Parallax Error of Leupold VX Freedom

[Methuselah]

I get that this will be moved to the optics gate, but wanted "initial visibility" --- please give it a few hours on this gate?

My other post criteria looking for a scope included AO (or side focus), lifetime warranty, low power, and etched reticle without IR. Now that I've looked and find the only scope that impressed me all-around was Westhunter with short warranty period, It's obvious I'm going to have to compromise.

Leupold VX Freedom line seem hardy, boast clear glass (presume etched reticle), but the ones fitting my budget lack AO.  I'm considering the 4X28, 2-7X33, 3-9X33 ($3-$400 price range), as opposed to the WestHunter Optics HD 4-16x44 FFP Riflescope, 30 mm Tube First Focal Plane at $179.

That said, I find virtually no information on how much parallax error to expect at any range save for the 60 yards they seem to be adjusted for.

Comments said the 2-7 will provide clear sight picture at close-in range at lowest power, but very poor DOF there. None of the three Leupold scopes have information how close they will focus and what the expected parallax error will be at closest focus range or other various ranges you would expect to see for a pellet rifle or .22 PB.

I'd prefer not to be the guinea pig here and buy all three knowing I can't afford to keep them ... so any 1st hand comments would be very appreciated!

P.S. I was initially considering the Bushnell Engage 3-9X40 at $102 + shipping on Amazon, but I am leery because I own two Bushnell scopes and find them large, heavy, clunky, and overall unimpressive. One was 50% markdown at WallyWorld, the other a thrown-in with a used airgun.

[subscriber]

Steve,

For low power airguns that are expected to hit small targets, I insist on scope parallax being adjustable down to 10 yards/meters.  On a more powerful platform, being off by an inch or two on a larger target may not matter.   Official airgun targets are small, and so are vermin noggins.

I suspect that the forum has people qualified and / or experienced to quantify your parallax error question.  I will see if I can invite such a person to the party.

[Tater]

Moved to the Optics Gate.

[rsterne]

Sorry, I can't quantify parallax error.... but you can test it yourself.... Set the scope up rigidly, look at your target and move your head side to side and/or up and down as you look through it.... The distance the crosshairs move on the target is the error that can occur on shooting....

The better your cheek weld, and the more consistent you place your head on the stock, the less parallax will bother you.... If your smallest target is tin cans, and the scope parallax is set to 60 yards, it may not be an issue.... If you are trying to hit the head of a squirrel at closer range, that can be problematic if you can't adjust the parallax....

Bob

[Bayman]

There's formulas for maximum parallax error. I believe it has to do with magnification and objective size. Parallax error doesn't really have to be an issue. As long as your eye is centered in the scope there's no parallax error.

I use a Hawke 4x32 Vantage with a 100 yard fixed parallax on my HW50 for squirrels. I shoot the gun from 10 to 100 yards. It'll stack pellets into a single round hole at 10 yards where parallax should be the greatest. I love this gun/scope combination.

The effects of parallax error is way over emphasized.All you have to do is train yourself to consistently look down the center of the scope. Your eye is centered when you get an evenly edged sharp vignette. You should always center it anyway but after consciously doing it a while it'll become second nature.

As far as the Leupolds go i can't help you. I imagine they would be clear at 15 yards or less at low power. My 100 yard Hawke 4x is clear at 11 yards out. I also have 3 2-7x32 non AO (100 yard) Hawke Vantage scopes on powder burners and they're focused under 10 yards on 2 or 3x.

Hth
Ron

[subscriber]

Sounds reasonable to me, Bob and Ron.   I guess I assumed the point of a scope was that there was only one pair of things to align.  I get that consistent head to scope alignment can be had from consistent cheek weld. 

Basically this suggests that if you shoot well, you can compensate for less than ideal equipment.  Which is true.  Also, that while a "small eye box" scope can be annoying, it can help train you to place your head more consistently on the stock.

Because I shoot mostly offhand, I do not like a lot of scope magnification.  It amplifies my wobble by causing "feedback" to make it worse.  I am one of those old timers that prefers a peep sight, and uses reading glasses to see the front sight.  That said, there is no denying that having the target and scope clearly visible is an advantage.  I just prefer low power scopes; where from the sound of it, parallax is less of a problem.

Thanks for answering the OP's question and educating me.

[subscriber]

Steve,

I agree with not taking a handy little rifle and spoiling its feel with a large scope.  A lot of air rifles come with cheap scopes in a package deal.  I don't want anything that causes eye strain, and that shoots worse for me than open sights.  Then, cheap equals junk.  Or, I am not good enough to compensate...

I wonder if a red dot might better suit your needs.

Anyway, you might try the Daisy "gate" to see what scopes people use on their 880:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?board=186.0

Also, the GTA search engine is not very good.  Try this instead:  www.google.com/search?q=site%3Agatewaytoairguns.org+scope+for+Daisy+880

[Rick67]

Sounds reasonable to me, Bob and Ron.   I guess I assumed the point of a scope was that there was only one pair of things to align.  I get that consistent head to scope alignment can be had from consistent cheek weld. 

