Trijicon 2.5-10x56

[prm]

Anyone have experience with any of the 56mm obj scopes? Is there a real world difference in low light? I fully understand exit pupil and all that theory. Asking about real world impressions at first or last light vs. a 36, 40, or 42mm obj scope.

edit: I have a 2-10x36 and it’s quite good in low light. Never looked through a 56.

 

[BjornF16]

PRM...I don't have a Trijicon 56mm, but I have a NF 56mm. It makes a difference over other 42mm scopes. I haven't compared to my relatively new Trijicon 2-10x36 directly...

 

[prm]

PRM...I don't have a Trijicon 56mm, but I have a NF 56mm. It makes a difference over other 42mm scopes. I haven't compared to my relatively new Trijicon 2-10x36 directly...

Thanks. Good to know. I have my 2-10x36 on a Barrett Fieldcraft in 6.5 CM. I’m really starting to like that scope. I saw the x56 and thought that might be a great choice for my Kimber in 338 Fed. The x56 is SFP vice the x36 being FFP. Perhaps a little heavier than I’d prefer, but may really be nice at first and last light. The x36 really isn’t bad at all in low light so I was curious whether the x56 would be much of an improvement. I would not be against getting another 36 for the Kimber.

 

[BjornF16]

I've been shooting the x36 on my Tikka 6.5CM a lot lately...I was a little skeptical when I first got the scope (having really liked the 2.5-15x42)...but it has really grown on me. May be my favorite scope right now

 

[ChrisAU]

I'm really kicking around the idea of grabbing a 2.5-10x56 Credo to put on my 280 AI where my 2.5-15x42 currently resides for a few reasons - green illumination, thicker reticle (maybe?), improved low light performance, and a less sensitive eye box. This is my do it all rifle, which 90%+ is Eastern whitetail hunting. All of those would be positives. I could then move my 2.5-15x42 to a 6.5 PRC that needs glass.

Looking at exit pupil specs, the 56 kicks the 42mm's ass. At 2.5x the 56mm has an exit pupil of 16.26mm while the 42mm is 10.67mm. Another translation is the 56mm exit pupil at 2.5x has an area of 207.65 square mm, while the 42mm's is 89.42 square mm - so the 56 is well over twice the size of the 42.

I prefer the weight and aesthetics of the 42mm, but I think in use the 56mm would be much more user friendly.

Matter of fact, screw it. Just ordered one off Amazon with the green reticle for $695 with tax...had been in my wish list with a fluctuating price. Cheaper than I could get it anywhere else. Should be here Thursday. Will do a thorough comparison. Feels dirty, like I'm cheating on my 42mm that I like so much...I just think it could definitely address the minor shortcomings of the 42mm for my use.

 

[prm]

I moved my 2.5-15x42 Credo to my 26” heavy barreled .308. It needed a scope. The x36 is a little finicky when it comes to focus, and I don't know if going to x56 helps or hurts. They did change from 2 to 2.5 on the low end, so who knows. Let us know what you think.

You must have got the only one at that price on Amazon! Well done!

 

[BCD]

I've not used the 56mm version but just ordered the 2.5-15 x 42 mostly for western hunting to top my 300 WSM. I hope I like it.

 

[BjornF16]

I just checked...can't find the deal you did on that x56

 

[ChrisAU]

I moved my 2.5-15x42 Credo to my 26” heavy barreled .308. It needed a scope. The x36 is a little finicky when it comes to focus, and I don't know if going to x56 helps or hurts. They did change from 2 to 2.5 on the low end, so who knows. Let us know what you think.

You must have got the only one at that price on Amazon! Well done!

I just checked...can't find the deal you did on that x56

Yep I actually ordered one from them a little cheaper a few weeks ago and then cancelled it...if you add these to your wish list and watch them, they'll go down. I got a Tenmile from them cheaper than anyone else would do last year too.

 

[gbflyer]

I think a healthy eye goes from 2.5mm - 8mm pupil diameter. Anything outside of that really is useless. As crappy as my eyes are getting I am wanting an 80mm obj. Haha.

 

[ChrisAU]

I think a healthy eye goes from 2.5mm - 8mm pupil diameter. Anything outside of that really is useless. As crappy as my eyes are getting I am wanting an 80mm obj. Haha.

