Lowest magnification for 1000 yards??

[Rich Coyle]

NEMTHunter,

You remind me of a guy I went to Alaska with. He had eyes like a hawk. Literally! He could see with the un-aided eye what I needed 7X binoculars to see. In fact he judged antlers at about two miles with my 7X binocs because he never carried any. It is no exaggeration to tell you he could judge antlers at half a mile without optics.

 

[NEMTHunter]

NEMTHunter,

You remind me of a guy I went to Alaska with. He had eyes like a hawk. Literally! He could see with the un-aided eye what I needed 7X binoculars to see. In fact he judged antlers at about two miles with my 7X binocs because he never carried any. It is no exaggeration to tell you he could judge antlers at half a mile without optics.

Now that's good eyesight!! Mine is not that good that is for sure. I wish it was.

 

[Barrelnut]

Some people do have exceptional eyesight. Chuck Yeager had 20/10 vision. 20/20 is normal. This means he could see at 20 ft. what a normal person could only see at 10 ft.
Seems 20/8 is about the best possible for a human. Eagles have about 20/5 vision.

 

[Rich Coyle]

When I first met him I thought he was exaggerating. Then while sitting on a berm eating lunch looking out over the tundra he says, "Horns!" I've been hunting for lots of years and usually see more game than others, except my son-in-law. He does about a well as me. I looked out over the tundra farther and farther to at least 500 yards and don't see anything. So I asked,
"Where?"
"In the draw. There is a caribou in the draw walking along and all you can see are the horns swaying," he informed.
"That's three quarters of a mile away!"
"Yea, I know. And the horns aren't even very good," he went on.
I put up the 7X binoculars and what do I see? A mediocre bull's horns swaying as its walking.

 

[LDHunter]

Someone mention a scope I compared with another scope. You will notice I include some info from a Swarovski z5 5-25X52, Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 with the test. Here it is.

July 19,2017 (Completely clear sky) I use a military optics chart for resolution comparison. I call the largest group of lines 1, and the next one down 2, and so forth.

I purchased a Zeiss Conquest HD 5-26X50. It has a 1" tube body and weighs 22.7 ounces. It was on closeout at Sportsmans Warehouse for $999.00. Down from $1,199. I hoped it would literally smoke the Bushnell 6500. After I adjusted the ocular as best I could for my eye I set the magnification ring on 25X. The evening sun was shining near the optics chart 127 yards away, but not directly on it. The chart was shaded from the evening sun by a tree. After much fussing with the HD5 I could see 3 – 6. I then set the Bushnell on 25X. After a similar amount of time I could see 4 – 1.

After this I set both on an indicated 10X for the low light comparison. This part of the test was to adjust them as sharply as I could on some deer antlers with three points on one side 131 yards away in the woods. Here I wanted to see how long I could distinguish the large point nearest the eye guard. I was still hoping beyond hope the Zeiss would be better than the Bushnell in this test. This evening the Zeiss went down at 8:33PM. At that time the Bushnell 6500 was still bright and smoked it by twelve minutes. It went down at 8:45PM. In this test the Swarovski z5 5-25X52, the Leupold VX-6 4-24X52, and the Bushnell all went down in the same minute.

So far the only two scopes that were so much better than these last three were a
Schimt & Bender 12 1/2-50X56 and a Nightforce 12-42X56. There was no need to go back and forth between the two to see it was better than the Bushnell like I did with those above. These two remind me of the first time I looked through Swarovski binoculars.

I've been touting the great glass on the Bushnell Elite 4200 and 6500 scopes for quite a few years and they've been my go to hunting scopes in the piney woods where ranges are usually under 300yds and the light can be dim on any cloudy day and almost impossible at dusk and dawn.

The Bushnell scopes performed flawlessly but when you dared to touch the reticle adjustments you quickly found that they usually required a few shots to settle back down.

That's what drove me to Nightforce for any rifle likely to be called upon to make a 300plus yard shot. When I have put the time, money, and effort into putting myself in a place where I'm about to shoot at any game, varmint or even paper way out there I insist that one click EQUAL 1MOA POI change! PERIOD! No excuses!

That's what drove me to Nightforce. Zeiss and Swarovski make some great optics and I own binoculars and spotting scopes made by both and I couldn't be happier but when my money hits the table for a long range rifle scope I reach for Nightforce. YMMV...

I have also had good luck with a couple of Leupy 4.5-14x Mark 4 Tactical scopes but the glass isn't up to my standards so I use them for target scopes and don't hunt with them.

Nightforce glass is simply the best I've seen and I'm VERY picky about clarity and light transmission in my optics of all kinds.

 

[LDHunter]

Some people do have exceptional eyesight. Chuck Yeager had 20/10 vision. 20/20 is normal. This means he could see at 20 ft. what a normal person could only see at 10 ft.
Seems 20/8 is about the best possible for a human. Eagles have about 20/5 vision.

I have known several people with 20/15 vision and one with 20/10 and they see so much better than the average person it's simply scary. One buddy with 20/15 vision could spot a deer in thick woods in low light very easily and it could take you a couple minutes to find them with binoculars unless they moved.

My vision is an honest 20/20 and I'm so glad to have vision that good after 7 eye surgeries including two lasik surgeries. I have a small fortune invested in quality optics to assist my "weak" vision and rely on my optics heavily when I hunt. It's simply amazing how much you miss when you have "average" vision and don't use quality optics to assist in game spotting.

