Lightweight 1-4x ?

[Intricater]

That Weaver looks pretty sweet. Whats the reticle look like?

 

[TheGDog]

That Weaver looks pretty sweet. Whats the reticle look like?

Super simple. At the time of purchase it was only like... $189 I think. Looks like they all cost more now.

 

[TheGDog]

I’m completely confused now. I had my mind set on a 1-4 (6) because they are compact and light weight. I’m being told the objective on those scopes are too small for low light conditions, in other words, the last few mins of legal hunting light.

Negative... the lower power scopes stay nice and bright in the view usually far longer into last lite than more powerful scopes because the exit pupil ends up being that much wider.

That's a trick I used in the field a lot. As it kept getting darker and darker, when I have a variable power scope, ya just end up having to inch the power down and down until you bottom out, and generally by then you're past legal shooting light anyway.

 

[Old-Cat]

Negative... the lower power scopes stay nice and bight in the view usually far longer into last lite than more powerful scopes because the exit pupil ends up being that much wider.

That's a trick I used in the field a lot. As it kept getting darker and darker, when I have a variable power scope, ya just end up having to inch the power down and down until you bottom out, and generally by then you're past legal shooting light anyway.

I thought I understood exit pupil. Doesn’t it need to match roughly ones pupil size, at whatever state of dilation it is, in order to transmit enough light to see? This is what has me confused.

BTW, I’m no scoped rifle shooter. Until last year I hunted w an iron sighted pistol for close to 25 years.

 

[Old-Cat]

I have a 1.5-4x or 1-4.5x bushnell banner and like it on a small carbine. Also have 4x and 2-7x on other guns.

Think i like 2-7x the best.

Have red dots too and they work well to about 100 yds. Good for low light/dark.

How are they in fading light?

 

[Old-Cat]

have killed coyotes no problem called in at 30 yards with 4x...minimum I'd be looking for is Leupold fixed 4x33 or 6x36 used, they about 9 oz, I shot a ewe at 170 with 6x36 and would have been happier with 9x or 2.5-8x36 minimum, so moved to 3-9x40 lightweights for the versatility, Trijicon accuPoint is 13.4 oz and man do I like that battery free illuminated green dot...a 1-4 would never leave 4x and always leave me wanting more, might as well just get the Leupold fixed 2.5x at 6.5 oz if you need to be that minimalist, just don't try the Trijicon and that green dot in the woods or that's what you'll buy, you've been warned

How does this do in low light? Also, how about target acquisition in super close, I mean feet?

 

[TheGDog]

I thought I understood exit pupil. Doesn’t it need to match roughly ones pupil size, at whatever state of dilation it is, in order to transmit enough light to see? This is what has me confused.

BTW, I’m no scoped rifle shooter. Until last year I hunted w an iron sighted pistol for close to 25 years.

Reaslitically... your eye should only be able to make use of about 5mm to sometimes 7mm of an exit pupil (if you're young)... however... you have to remember that the exit pupil at the back of that scope has accumulated the light into it from a much bigger surface area to begin with, as well.

Example: Let's say a 1-4x24mm scope. At 1x.. the exit pupil is 24mm. At 4x, the exit pupil is 24mm/4=6mm.

So do you see how as you're going lower and lower into the powers... more and more of the light it does happen to be gathering in front... is then being focus down into your own pupil? (There are some losses as it's transmitted thru the glass though, as you'll see in specs for nicer high-end glass scope the light transmission will be a nice high value like 90-92% light transmission)

As an example of what I'm talking about... go take your spotting scope and look at the moon. When you look at the moon with just your eye... is has a certain amount of brightness to it... but.. when you look at that same moon thru your spotting scope... Wow..you'll instantly be aware of how your eye is now receiving much more brightness pumped at it. Also... have someboedy else look thru that spotting scope.. and you look at how the light falls upon there eye. You'll very clearly be able to see that bright circle of light cast upon their eye region.

Exit pupil math is super easy. Divide the Objective lens width by the magnification power.

