50mm or 56mm is it bright enough to make it worth it???

[Jeff In TX]

[ QUOTE ]
Some simple maths

50mm lens - Area in square mm 1963,5
56mm lens - Area in Square mm 2463,0

Divide 2463/1963.5 = 1,254 OR put another way the 56mm has 25% more light gathering area than a 50.

[/ QUOTE ]

Chris in Madrid,

It's not quite that simple, /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif but your math is correct! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Also, scopes don't gather light, it's how much light can they transmit through the scope.

Hope it helps,

 

[joseywales]

Not only that. How much light can the human eye benefit from? When looking through a 1" tube, how much light can my 40 year old eye gather? Is there a point of diminishing return on a larger objective, and if so, what is it? 44mm, 50mm, 52mm.

As I see it (haha), every eye is different and will perceive things differently. To me, the biggest disadvantage of mounting a high scope is the cheek to stock weld.

When I close my eyes and shoulder my shotgun, I can open my eye and be exaclty on my sight plane. Very little, if any adjustment of my head is necessary. Some will argue that this type of fit is not necessary for rifle and I don't totally disagree with that. Afterall, snap shots are rare and mostly ill advised when rifle hunting.

Still, I like to shoulder my rifle and have a good fit of cheek to stock. If a gun doesn't fit me right, or the scope is too high for me, I don't shoot as accurately. And seeing game only helps if you can hit it!

 

[eddief]

The Obj. Bell is not the only answer, the 56Obj will always gather more light than any 50Obj. It's how it comes through the rest of the system and the size of the exit pupil on the scope. Later !

Eddie Fosnaugh