Basically this suggests that if you shoot well, you can compensate for less than ideal equipment.  Which is true.  Also, that while a "small eye box" scope can be annoying, it can help train you to place your head more consistently on the stock.

Because I shoot mostly offhand, I do not like a lot of scope magnification.  It amplifies my wobble by causing "feedback" to make it worse.  I am one of those old timers that prefers a peep sight, and uses reading glasses to see the front sight.  That said, there is no denying that having the target and scope clearly visible is an advantage.  I just prefer low power scopes; where from the sound of it, parallax is less of a problem.

Thanks for answering the OP's question and educating me.

Like Bayman, I have a low power 1-4x20 scope (100-yard parallax) I have no problems shooting tight groups with at any viable distance.

I’m pellet on pellet with it from 10-25 yards.

Wish the reticle was thinner though.

[subscriber]

So, you use the scope like a peep sight with a large aperture.

A 1 - 4 X sounds ideal to me.  Just never tried one with a 100 yard parallax at 10 yards.  That said, 1" groups at 25 yards are "easy"; but not good, if you ae expecting 1/4" groups.

[Rick67]

So, you use the scope like a peep sight with a large aperture.

A 1 - 4 X sounds ideal to me.  Just never tried one with a 100 yard parallax at 10 yards.  That said, 1" groups at 25 yards are "easy"; but not good, if you ae expecting 1/4" groups.

I think I have a photo of my 25-yard grouping, but I mounted the scope at that time on a Kidd barreled rimfire just to see how good the optic was w/o the hassle of reloading for every shot.

[Methuselah]

So far it's had Hatsan Optima's and this current no-name 4X, not particularly conducive to a decent cheek weld because of very short relief

Yes though, 100%, good form would render the parallax part of the situation moot.

I'm still curious, but thanks to all those who chimed in I believe my answer is the 2-7 and 3-9 at low power will very likely focus close-in, and the 4X28 from Amazon comments seems to be some will some won't.

In my saved basket were WestHunter HD 4-16X44 FFP, and Bushnell Engage 4-16X44 @ $178.99 and $332.49 respectively.

I ruled out the WestHunter on its lack of warranty, and the Bushnell on size/weight plus just figured for similar coin there were these Leopold...

If anyone thinks I should reconsider on the Bushnell Engage, it is an AO ---- any thoughts?

[Rick67]

The Engage has very clear optics.

Mine was a 1” 4-12x40 SF.

Sold it though ‘cuz of the cluttered Deploy MOA reticle.

Hard to determine what hash I was at, as they’re too close, fine, and sans numbers.

[Rick67]

Mine was made in South Korea.

[subscriber]

Please don't read my confessions of a lack of skill as doubt about what can be achieved, with enough practice.

A picture of one group may or may not be representative of what a person regularly achieves.  So, if I had doubt, I need more than one group.  But I don't have any reason to doubt you.

So, you use the scope like a peep sight with a large aperture.

A 1 - 4 X sounds ideal to me.  Just never tried one with a 100 yard parallax at 10 yards.  That said, 1" groups at 25 yards are "easy"; but not good, if you ae expecting 1/4" groups.

I think I have a photo of my 25-yard grouping, but I mounted the scope at that time on a Kidd barreled rimfire just to see how good the optic was w/o the hassle of reloading for every shot.

[subscriber]

What about these:  3 yds to infinity parallax adjustment

https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-bugbuster-3-12x32-scope-1-3-moa-ao-mil-dot-reticle-med-dovetail?a=8857
https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-3-12x32-ao-bug-buster-rifle-scope-mil-dot-reticle-1-3-moa-1-tube?a=7972
https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-3-9x32-ao-bug-buster-rifle-scope-ez-tap-illuminated-mil-dot?a=4721
https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-3-9x32-ao-compact-cqb-bug-buster-rifle-scope-illuminated-mil-dot?a=4222

[Rick67]

Please don't read my confessions of a lack of skill as doubt about what can be achieved, with enough practice.

A picture of one group may or may not be representative of what a person regularly achieves.  So, if I had doubt, I need more than one group.  But I don't have any reason to doubt you.

So, you use the scope like a peep sight with a large aperture.

A 1 - 4 X sounds ideal to me.  Just never tried one with a 100 yard parallax at 10 yards.  That said, 1" groups at 25 yards are "easy"; but not good, if you ae expecting 1/4" groups.

I think I have a photo of my 25-yard grouping, but I mounted the scope at that time on a Kidd barreled rimfire just to see how good the optic was w/o the hassle of reloading for every shot.

You are a gentleman, Sub sir, always have been.

You, Mr. Rib, and Mr. John/Fuzzy are like the patriarchs of this forum 👍

[Rick67]

I get that this will be moved to the optics gate, but wanted "initial visibility" --- please give it a few hours on this gate?

My other post criteria looking for a scope included AO (or side focus), lifetime warranty, low power, and etched reticle without IR. Now that I've looked and find the only scope that impressed me all-around was Westhunter with short warranty period, It's obvious I'm going to have to compromise.

