Credo Objective Size: 56 vs 42?

[duffman]

I’m planning a 300wsm hunting rifle (Tikka of course) and have pretty much settled on a Trijicon Credo 2.5-15x56. Just from reading, seems the Credo a great option if you are ok with SFP.

I’ve not seen a comparison between the 56 and the 42. Opinions/experiences?

Really I’m looking for some first hand experience if one or the other is easier to get behind or one has issues (sometimes happens between variants) etc.

On paper differences:
- Bigger exit pupil: Not sure how much this matters since on the high end, I prob won’t be taking a shot at 15x when low light, I dial back. On low end both are over 8mm which I’ve heard after that is diminishing returns?
- FOV: I’ll take as much as I can get, but is it worth the objective size? I’m thinking it probably is since I like my optics a little higher since I have a big face. Less tradeoff to worry about.

This would be my first SFP in many years, but this is primarily for eastern whitetail, so it won’t hold me back. I’ll dial for anything over 300 (which is rare).

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

They will both take you to last legal shooting time under a canopy on a cloudy evening. So, as you have expressed, it's those other factors. No direct experience with either. I do have 2 Credos and one Tenmile. I can say that every Trijicon that I have ever used or piddled with was easy to get behind and had a good eye box.

The difference in specs on the scopes is largely inconsequentially different, with one exception. The 56 has a half inch less eye relief on the high end. I wan more than the 2.8 inches it offers. The 42 has 3.4. I have come to realize that I am an eye relief snob, so this may not matter to you. Some may point out that ,all other things being equal, the 56 will require mounting 7mm higher. That wouldn't be an issue for me.

Trijicon also offers excellent illumination control. On the lowest setting in dark conditions you will not get washout.

You'll end up with a great scope no matter the choice.

 

[duffman]

They will both take you to last legal shooting time under a canopy on a cloudy evening. So, as you have expressed, it's those other factors. No direct experience with either. I do have 2 Credos and one Tenmile. I can say that every Trijicon that I have ever used or piddled with was easy to get behind and had a good eye box.

The difference in specs on the scopes is largely inconsequentially different, with one exception. The 56 has a half inch less eye relief on the high end. I wan more than the 2.8 inches it offers. The 42 has 3.4. I have come to realize that I am an eye relief snob, so this may not matter to you. Some may point out that ,all other things being equal, the 56 will require mounting 7mm higher. That wouldn't be an issue for me.

Trijicon also offers excellent illumination control. On the lowest setting in dark conditions you will not get washout.

You'll end up with a great scope no matter the choice.

Good point about the eye relief. I’ve been in awkward shooting positions where more eye relief would’ve made a shot easier, especially when wearing glasses.

 

[Buzby]

They will both take you to last legal shooting time under a canopy on a cloudy evening. So, as you have expressed, it's those other factors. No direct experience with either. I do have 2 Credos and one Tenmile. I can say that every Trijicon that I have ever used or piddled with was easy to get behind and had a good eye box.

The difference in specs on the scopes is largely inconsequentially different, with one exception. The 56 has a half inch less eye relief on the high end. I wan more than the 2.8 inches it offers. The 42 has 3.4. I have come to realize that I am an eye relief snob, so this may not matter to you. Some may point out that ,all other things being equal, the 56 will require mounting 7mm higher. That wouldn't be an issue for me.

Trijicon also offers excellent illumination control. On the lowest setting in dark conditions you will not get washout.

You'll end up with a great scope no matter the choice.

How do the 10mi and the credo compare? I would assume the 10mi has a bit better build quality, turrets etc.

 

[KenLee]

Trijicon has monkeys measure eye relief on 56mm Accupoints. I've never found eye relief lacking on the boomers I have them mounted on. I'd estimate 3.3 inches on max magnification, regardless of what they put in print

 

[duffman]

How do the 10mi and the credo compare? I would assume the 10mi has a bit better build quality, turrets etc.

I’d be interested in hearing another first hand opinion on this as well. From my research it seems they are the same in all the above.

 

[duffman]

Trijicon has monkeys measure eye relief on 56mm Accupoints. I've never found eye relief lacking on the boomers I have them mounted on. I'd estimate 3.3 inches on max magnification, regardless of what they put in print

I wonder if the 42 is more than listed too? I’ll probably go with 56mm with this in mind, it’s close to my razor gen2 which has always felt good to me.

 

[EMAZ]

I’d tend to lean more towards the 42mm; mounts lower, weighs less, will aesthetically look more proportional on the 22” tikka barrel in that 300wsm than a big 56mm bell

 

[Marshfly]

How do the 10mi and the credo compare? I would assume the 10mi has a bit better build quality, turrets etc.

I own both. They are functionally the same with the exception of FFP vs SFP.

People have remarked that the elevation turret is “mushy.” I just bought a new Tenmile from the Optics planet sale and could compare it to my 8 month old Tenmile. The new one was slightly mushy but a minute of playing with it, (spinning it back and forth), made it just like my “old” one with very positive clicks.

I think it’s just assembly grease that has to settle in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[General RE LEE]

Take the objective diameter and divide by 5. The result is the magnification power you will still have an exit pupil of 5mm, which is a good average pupil size in low light. Basically the 56mm is only an advantage if you are going to zoom higher than 8x in fading light.

Personally, I keep my magnification 5-6x on shots 4-500 yards to get a big exit pupil, see the hit and reduce visible shake. In my case, there is no benefit to a bigger objective if I’m not zooming way out there in low light.

 

[Erev803]

How does the credo and credo hx do at last light?

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

How do the 10mi and the credo compare? I would assume the 10mi has a bit better build quality, turrets etc.

I haven't been able to discern any difference in them. I have only taken them to the range to get them sighted in. They adjusted as they are supposed to. Optical quality is great, Eye relief is good. Illumination control is outstanding. They are easy to get behind.

 

[duffman]

Take the objective diameter and divide by 5. The result is the magnification power you will still have an exit pupil of 5mm, which is a good average pupil size in low light. Basically the 56mm is only an advantage if you are going to zoom higher than 8x in fading light.

Personally, I keep my magnification 5-6x on shots 4-500 yards to get a big exit pupil, see the hit and reduce visible shake. In my case, there is no benefit to a bigger objective if I’m not zooming way out there in low light.

That’s interesting, I didn’t know you could just divide by the desired exit pupil like that.

 

[sconnieVLP]

How does the credo and credo hx do at last light?

I have a 4-16x50 and a 2.5-15x42, both will get you to legal light without an issue. Illum settings are excellent and won’t wash the view out as it gets darker.