Convince me that I don’t need 24x magnification!... (Or that I DO need it!)

[Bryan Heimann]

How is the optical quality of the BSA 4-14x44 FFP? It cost only $120.

check one out at a Cabela's, Academy, etc.  not too bad for a hundred dollar scope, but there are better for the money and bsa are known for durability issues.

[jhm757]

I like my Optisan Viper 6-24×56. I keep it at 12 power for hunting, and turn it up to 24 for bench shooting at 100yds. It works well for me.

Jim - jhm757

[nervoustrigger]

Put simply, better aiming precision (afforded by higher magnification) gives better precision to the point of impact.  This has been demonstrated again and again.  In spite of the fact we are pretty good at centering to a point of aim, we get better groups with, say, 24x magnification than we do with 12x.

[bandg]

Agree 100%.  In addition to other uses noted.

[jorgo]

I have a hawk airmax 8-32 for long range.
For rathunting somthing 3-7 is much better.
There are much closerange shots 5 -20 meters.
For the targetsearching part with nightvision 3x is best.
Pigeeon and rabbit shots are longer .
If i shot 80 meters ore more the high magnification scope is good choice for closerange rathunting i use a 3-9 .

[rsterne]

You already have an inexpensive 24X scope.... Therefore, you have probably already noticed one of the problems of too much magnification for the diameter of the objective lense…. the image gets dimmer at the higher end of the magnification range.... This has to do with the "exit pupil" of the scope, which is the diameter of the objective lense divided by the magnification.... For your 6-24 x 50, at 24X that is (50/24) = 2.08 mm.... In bright light, the pupil of your eye measures 2.5-3 mm, so there is not enough light coming out of the scope to fill the pupil of your eye (it "wants" more light than the scope can deliver)…. so the image dims....

There are two solutions to this basic problem.... Use a lower magnification, or purchase a scope with a larger objective lense…. If you get one with a 60mm objective, then the exit pupil at 24 X will be 2.5 mm, so if you have "young eyes" you may be able to use full power without noticing the image getting dimmer.... Scopes with large objectives are usually expensive, so within your budget you are left with two choices.... Use less magnification, or put up with a dimmer image when you crank the power up.... Incidently, in poor light (dawn or dusk), the pupil of your eye opens to about 5 mm.... and in the dark 7-8 mm.... This is precisely why a lot of hunters use a 4 x 32 scope for deer, because the exit pupil is 8 mm....

Bob

[QVTom]

The only reliable tracking scope in your budget is the fixed power SWFA SS.  The SS 3-15 Ffp is a great scope for tracking but the 15x is marginal for serious target shooting and its outside of your budget.  All SS scopes are seriously marked down during Black Friday sale at SWFA.

[Bryan Heimann]

You already have an inexpensive 24X scope.... Therefore, you have probably already noticed one of the problems of too much magnification for the diameter of the objective lense…. the image gets dimmer at the higher end of the magnification range.... This has to do with the "exit pupil" of the scope, which is the diameter of the objective lense divided by the magnification.... For your 6-24 x 50, at 24X that is (50/24) = 2.08 mm.... In bright light, the pupil of your eye measures 2.5-3 mm, so there is not enough light coming out of the scope to fill the pupil of your eye (it "wants" more light than the scope can deliver)…. so the image dims....

There are two solutions to this basic problem.... Use a lower magnification, or purchase a scope with a larger objective lense…. If you get one with a 60mm objective, then the exit pupil at 24 X will be 2.5 mm, so if you have "young eyes" you may be able to use full power without noticing the image getting dimmer.... Scopes with large objectives are usually expensive, so within your budget you are left with two choices.... Use less magnification, or put up with a dimmer image when you crank the power up.... Incidently, in poor light (dawn or dusk), the pupil of your eye opens to about 5 mm.... and in the dark 7-8 mm.... This is precisely why a lot of hunters use a 4 x 32 scope for deer, because the exit pupil is 8 mm....

Bob

This!  Is the reason for the magnification range I suggested.

You put a ceiling on the price, there will always be a tradeoff with the features of the scope. 

Illuminated reticle?  Takes away from quality of the glass or less durabke.

AO?  Again, less quality glass or less durable.

More msgnification?  Lesser quality glass or less durable.

Honestly, if I were serious about getting a good scope, I would work my way down in price from the max I would be willing to pay.  Choose the top ten most expensive 1" tube scopes that do not have an illuminated reticle, but do have an adjustable objective, in the price range.  And go from there.

