Talk to me about optics

[subscriber]

It also does not magnify any shakiness.   It simply shows that shakiness (of the shooter) in more/higher detail.   The motion/movement of the shooter is the same! 

My comment was for shooting offhand.  Yes, the scope does not magically increase wobble. What happens is that the wobble the shooter sees is magnified (as you stated).  Then, the shooter tries to correct what appears to be more significant wobble than it actually is.  This results in over correction.  And that increases shakiness.

This is a simple feedback system, such as placing a microphone for a PA system near the speaker.  Or, if you prefer, counter steering with rear wheel drive car that had the back end break away on an frozen road.  Unless the person has had a lot of practice, it is very easy to over correct, and to precipitate over steering to a much larger yaw angle in the opposite direction.  Over correcting; just like with magnified optics in an unsupported shooting stance. 

[BackStop]

It also does not magnify any shakiness.   It simply shows that shakiness (of the shooter) in more/higher detail.   The motion/movement of the shooter is the same! 

My comment was for shooting offhand.  Yes, the scope does not magically increase wobble. What happens is that the wobble the shooter sees is magnified (as you stated).  Then, the shooter tries to correct what appears to be more significant wobble than it actually is.  This results in over correction.  And that increases shakiness.

This is a simple feedback system, such as placing a microphone for a PA system near the speaker.  Or, if you prefer, counter steering with rear wheel drive car that had the back end break away on an frozen road.  Unless the person has had a lot of practice, it is very easy to over correct, and to precipitate over steering to a much larger yaw angle in the opposite direction.  Over correcting; just like with magnified optics in an unsupported shooting stance.

I disagree.   For me, having more magnification makes me concentrate more on keeping my hold steady and my follow through more complete.

Accuracy is accuracy.

Aim small, miss small.

The only drawback I see to higher magnification is target acquisition.

The higher feedback helps to make more detailed/subtle corrections and more precise shots.

Less feedback leads to less accuracy.

You can aim at a tree rat's head or you can aim at the tree rat's eye...

Or... you can aim at the flea on the tree rat's eye!  (grin)

[subscriber]

I disagree.   For me, having more magnification makes me concentrate more on keeping my hold steady and my follow through more complete.

You are welcome to disagree.  However, just because something works for you, does not trump something that works for me (or anyone else).

You are arguing very emphatically about something I stated very clearly, applied to me (and possibly only me).  Below is the introductory statement that you are trying to drown out with your superior knowledge.

I may be in the minority here, but for me, more magnification is not "better". 

In the same way that aiming too long may reduce some mortals' ability to hit small targets when shooting offhand, so may too much magnification.  For the same reason.  Wobble increases with fatigue.  Chasing wobble makes it worse.

Now, if you are using all that magnification from rested positions, then your argument is doubly silly, because I excluded that position in the context of my statement.

So; from a sandbag rest, more magnification is better, as long as clear focus and a correct parallax setting are obtained.  But from an offhand position, I do not benefit from anything over 3X.  That is not up for debate.  No matter your level of expertise when shooting with 24X mag, unsupported.   

[Bayman]

My comment was for shooting offhand.  Yes, the scope does not magically increase wobble. What happens is that the wobble the shooter sees is magnified (as you stated).  Then, the shooter tries to correct what appears to be more significant wobble than it actually is.  This results in over correction.  And that increases shakiness.

This is a simple feedback system, such as placing a microphone for a PA system near the speaker.  Or, if you prefer, counter steering with rear wheel drive car that had the back end break away on an frozen road.  Unless the person has had a lot of practice, it is very easy to over correct, and to precipitate over steering to a much larger yaw angle in the opposite direction.  Over correcting; just like with magnified optics in an unsupported shooting stance.

This is spot on! It's the same condition that condition that causes "Purpose Tremor". That's when you get shakier as you get the thread closer to the needle eye. To some degree similar over monitoring causes speach stuttering. Some people are less prone to these feedback issues but they are more common than not. Most people can't work unsupported and will steady themselves with a nearby environmental item. All I know is I'm not a good offhand shooter but I definitely do my best at lower magnifications for the exact reasons described in the above quote.

[subscriber]

Thanks Ron

Just because we are not super human, does not make us "wrong"...

[Bayman]

Thanks Ron

Just because we are not super human, does not make us "wrong"...

Ha! It's funny that us mere mortals have a hard time explaining our issues to the super humans.

[subscriber]

Ha! It's funny that us mere mortals have a hard time explaining our issues to the super humans.

It appears I was arguing with a super human arguer; not a super human offhand shooter.  So, no actual frame of reference for what I said about too much magnification being a hindrance, unsupported:

I simply can't hold a rifle steady enough off hand.   Even at 10 yards, it is iffy, but then again, I don't practice off hand anymore.

[BackStop]

Ha! It's funny that us mere mortals have a hard time explaining our issues to the super humans.

It appears I was arguing with a super human arguer; not a super human offhand shooter.  So, no actual frame of reference for what I said about too much magnification being a hindrance, unsupported:

I simply can't hold a rifle steady enough off hand.   Even at 10 yards, it is iffy, but then again, I don't practice off hand anymore.

Wow!   You do your research on posts from other threads...  (chuckle)

I stand by what I said.   Off hand, rested, accuracy is accuracy.   Aim small, miss small.

If you can't get the sight picture fast enough, go with a lower power and/or use/improvise a rest.

[JeffB1961]

I may be in the minority here, but for me, more magnification is not "better".  Not unless you do all your shooting off a sandbagged bench rest.  Unless you have a lot of practice shooting with high power scopes from field positions, my advice would be to go for a 3 - 9X, or even a 2 - 7X.  From less than well grounded rests, high magnification actually makes the air rifle harder to hold "still", rather than easier.

Also, clarity is more important than the size of the image...

Magnification does not make it harder.   It also does not magnify any shakiness.   It simply shows that shakiness (of the shooter) in more/higher detail.   The motion/movement of the shooter is the same!   However, with higher magnification, you SEE how much variation that movement has on the actual target.


With a lower powered scope, you may be only capable of aiming at a tree rat's head.   On higher magnification you might be aiming at a tree rat's eye and at even higher magnification, you might be aiming at the flea on the eyelid of the tree rat's eye... etc.   

It IS harder to get the sight picture on higher power, so if that is a problem, always go for lower powered scopes.


However... the best I can explain it is... Aim Small, Miss Small..... 

If I can't actually SEE it, I can't truly AIM at it.
 
I probably didn't say exactly what I wanted to say, but I think most folks will get my drift.   

 love the option that a higher power variable give me ..... i choose what magnification i want for the given situation .