Trijicon 2.5-10x56

[prm]

If you believe that article where zoom was measured and they stated zoom can be 3-5% off, and apply that to the exit pupil equation it would explain a lot, though not all. I wonder if using published eye relief to calculate actual zoom works? Probably not, but would be interesting to measure.

 

[ChrisAU]

If you believe that article where zoom was measured and they stated zoom can be 3-5% off, and apply that to the exit pupil equation it would explain a lot, though not all. I wonder if using published eye relief to calculate actual zoom works? Probably not, but would be interesting to measure.

Using the Trijicon 2.5-15x42 as an example, if that were the case, then they are off by over 50%. 10.67mm to 16.8mm. Massive difference. It is not a tolerance error, it is a design limitation with high zoom ratio scopes, for some reason or another. Its easy to see the difference. I got rid of a Swarovski Z8i 2.3-18x56 specifically because it was so damn hard to get behind. Same with a Zeiss V6 5-30x50. Using the classic equation with the Swaro specifically should result in an absolutely massive exit pupil, even if the zoom specs were off by large magnitudes. But, here we are with Swaro stating themselves that the exit pupil of that scope at 2.3 is 8.1mm. Its just something I guess they don't want us to talk about - high zoom ratios sell scopes, but they actually make them harder to use, especially for hunters.

 

[prm]

I agree the Trijicon is way off. That’s why I said it may explain some things, but not all. But over 10mm is still very usable.