For $300-$400 you should actually be able to get some pretty darn good mid power variables.  As far as I can tell, to gain optical quality above this price range you'd have to spend quite a lot of money.  So a carefully chosen $300-$400 scope will be at least as good as if not better than a typical scope that cost $1000.  Just fewer bells and whistles.

When is the last time you ran out and bought batteries for anilluminated reticle?  I have never used one, in any scope, in any light conditions.

[JungleShooter]

Friends, a fixed power scope is not feasible for my situation, as I have targets (live and paper) at ranges from 10 to 100 yards, so I need the flexibility. A compromise scope cannot be fixed power.


Bob, thanks for the explanation about the exit pupil. The way you put it was particularly clear, and after Brian’s ringing endorsement I went on a Google-spree and reevaluated if a 4-16x50 (or similar) would be better.

RESULTS:
I found a Falcon S18i 3-18x50 FFP Mil, that has all I want (from the UK). Exit pupil 16.7-2.8. With an amazing elevation turret range of 90 MOA. I’m losing ¼ magnification on the top, and I’m gaining 1 full magnification on the bottom. But it’s not yet available....!

The Hawke Sidewinder 4-16x50 FFP Mil qualifies as well. But the MIL is usually over $500.

There is a Sightron and an MTC Viper Pro, but they have MOA turrets, or are second focal plane.

Many others have capped turrets, but I’m a clicker, not a hold’er-over.


SUMMARY
My choices in the 4-16x50 (or 3-18x50) range are much more limited than the 6-24x. Which is a surprise for me. 
Of course, I could reduce my requirement of a 50mm objective lens and go with something smaller (44mm or similar). If you want to comment on that, I have a separate thread for your recommendation of objective lens size, here:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=150535

You are welcome to comment there.
THANK YOU ALL! 

[mobilehomer]

US military snipers use 10X all the way out to 2000 yards. Billy Dixon killed an Indian at a measured 1000 yards with open sights at the Second Battle of Adobe Walls. Whatever power you choose, the key is to learn it. There is no substitute for trigger time. Shoot at unknown distances, learn drop with your gun/scope combo.
I have a UTG 4-16X56 and really like it. The 36 color illumination might seem like a gimmick, but it is truly useful. The glass reticle is very thin and covers about 1/2 MOA or less.

[rsterne]

Matthias, you mention wanting to be able to shoot at 100-150 yards, but I am wondering if you have ever done that, in particular with your 33 FPE airgun.... There is a Long Range Club here on the GTA called N.U.A.H. (for Nuttin' Under a Hundred), you can find the rules here....

https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=100865.0

There are five divisions you can work you way up through, and although the minimum range allowed is 100 yards, the rules are set up to accomodate those who want to shoot at 300 yards or more.... There are only 69 people who have currently qualified as members, of which only 17 have achieved "Master" status, and only one of those has done that at over 110 yards (dyotat100 did it at 200, the ONLY person to shoot NUAH at over 150 yards).... It is not easy to hit consistently at 100 yards and beyond.... so I would recommend that you print out some NUAH targets, set them up at 100 yards, and see how you can do....

There is little point in thinking about shooting at 150 yards, and worrying about what kind of scope is best for that.... unless you have at least tried it.... JMO.... I use a 3-12 x 44 for all my gopher hunting, and my longest kill to date is 106 yards, with a .22 cal shooting 18 gr. JSBs at 37 FPE.... In NUAH, I have qualified as "Expert" (one level down from Master)….

You might be interested in the opinions in this thread about a good scope for NUAH.... https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=128461.0

Bob

[JungleShooter]

Bob, your comments and the link to the NUAH discussion have been very helpful – as SO OFTEN!! Thanks.

I have the NUAH target cards saved on my computer since over half a year ago.... 
It’s been a bit complicated where I live to get a 100 yard stretch that is not exposed to the wind.
So far I’ve been able to shoot 75 yards, and my best was 1.9" ctc (10 shots, 1 flyer). That was a low-powered springer, though.

[Relentless Holiday]

You can get some real nice glass for $300-$400.  I would choose optical quality before high magnification.

I average less than 2" for 3 shots at 100 yards with my 30-30 and good ammo, with the semi buckhorn factory sights.  And I am just a regular guy, not any kind of marksmanship competitor.