Examples:
8x56mm binos... that's 56mm/8 = 7mm Exit Pupil.
8x42mm binos... that's 42mm/8 = 5.25mm Exit Pupil.
10x42mm binos.... that's 42mm/10 = 4.2mm Exit Pupil.
15x56mm binos.... that's 56mm/15 = 3.73mm Exit Pupil.
you get the idea.

 

[TheGDog]

BTW, I concur with that gentleman mentioning a 2x7 scope. For most normal stuff you'd likely do while hunting, you'd likely be fine with a 2-7. Where 2-7 can get tricky is like if you're for example trying to Pop Squeeks (Ground Squirrels) at distances like 100yds and beyond. For a small small target like that, you'll likely find yourself wishing you had more magnification, which is why for a Varmint rig, they're often 4x-12 or 4x-14 type power ranges, just because the target species are smaller, so the extra magnification comes in handy sometimes.

But since you're talking about using the rig for deer. And me making some assumptions here that you're probably not gonna try to stretch it out very far since you said you've been hunting with irons since forever and a day.... I'm sure a 1-4 or 2-7 on a bigger species like a deer would make you plenty happy about to like 300yd or so.

I'd hazard a guess and say when they start getting past like 300yd is when you might find yourself wishing you had more magnification. For example, because of this one open country spot where one year I was seeing them feed at like 700yds up this big DesertHill... since I wanted to be prepared for the subsequent years hunt for the possibility of potentially having them present at those (for me) far distances... I went out and picked up a 3-15x50mm Burris Veracity. Also so the scope could match the magnification on my 15x binos, which I tended to use more out there in that Open Country DesertHills type of terrain type of spot. BUT... that greater magnification and better glass comes with a weight penalty. Good glass is more dense, and thus weighs more overall.

A good thing about like a 1-4 type of scope is that the glass doesn't necessary have to be that upper tier quality to still look great to your eye, since the magnification is lower, so it's not like you're gonna be noticing all these fine details anyway.

 

[Intricater]

While it is true that a larger objective does 'draw' in more light, the quality of the lenses is what Extends the hunting/shooting time, because of greater Resolution. I have a 1-4x Bushnell that just doesn't have the clarity I want under adverse conditions. A lot of years ago I went to and NRA show in Wis. A booth had a Kahles scope that someone had fallen out of a tree with a huge dent in the objective bell. Looking through it you couldn't tell it was damaged and man was it bright, but it was made in Austria, Expensive! It can be difficult to determine where a scope is made and who makes the glass, but if you search online enough you can get a pretty good idea. The other option is to just go to gun/trade shows and look through a lot of scopes and take notes. Not all of the models in a scope line are the same, especially over the years. More variables, why looking through them might be best.
I can't speak to the High End optics, as I find them pricey, but I'm pretty sure that the CRS is every bit as good as most of the Trijicon line as it was made in the same factory with the same glass.

 

[Old-Cat]

Reaslitically... your eye should only be able to make use of about 5mm to sometimes 7mm of an exit pupil (if you're young)... however... you have to remember that the exit pupil at the back of that scope has accumulated the light into it from a much bigger surface area to begin with, as well.

Example: Let's say a 1-4x24mm scope. At 1x.. the exit pupil is 24mm. At 4x, the exit pupil is 24mm/4=6mm.

So do you see how as you're going lower and lower into the powers... more and more of the light it does happen to be gathering in front... is then being focus down into your own pupil? (There are some losses as it's transmitted thru the glass though, as you'll see in specs for nicer high-end glass scope the light transmission will be a nice high value like 90-92% light transmission)

As an example of what I'm talking about... go take your spotting scope and look at the moon. When you look at the moon with just your eye... is has a certain amount of brightness to it... but.. when you look at that same moon thru your spotting scope... Wow..you'll instantly be aware of how your eye is now receiving much more brightness pumped at it. Also... have someboedy else look thru that spotting scope.. and you look at how the light falls upon there eye. You'll very clearly be able to see that bright circle of light cast upon their eye region.

Exit pupil math is super easy. Divide the Objective lens width by the magnification power.

