optic that I could afford. There is a long discussion on this site as well as other sites about how much light the human eye can actually pull in. Don't quote me but i believe the human eye can only dilate 7mm. So, no matter if you have a 76mm objective, the eye can only take in so much. I can only speak from my experience, but to my eyes, there is a difference in 40, 44 when compared to a 56. Even on low magnification. Science and light transmission of scopes may say otherwise.


And yes Dented, they are big. Here is a pic of my low light setup. Tikka T3 308 with the 4-6x56 S&B Polar.

 

[MThuntr]

I like 44mm but it varies. If you're buying a good quality scope with good glass then it's likely not that big of a deal at least to my eyes

 

[KoolBreeze]

I rarely mag up to 16x. I bought the S&B Polar 56 because I wanted one of if not the best low light optic that I could afford. There is a long discussion on this site as well as other sites about how much light the human eye can actually pull in. Don't quote me but i believe the human eye can only dilate 7mm. So, no matter if you have a 76mm objective, the eye can only take in so much. I can only speak from my experience, but to my eyes, there is a difference in 40, 44 when compared to a 56. Even on low magnification. Science and light transmission of scopes may say otherwise.


And yes Dented, they are big. Here is a pic of my low light setup. Tikka T3 308 with the 4-6x56 S&B Polar.

Ah, you're looking through a S&B Polar! I here they are fantastic. Maybe some day.

 

[ArcherAdam]

I am sitting at 44mm now and don't think I can go bigger. I do walk and hike alot and though it may make little difference, it just seems nit as nimble for me. Now I went from 3×9×40 vx2 to a 3x15x44 vx5 so the difference in clarity and brightness was significant.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[sdupontjr]

Ah, you're looking through a S&B Polar! I here they are fantastic. Maybe some day.

On my 120 acres of personal property, the timber is so thick that it will block out the sun way before legal time ends here in Louisiana. Now if you walk out on a powerline or open area, plenty light. However, in my oaks here in the south, sometimes at legal time, you can't see 10 feet due to these old thick oaks. Now later in the year, when leaves start to fall, some sun/moon light is let in and and it gets better, but not by much.

Thus me looking into the Polar. Because after hunting this property for over 40 years, I finally decided enough was enough. Now I can sit in my cedar box stand well after shooting time just looking around with that illuminated dot. I do hunt other places as well, thus me getting the 4-16 for more upper magnification. We make several trips over the years to southwest Texas where shots and terrain is much different. Now hunting out there, I probably wouldn't need a 56 due to the terrain is nothing but mesquite trees, cactus and open headlands. But In south Louisiana hardwoods, you can bet when you stop and talk to "most", not all, they will be sporting a 56 and if not, a 50.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Like I said, just what i heard. I think it was on back country podcast. I prefer a 44mm so I can get a lower mount and better cheek weld.

The difference between a 44mm and 56mm is 12mm. All other things being equal, you'd have to be 6mm higher on the stock if using a 56. When I hold my fingers 6mm apart, I don't see that making any difference for me.

 

[doc holiday13]

A high end 40 or 42 mm objective will be indescernable from a 50 or 56mm. On a sub $800 scope.. yeah it'll show

 

[KoolBreeze]

On my 120 acres of personal property, the timber is so thick that it will block out the sun way before legal time ends here in Louisiana. Now if you walk out on a powerline or open area, plenty light. However, in my oaks here in the south, sometimes at legal time, you can't see 10 feet due to these old thick oaks. Now later in the year, when leaves start to fall, some sun/moon light is let in and and it gets better, but not by much.

Thus me looking into the Polar. Because after hunting this property for over 40 years, I finally decided enough was enough. Now I can sit in my cedar box stand well after shooting time just looking around with that illuminated dot. I do hunt other places as well, thus me getting the 4-16 for more upper magnification. We make several trips over the years to southwest Texas where shots and terrain is much different. Now hunting out there, I probably wouldn't need a 56 due to the terrain is nothing but mesquite trees, cactus and open headlands. But In south Louisiana hardwoods, you can bet when you stop and talk to "most", not all, they will be sporting a 56 and if not, a 50.

I hunt mostly in a similar situation here in MS hardwoods but I almost never zoom above 8x in a hunting situation. Given a 44mm objective, that would be a 5.5mm exit pupil. So, I'm not sure I'd see much of a difference going to a larger objective, all else being equal. I bet the S&B Polar glass would be a significant upgrade though.

I do like additional magnification for target practice but don't do that in low light. I think someone taking long range shots at game in low light situations is where the larger objective scopes would really shine. Or on game where you need to zoom in to get a better look at your quarry.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Anything over 42 in high quality scopes is completely unnecessary IMO. Similar to throwing muzzle breaks on 6.5’s.