I would not go for a fixed scope with an accurate PCP.  It's not just about group size, but also about identifying your target and it's vital area and placing your shot.

I would look at AO, SFP scopes up to  10, 12, or 16x with mil reticles at or near the max price range of your budget.  Why start at 10x?  Because most mil reticles are true mil at 10x.  Why sfp?  Because at the price range you'll probably trade optical quality for FFP.

+1!   Solid spot on advice.

[Joe Brancato]

I will not attempt to convince you one way or the other, only explain. 

I personally like a 6-24x scope when hunting.  I like the magnification, etc..  U.S. Army Snipers use less power (IIRC 12x).  Point is; use what YOU want, not what a dealer wants to sell you. I start off suggesting an inexpensive, but high quality 6-24x scope. If the customer says they want to be snap shooting, or just don't like 24x, then I go with what THEY want.

Bottom line, I could discuss all the different types of scopes, reticle, 1st vs. 2nd focal plane, etc., but it's really what YOU want.  The dealer should only be making suggestions.

[bandg]

Excellent advice.

[JungleShooter]

Rather than asking, do I need 24X, maybe the question is, do I need 6X, or 4X or 8X on the low end. If you have adequate field of view and depth of field on the low end, then your upper end comes along naturally.

elh0102, a few days ago when you posted this I took your advice and thought about this:

I DO need something lower than 6x magnification on the lower end, because target acquisition at short ranges and when I have to react when a quarry shows unexpectedly, 6x makes it difficult.
A typical 6x scope gives me a field of view (FoV) of only 17ft -- at 15y that's only 2.5ft!

Also, I was thinking a future ratting opportunities at the chicken farms outside of town. This will be short range, and low light. Again, 6x is not going to serve me well there, in low light targets are even more elusive with a 2.5ft FoV than in good light conditions! And moving(!) targets in low light,... forget it.



After searching through a couple of dozen scope brands in my price range, I came up almost empty...

If I want 4x on the bottom end, there is hardly anybody offering a 50mm objective lense (Bob's advice for a large enough exit pupil), and there are few exposed turrets, or FFP, or MIL/MIL.
Now, if some scopes have those features, the top end magnification is usually no more than 14x. And giving up 24x for a 14x, just to gain a bit on the bottom just is too much. I DO need higher magni for long distance (I don't want to buy a spotting scope, I want to see it through my shooting scope).


Thanks to your comments     and thinking this through again, I am now convinced that 24x on the top end is nice, but not as important as 4x or less on the bottom end.

4x magnification gives me 3.5ft FoV at 15y. Still not great, but better.


There were very few scopes that went lower than 4x on the bottom while offering a fairly high top end:
The Falcon S18i 3-18x50 FFP Mil is one of them.

3x magnification gives me 6.5ft FoV at 15y -- now that is 260% more FoV than with a 6x magni.
I contacted the manufacturer, and the scope is just being released this year. They are willing to sell me one directly.

Holding for a price quote now.... 

[Fussell]

I just saw one on Ebay

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Falcon-S30-3-18x50-FFP-30mm-Side-Focus-B24i-MilLine-Reticle-0-1-MRAD-Rifle-Scope/232791259120?epid=2010545645&hash=item363370b7f0:g:bRYAAOSwo5lbEl7e:rk:1:pf:0

[rsterne]

The larger the zoom range, in general the poorer the quality of the image.... A "3X" zoom (eg. 4-12) will generally provide a better image (in inexpensive scopes) than a "5X" zoom (eg. 3-15)….

Bob

[Taso1000]

If camera lens quality translates the same to rifle scopes, the lenses will be sharper in the center and less towards the edges of the glass and clarity will be better in the middle of the zoom range and worse at the extremes.

One more thing I'd like to add about exit pupil: the smaller the exit pupil the more critical the positioning of your eye (smaller sweet spot).  A larger exit pupil generally has more leeway for eye positioning (bigger sweet spot).

Thanks,

Taso

[JungleShooter]

I just saw one on Ebay

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Falcon-S30-3-18x50-FFP-30mm-Side-Focus-B24i-MilLine-Reticle-0-1-MRAD-Rifle-Scope/232791259120?epid=2010545645&hash=item363370b7f0:g:bRYAAOSwo5lbEl7e:rk:1:pf:0

Thanks for the link, Fussell    –  I think I missed this page because it says "Falcon S30" (which of course is different than S18i....).

About $380 shipped, OK. Now let's see what the manufacturer offers me...!