Leupold VX Freedom line seem hardy, boast clear glass (presume etched reticle), but the ones fitting my budget lack AO.  I'm considering the 4X28, 2-7X33, 3-9X33 ($3-$400 price range), as opposed to the WestHunter Optics HD 4-16x44 FFP Riflescope, 30 mm Tube First Focal Plane at $179.

That said, I find virtually no information on how much parallax error to expect at any range save for the 60 yards they seem to be adjusted for.

Comments said the 2-7 will provide clear sight picture at close-in range at lowest power, but very poor DOF there. None of the three Leupold scopes have information how close they will focus and what the expected parallax error will be at closest focus range or other various ranges you would expect to see for a pellet rifle or .22 PB.

I'd prefer not to be the guinea pig here and buy all three knowing I can't afford to keep them ... so any 1st hand comments would be very appreciated!

P.S. I was initially considering the Bushnell Engage 3-9X40 at $102 + shipping on Amazon, but I am leery because I own two Bushnell scopes and find them large, heavy, clunky, and overall unimpressive. One was 50% markdown at WallyWorld, the other a thrown-in with a used airgun.

Optics Zone is one of favorite sellers.

TOZ11 (or TOZ13 on very rare occasions ) gives you 11% discount on the Leupolds you want with free shipping.

I no longer buy Chinese optics myself.

[Methuselah]

What about these:  3 yds to infinity parallax adjustment

https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-bugbuster-3-12x32-scope-1-3-moa-ao-mil-dot-reticle-med-dovetail?a=8857
https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-3-12x32-ao-bug-buster-rifle-scope-mil-dot-reticle-1-3-moa-1-tube?a=7972
https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-3-9x32-ao-bug-buster-rifle-scope-ez-tap-illuminated-mil-dot?a=4721
https://www.pyramydair.com/product/utg-3-9x32-ao-compact-cqb-bug-buster-rifle-scope-illuminated-mil-dot?a=4222

Well
Hmmm

First two at $160'ish range no IR is good ... both are AO, one has it on the side.

I don't know, not particularly crazy about the ring spacing since I'll move it to a pb at some point, and well, $160's + shipping vs. $300 (or $400) for a Leopold. I do have a UTG full size and it's a good scope despite heavy and has the IR.

Well, just looked again, weight was good but the eye relief not great (variance) compared to the Leopold's. Given price difference, and all things considered, I belive they become close seconds... I think the Leopold's will be heirlooms with my passing, the UTG, well I donno.

Thanks for the tough choices 

(no, really though, much appreciated --- on the Daisy 880 they would be great to overkill, but the 22's made a slight difference)

[Methuselah]

Optics Zone is one of favorite sellers.

TOZ11 (or TOZ13 on very rare occasions ) gives you 11% discount on the Leupolds you want with free shipping.

I no longer buy Chinese optics myself.

I did find other places that also discounted, but 11% is more than the 10% I think most were offering. I disregarded them though because I wanted the liberal return policy offered by Amazon.

Have you ever had to return or deal with an issue on items from Optics Zone?

I am also now wondering if I should consider hunting a used scope ... beat up doesn't bother me if it's 100% functional, just thinking out loud 

[Rick67]

I get that this will be moved to the optics gate, but wanted "initial visibility" --- please give it a few hours on this gate?

My other post criteria looking for a scope included AO (or side focus), lifetime warranty, low power, and etched reticle without IR. Now that I've looked and find the only scope that impressed me all-around was Westhunter with short warranty period, It's obvious I'm going to have to compromise.

Leupold VX Freedom line seem hardy, boast clear glass (presume etched reticle), but the ones fitting my budget lack AO.  I'm considering the 4X28, 2-7X33, 3-9X33 ($3-$400 price range), as opposed to the WestHunter Optics HD 4-16x44 FFP Riflescope, 30 mm Tube First Focal Plane at $179.

That said, I find virtually no information on how much parallax error to expect at any range save for the 60 yards they seem to be adjusted for.

Comments said the 2-7 will provide clear sight picture at close-in range at lowest power, but very poor DOF there. None of the three Leupold scopes have information how close they will focus and what the expected parallax error will be at closest focus range or other various ranges you would expect to see for a pellet rifle or .22 PB.

I'd prefer not to be the guinea pig here and buy all three knowing I can't afford to keep them ... so any 1st hand comments would be very appreciated!

P.S. I was initially considering the Bushnell Engage 3-9X40 at $102 + shipping on Amazon, but I am leery because I own two Bushnell scopes and find them large, heavy, clunky, and overall unimpressive. One was 50% markdown at WallyWorld, the other a thrown-in with a used airgun.

Optics Zone is one of favorite sellers.

TOZ11 (or TOZ13 on very rare occasions ) gives you 11% discount on the Leupolds you want with free shipping.

I no longer buy Chinese optics myself.

The 3-9x33 Leupold EFR does have AO (10 yards to infinity.

Simple fine reticle like the ones on my Clearidge scopes.

I much prefer a Duplex Dot though, but a fine reticle equates to precise small holes for me.