ZeroTech TRACE ADV 3-18×44 FFP Shoot2Hunt

[JCMCUBIC]

I'm not sure what part of what I posted you are responding to, here. I understand 2-12 and 3-18 have a 6x zoom ratio.

But that's precisely my point/question. If the zoom ratio, turrets, erectors, illumination setup, objective size, main tube size are all the same, where does it lose 25% of its weight? And why is 2 on the low end better than 3? What do you gain?

Smaller objective is likely. 2-12 is fine with me, but 1.5-9x36 is what I thought might be the route to go. It would be more compact going from 44 to 36 on the objective, keeping the 6x erector, and still maintaining a 4mm exit pupil at the highest power.

I'm fine with dropping to a 5x zoom ration at 2-10, 4x at 2-8, or keeping the 6x at 1.5-9. Whatever works best to get the reticle in a reliable, lightweight (<=20 oz), compact FFP scope.

 

[dårlig jeger]

Smaller objective is likely. 2-12 is fine with me, but 1.5-9x36 is what I thought might be the route to go. It would be more compact going from 44 to 36 on the objective, keeping the 6x erector, and still maintaining a 4mm exit pupil at the highest power.

I'm fine with dropping to a 5x zoom ration at 2-10, 4x at 2-8, or keeping the 6x at 1.5-9. Whatever works best to get the reticle in a reliable, lightweight (<=20 oz), compact FFP scope.

Dropping to a 1.5-9x36 makes sense if you're trying to get under 20 ounces.

I was just trying to make sense of the clamoring for a 2-12x. Even if you dropped to a 40mm objective and shed a few ounces, I don't think it makes sense. The point i was trying to make is that it's effectively the same scope as the 3-18.

 

[ChrisAU]

Smaller objective is likely. 2-12 is fine with me, but 1.5-9x36 is what I thought might be the route to go. It would be more compact going from 44 to 36 on the objective, keeping the 6x erector, and still maintaining a 4mm exit pupil at the highest power.

I'm fine with dropping to a 5x zoom ration at 2-10, 4x at 2-8, or keeping the 6x at 1.5-9. Whatever works best to get the reticle in a reliable, lightweight (<=20 oz), compact FFP scope.

Careful, you’ve found one of the biggest draw backs for high magnification erectors. The exit pupil on the 3-18 is only 6mm at 3x and 2.4mm at 18x.

Looking at it for the 20th time, I really hope that spec is wrong for the exit pupil at 3x and is a typo? I know it’s not 14.67, but surely not 6mm? @Formidilosus @Ryan Avery

 

[dårlig jeger]

Careful, you’ve found one of the biggest draw backs for high magnification erectors. The exit pupil on the 3-18 is only 6mm at 3x and 2.4mm at 18x.

Looking at it for the 20th time, I really hope that spec is wrong for the exit pupil at 3x and is a typo? I know it’s not 14.67, but surely not 6mm? @Formidilosus @Ryan Avery

Isn't exit pupil just objective size/magnification power? So 44/3=14.67. It doesn't drop below 6mm EP until 8x. A 2-12×40 goes below 6mm at 7x.

 

[ChrisAU]

Isn't exit pupil just objective size/magnification power? So 44/3=14.67. It doesn't drop below 6mm EP until 8x. A 2-12×40 goes below 6mm at 7x.

No, that formula does not work for 4x+ erectors. Other optical compromises restrict it much further. Go look at the specs for any scope out there. NF NX8 2.5-20 is 7.1/2.6 low/high for example.

 

[dårlig jeger]

No, that formula does not work for 4x+ erectors. Other optical compromises restrict it much further. Go look at the specs for any scope out there. NF NX8 2.5-20 is 7.1/2.6 low/high for example.

That makes more sense, thank you.

 

[omicron1792]

But if the erector is the same, and the turrets are the same, where does the 6 ounces come from?

Also, I still don't understand the functional difference between a 3 on the low end and a 2, but you give up 6x on top.

I guess I still don't understand the draw to a 2-12, other than making it lighter, but why not make the 3-18 lighter if all else is equal? Do you drop to a 40mm objective with the lower zoom range?

You can’t make the 6x much lighter than they did and it still be durable.

A 20oz 2-12 that matched the 3-18 reticle and setup would be perfect for my 223

 

[omicron1792]

I'm not sure what part of what I posted you are responding to, here. I understand 2-12 and 3-18 have a 6x zoom ratio.

But that's precisely my point/question. If the zoom ratio, turrets, erectors, illumination setup, objective size, main tube size are all the same, where does it lose 25% of its weight? And why is 2 on the low end better than 3? What do you gain?

You gain (lose) 4-6 oz and overall scope size.