That's right, but two caveats when applying that to the specs I quoted earlier if someone (not you, just talking in general) thinks oh well 8mm at minimum mag is all I need then - 1, the bigger the exit pupil the easier it is to line up your eye. You have much more freedom to move your head around. Much easier to get a clear sight picture quickly, or in an awkward position. 2, comparing specs at 10x magnification (chose that for ease of math) may make this seem more relevant. Lets say your pupil has dilated to 7mm at dusk. The 56mm model will have an exit pupil of 5.33mm (22.4 sq mm). The 42mm meanwhile at 10x will be 4.27mm (14.32 sq mm) - your eye will be getting an image right at 50% larger with the 56mm.

 

[prm]

All good. As mentioned in the first post, I’m really interested in hearing from someone comparing a smaller Obj to a 56 in low light. As apples to apples as possible in terms of glass quality. What is the actual difference to the user in that scenario? Ease of use, ability to see twigs in LOS, identify aimpoint, see little tiny spikes so I don’t shoot a spike when intending to shoot doe, etc. If there is no tangible benefit to the x56 I’d happily get another 2-10x36.

 

[Formidilosus]

All good. As mentioned in the first post, I’m really interested in hearing from someone comparing a smaller Obj to a 56 in low light. As apples to apples as possible in terms of glass quality. What is the actual difference to the user in that scenario? Ease of use, ability to see twigs in LOS, identify aimpoint, see little tiny spikes so I don’t shoot a spike when intending to shoot doe, etc. If there is no tangible benefit to the x56 I’d happily get another 2-10x36.

The tangible benefit given equal IQ, is that the larger objective allows you to turn the power up in low light and still have the same image brightness, which more power will show more detail.

For instance, the S&B Klassik 8x56mm absolutely flogs the Klassik 6x42mm in low light resolution even though both have the same exit pupil and glass quality.

 

[prm]

Thanks. I‘ve tended to dial up the zoom to get the desired detail in low light in spite of exit pupil. Having more zoom for equal image brightness would be beneficial. Picking a shot at first/last light with a cloudy sky on an elk in the dark timber with all the small fir/spruce branches is really where I might see some advantage. Not a super high odds of realizing a benefit, but why not have the capability when there is very little drawback. Older eyes don’t work quite as well too…

 

[Formidilosus]

Thanks. I‘ve tended to dial up the zoom to get the desired detail in low light in spite of exit pupil. Having more zoom for equal image brightness would be beneficial. Picking a shot at first/last light with a cloudy sky on an elk in the dark timber with all the small fir/spruce branches is really where I might see some advantage. Not a super high odds of realizing a benefit, but why not have the capability when there is very little drawback. Older eyes don’t work quite as well too…

Yes sir. The higher powers and larger objectives are quite common in countries that allow night hunting but no artificial illumination- where shooting is generally in forest and close. If I could get an 8x56mm scope with good reticle and turrets that work…. That’d be what I used for the vast, vast majority of hunting big game.

 

[JEC75]

I put a Trijicon 2.5-10X56 Accupoint on my 20" Ridgeline in 308 for deer hunting late afternoons on food plots this last season. It gave me an extra 10 minutes of being able to shoot over my 3-9X40 Accupoint. Both have the green dot. I have never been a fan of big objectives, but it definitely made a difference. The ability to be able to go up to 8 power and still have full exit pupil capabilities was the key for me.

 

[Wapiti1]

I've used the 2.5-10X56 Trijicon quite a lot in the evening and at night. It's one of the best of the low light options. The dimmer tritium dot is really nice. You're going to pay a lot more if you want a better scope in dim light, IMO.

Jeremy

 

[prm]

I’ll say one thing, Trijicon has a rather convoluted line of scopes. The good news is you can probably find what you want. Other than inventory, they are no doubt saving some money by making so many common components.
Just in 2.5-10x56, they have the following:

• Accupoint: Triangle Post (red, yellow, green), Duplex (yellow or green), Mil-Dot (yellow or green) All Tritium/fiber.
• Credo: MRAD (red or green)
• Credo HX: MOA (red or green), Duplex (red or green)

 

[ChrisAU]

Got the 2.5-10x56 in today, last day of whitetail season here and I'm going to try for one more doe this afternoon. I'm going to put it in it's neoprene sleeve and put it in my pack and compare it to my 2.5-15x42 at dusk, hopefully looking at a piled up doe at around 250 yards ha.

 

[prm]

Got the 2.5-10x56 in today, last day of whitetail season here and I'm going to try for one more doe this afternoon. I'm going to put it in it's neoprene sleeve and put it in my pack and compare it to my 2.5-15x42 at dusk, hopefully looking at a piled up doe at around 250 yards ha.

Any initial thoughts on ease of focus (reticle and image). I find the 2-10x36 a little picky. I can get it fine, just touchy.
Look forward to hearing comparison with 2.5-15. I was comparing that to my 2-10x36 last night.