Tiger Woods has/had 20/10 vision. That was part of his edge. Some of the world class shooters have excellent vision as well. It certainly makes a difference.

 

[WildRose]

NEMTHunter,

You remind me of a guy I went to Alaska with. He had eyes like a hawk. Literally! He could see with the un-aided eye what I needed 7X binoculars to see. In fact he judged antlers at about two miles with my 7X binocs because he never carried any. It is no exaggeration to tell you he could judge antlers at half a mile without optics.

When you do it on a daily basis it's a lot easier. I crack people up that deer or hog hunt with me because they are going nuts grabbing optics to look at everything I rarely do.

They quickly learn that when I grab for them things are about to get interesting.

 

[Hornhunter32]

Have you brought this up with the Technical/QC folks at Zeiss? If yes, what was their answer? If no, why not?

I've had and seen exceptions for nearly every piece of equipment and component I can think of. It's always possible that one or two pieces get by the inspection process given the volume of production. But in most cases, these are exceptions, not the rule or the common occurrence.

Not that my observations are infallible but I have never read or heard about this problem. I am not affiliated with nor compensated by Zeiss or any other manufacturer.

Regards.

Yeah, I contacted them about it, and they weren't interested in fixing it. It's the grease they use. I had three of them, and they all froze up. Stick yours in the freezer and let me know if they freeze solid.

 

[Rich Coyle]

WildRose,

One can try to see what they can't see everyday with 20/20 and not come close to the eyesight of someone with 20/15 or better vision. The vast majority of the time of my life I didn't use binoculars and never matched Shannon's ability. A few years ago I started using binos and found deer I could not see when I took them down. There is no way I would hunt without them. Same for a high magnification scope. One three occasion after finding game I had to turn up the magnification to verify it was legal. Shannon does not need binos for that.

 

[WildRose]

Yeah, I contacted them about it, and they weren't interested in fixing it. It's the grease they use. I had three of them, and they all froze up. Stick yours in the freezer and let me know if they freeze solid.

That's an awfully easy fix. Change lubes. Machinegunner's lube is excellent and so too are LPS 1 and LPS 2. I'd use the LPS 1 in subzero conditions.

 

[chickm1]

WWI snipers made 600 yd shots with 3X scopes. Just saying...............

 

[Bpsmith]

If you hunt in cold weather, stay away from HD5's. The mag ring freezes up.

I had the mag ring on my HD 5 3-15x42 with the target turrets freeze up in late season deer season. I was hunting in northern PA and the temp was around 10 degrees. I called Zeiss and they had me send in my scope. They sent me a brand new scope within a week. I was ****ed I had to pull off my scope to send it in but was happy they sent me a new one. I have 2 of these scopes and I am pretty pleased with them. They track nicely and return to zero. Hopefully I won't have anymore problems.

 

[coyotezapper]

I've been touting the great glass on the Bushnell Elite 4200 and 6500 scopes for quite a few years and they've been my go to hunting scopes in the piney woods where ranges are usually under 300yds and the light can be dim on any cloudy day and almost impossible at dusk and dawn.

The Bushnell scopes performed flawlessly but when you dared to touch the reticle adjustments you quickly found that they usually required a few shots to settle back down.

That's what drove me to Nightforce for any rifle likely to be called upon to make a 300plus yard shot. When I have put the time, money, and effort into putting myself in a place where I'm about to shoot at any game, varmint or even paper way out there I insist that one click EQUAL 1MOA POI change! PERIOD! No excuses!

That's what drove me to Nightforce. Zeiss and Swarovski make some great optics and I own binoculars and spotting scopes made by both and I couldn't be happier but when my money hits the table for a long range rifle scope I reach for Nightforce. YMMV...

I have also had good luck with a couple of Leupy 4.5-14x Mark 4 Tactical scopes but the glass isn't up to my standards so I use them for target scopes and don't hunt with them.

Nightforce glass is simply the best I've seen and I'm VERY picky about clarity and light transmission in my optics of all kinds.

I have owned or do own all of the scopes being mentioned here and I see things a little different - pun intended. Number one is the only NF scope that is even in the same category with a Swarovski is the Comp 15-55 with the ED glass. The rest just have very good Japanese glass. Also, Zeiss HD glass is also very good but you have to get into the higher end models like the Victory to really see Zeiss quality. The HD glass is more than good enough for LRH IMO.

As far as my opinion on the OPs question for a 1000 yards I would have to say I am on the 10X bandwagon also. I like all of the magnification I can get for load work up and then never use it after that and for this reason I use a 36X target scope for most of my load work up now and then change the scope out once I go out to true drops and shoot LR and usually use no more than 18X.

 

[tuscan]

Agree with the 10x, but I like the option of a little more. Recently purchased and deployed a March 3-24x42 for a 7mm rem mag that I use for long range hunting. Very light weight and compact (in fact, too short for rings on a long action, so put a rail segment on, losing some of the light weight benefit). The glass is excellent. When shooting steel at 1000 yards, can easily get by with 10x, but prefer going up to 18x and if I do my part right, can keep the steel in view for a quick follow up. But, if hunting, I wouldn't use more than 12x at 1000 to keep FOV more open.