scope size 40 mm vs 50mm

[deaner 20]

just want some opinion on what hunters thoughts were on what and why they prefer .thanks

 

[Bigeclipse]

just want some opinion on what hunters thoughts were on what and why they prefer .thanks

I am NOT an expert but I think it will depend on some things. Is weight a concern? All other things being equal, 50mm is typically heavier. Do you have an adjustable cheek rest? 50mm scopes typically need a higher comb height than non-adjustable run of the mill stock can provide. If neither of those things are an issue, again, all other things being equal, 50mm scope will typically have better low light capabilities than 40mm. I would rather have a higher end 40mm than a lower end 50mm scope with regards to clarity and low light conditions because the glass in the higher end 40mm is likely that much better.

 

[joseph singleton]

50+++mm on all mine aging eye neeeed help..

 

[Peddler 76]

I have a mixture but none bigger than 50.

Nikon Monarch UCC 2-7x32 on my old Kimber .22.
Nikon Monarch Gold 1.5-6x42 30mm on a TC G2 Contender .45 ML.
Nikon Monarch Gold 2.5-10x50 30mm on my old CZ BRNO Model600 .270.
Nikon Monarch UCC 3-9x40 on my old Model 7 MS .257 Roberts from the Custom Shop when it was in Ilion, NY.
Leica ERi 2.5-10x42 30mm #4 reticle on my LAW Professional Model 6.5 Creedmoor
Nikon Monarch UCC 2.5-10x50 on my wife's Savage Lady Hunter 6.5 Creedmoor.

 

[Canhunter35]

Get the maximum objective which fits ur rifle with correct cheek support.
There's lots of aftermarket cheek pad/rest options if u want to run a big bell. If not a quality scope with low magnification will be fine for low light.
For example I've had a vari-x1 3-9 outperform an sightron s3 6-24 in low light. The s3 is a far more expensive scope, but 6x is just too much magnification for good low light transmission

 

[WildRose]

just want some opinion on what hunters thoughts were on what and why they prefer .thanks

I will take a 50mm or larger objective all day long and twice on Sundays.

Currently all of my scopes are 50, 52, or 56mm OBJ's except for my short range tactical and dangerous game scopes.

 

[WildRose]

Get the maximum objective which fits ur rifle with correct cheek support.
There's lots of aftermarket cheek pad/rest options if u want to run a big bell. If not a quality scope with low magnification will be fine for low light.
For example I've had a vari-x1 3-9 outperform an sightron s3 6-24 in low light. The s3 is a far more expensive scope, but 6x is just too much magnification for good low light transmission

All of my VX6's will work on 10x or higher in any light you can still see in. I have in fact shot coyotes and deer with them on a full moon night with no other illumination added.

 

[lancetkenyon]

50, 52, 56mm objectives on all my rifles too (except rimfires). A high quality 50mm+ really shines (no pun intended) at first and last legal light on a hunting rifle.

In the words of the big bad wolf, when Red Riding Hood commented on what big eyes you have.... "All the better to see you with!"

 

[milkie62]

I did not have a preference yrs ago when I ran $50 scopes. Now that I am running much better glass and 60 yr old eyes I try to buy 50 mm whenever I can. I do have a 40 mm on my 223 bolt action which seems OK though to me.

 

[Greyfox]

All my hunting scopes used for LR hunting(shots at 500+ yards) are 50mm-56mm. I will choose higher quality glass over objective size within this range, which may also result in less weight and bulk...a much desired attribute for me. Mechanical performance trumps all. My current favorite LR hunting optic is the 2.5x25x52 March SFP.

 

[Canhunter35]

All of my VX6's will work on 10x or higher in any light you can still see in. I have in fact shot coyotes and deer with them on a full moon night with no other illumination added.

I've noticed that with my mark 4 and other leupolds, they do well in low light. But the example I related was a 30 year old 3-9 leupold was outperforming an s3 sightron. It was pretty dark though as we were hunting beavers.

 

[Greyfox]

While, like most, glass charity, resolution, and low light performance are highly desired, the difficult condition I encounter most frequently is reflection(yellow-orange haze) produced by shooting into a low sun position or ice/snow reflection. Being primarily a white tail hunter, these conditions are quite frequent and there is rarely time to reposition, or wait out a mature buck. This has cost me far more missed opportunities then low light when hunting at extended ranges. The scopes ability to minimize this condition is a "combination" of the glass and the internal geometry/coating of the scope. From my experience low light performance does not always equate to the scopes ability to handle the chromatic aberration caused by the above mentioned condition. I will test this as well, choosing the scope that gives the best balance of light gathering,resolution, and control of light distortion. Just my viewpoint.

 

[Heavyiron]

I am NOT an expert but I think it will depend on some things. Is weight a concern? All other things being equal, 50mm is typically heavier. Do you have an adjustable cheek rest? 50mm scopes typically need a higher comb height than non-adjustable run of the mill stock can provide. If neither of those things are an issue, again, all other things being equal, 50mm scope will typically have better low light capabilities than 40mm. I would rather have a higher end 40mm than a lower end 50mm scope with regards to clarity and low light conditions because the glass in the higher end 40mm is likely that much better.

Hit the nail on the head. Myself i rather have a high end 40 anytime. I remember when a 32 was standard. Love those high end bushnells

 

[Laelkhunter]

I kinda split the difference. I have a 44mm objective on my Swarovski 3.5 -18 It seems to be plenty bright enough, but not too heavy and bulky (to fit in saddle scabbards).