Examples:
8x56mm binos... that's 56mm/8 = 7mm Exit Pupil.
8x42mm binos... that's 42mm/8 = 5.25mm Exit Pupil.
10x42mm binos.... that's 42mm/10 = 4.2mm Exit Pupil.
15x56mm binos.... that's 56mm/15 = 3.73mm Exit Pupil.
you get the idea.

Thanks sooo much for the detailed response?


This is what confuses me. It’s seems a 1-4(6) will gather as much light on a low setting as one’s eye is capable of using? I don’t get why people are telling me they won’t be good for low light conditions?

 

[Rich M]

How are they in fading light?

The Bushnell 1-4.5x has heavy reticle, pretty to see.
The 2-7x is a Viper and is good glass, great in low light
Red dot is more visible in lower light.

The better the glass, the more visibility you get. Example - I have a Vortex Diamondback and it is good 15 minutes after sundown, when the grey starts playing with your vision. A Leupold VX-2 that is good til 30 minutes after. That viper (vx-3 level) is good for about 40 minutes after. Had a Leica ER that was good for pushing 40-60 minutes after sundown.

Most people talk about stuff we/they have little understanding or, others talk about their own experiences, then we have diff situations - 10 minutes after sundown in a cypress swamp is much diff than 10 minutes after sundown on the sun facing side of the mountain or open field.

The 1 power gives a larger light area than your eye can handle. The quality of the glass will determine how long you keep seeing details.

 

[ETtikka]

Swfa 1-4 on a tikka 308 for me

Also have Leupold 1.5-4, but the swfa is superior in every way except weight

 

[TheGDog]

Part of the variables you'll see and need to make decisions on are... that scopes with a higher quality of glass, which transmits thru a higher percentage of the light that comes into it... 1) are heavier, because the glass is more dense, and thus.... 2) costs more. 3.) A larger tube diameter, again to allow more light overall to pass thru it. 4.) A larger objective diameter.

If your goal is a reasonably lighter weight optic, that doesn't need to be too high in power... but you want the best bang for buck in terms of you still being able to see a critter sneaking in during last-lite... some of the things you'll need to do is possibly be willing to pay for a nicer grade of glass..... buy a bigger overall tube diameter... and consider a wider and wider objective end.

As an example.... at first on my AR... I had a Vortex Crossfire II 2-7x33mm. But... I found that during that last-lite period... it felt like I had to drop and drop and drop the magnification down correlating to how the ambient light was diminishing, at a pretty rapidly degrading pace. And it didn't give me enough time during that last-light period in this particular place I was setup at.

So, not wanting to spend a lot, and me being Ok with adding some weight, I instead opted for their 3-9x50mm Crossfire II. Now... it's certainly NOT primo glass, BUT... since I was OK with bumping up to 50mm... you've got a bigger opening for letting light in (and also a slightly larger FOV that your eye is met with, which I like because my vision sucks now since I'm older). So... I viewed this as the "cheapie way" to get me more minutes of viable ability to spot that critter creeping in to the caller. While still providing a low enough minimum magnification that I can do up close rapid target acquisition reasonably well.

So like, for an ultimate CQB type of optic that'll give you primo amount of time during last-lite.... in a no-holds barred, money-is-no-object scenario... you'd maybe buy a primo glassed 1-4 optic with a big ol' honking 34mm tube. BUT.... that's likely gonna cost you more than the rifle, ya see what I'm saying?

So you've got some decisions to deliberate on here.

 

[ETtikka]

It is hard to justify the cost of really nice glass that will only be used for short ranges because the difference is so negligible when compared to longer ranges

 

[TheGDog]

BUT... that difference shows itself as it gets darker and darker! That's the dealio.

So my lil choice of 3-9x50mm.... while "better" than the 2-7x33mm of same lower grade glass... will not be as good, in terms of how long I'm provided with usable brightness of image and sharpness of image... as the upper tier glassed, big tubed, low-power optic would be. But that's Ok, for my needs it seems to be good enough.

But for me... I'm in SoCal, so it's not like I'm roaming around in some truly "dark-timber" forest like in some locale back east, or, say the Pacific NorthWest. Or say a thick swamp. So for my needs, it's fine.

 

[Brook.Trout]

It's hard to beat the Leupold 1.5-4x scopes for weight and decent optics. I had a VX-II 1.5-4x on my .308 for years and now have one on my AR to keep it as light as possible while still having versatile optics. The Freedom line should be the current offering for that package.

I’m running a 1.5-5 vx3 and it’s real nice, gun shop here used to build lightweight mountain rifles with these scopes

 

[Rich M]

It is hard to justify the cost of really nice glass that will only be used for short ranges because the difference is so negligible when compared to longer ranges

BUT... that difference shows itself as it gets darker and darker! That's the dealio.

So my lil choice of 3-9x50mm.... while "better" than the 2-7x33mm of same lower grade glass... will not be as good, in terms of how long I'm provided with usable brightness of image and sharpness of image... as the upper tier glassed, big tubed, low-power optic would be. But that's Ok, for my needs it seems to be good enough.

But for me... I'm in SoCal, so it's not like I'm roaming around in some truly "dark-timber" forest like in some locale back east, or, say the Pacific NorthWest. Or say a thick swamp. So for my needs, it's fine.

In the Vortex Crossfire example, using same exact scope parameters, a Diamondback would show more in low light. And a Viper would show even more than the Diamondback. Crossfire is about $150, Diamondback about $250, Viper about $550. Of course these numbers came from the flying monkey in the room. You do need to know your budget. A $100 diff in a scope is notable, the pricier one either has a better brand name or better components.

And you can no longer get a Viper in 2-7x. The push for cheap scopes has changed a lot of the landscape and I'm just not familiar with it. I did buy a Viper and a Diamondback but for $100 would always choose the Diamondback over the Crossfire. And the only reason I got the Diamondback is due to a buddy having one and looking thru it.

I am in love with the circle plex style reticles - the circle draws your eye and bingo-bongo your gun is going off and the critter dead. My Viper and 2 of my Bushnell scopes have this reticle or something similar. It is hard not to put the crosshairs on the boiler room in close quarters with this kind of scope - you'll often find it on shotgun and ML scopes.



Last note - check the weight of the scopes. I'd rather carry a 3-9 than a 2-7 if I might shoot 200-250 yards. If it is like 6 oz diff - can you even tell? Maybe just put 2 rounds in the magazine instead of having 5+1 in the chamber...

 

[CCH]

6 ounces is a lot in scope weight, and definitely a lot when you start adding up all the other ounces. It can also be a lot in rifle balance with lighter weight guns. I've stuck with Leupolds because of the weight to quality ratio. However, the current trend is towards 30mm tubes and dialing, so I'm a bit old school in that regard.

Curious as to why a 3-9x is necessary for 200-250 yard shots? My highest power scope ever is 2.5-8 (that was a big jump for me) and I've used 1-4x, 1.75-6x and similar. Haven't run into a problem.

When it comes to brightness, quality does come into play in a big way, but so does exit pupil and that is related to power. Higher power scopes need larger objectives for brightness (we'll leave quality out, but that's probably most important.) For a bino analogy, I'm totally happy with good 8x30/32 binos for brightness, but want 10x42s to get the same. If you throw a pair of Swaro 10x32s at me, I won't drop them though.

 

[TxxAgg]

Product Description

Product Description | Camera Land NY

cameralandny.com

For set it and forget it this works. Don't let the "rimfire" scare you. I have shot this to 300 yds with a 30-30 easy peasy

 

[Old-Cat]

Well, I borrowed a friends 1-6 PST vortex tonight, its made in the Philippines and it did just fine all the way through legal light. German or quality Japanese glass should be even better, not that’s it’s necessary.

Interestingly enough I liked it on 2x rather than 1x all the way through complete darkness? That could be the glass, sharpness dropped way off on 1x. But whatever, it will do what I hoped.

Thanks for all the input.