I see guys with pic related on top of their hunting rifles walking around shooting ranges like they're going to shoot the moon. It's not just ugly. It's unnecessary. A magnification factor of about 6.5 is all that is needed for shooting animals out to 150 yards. If your quarry is further than that, there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to get closer. Trying to shoot further than that will only make your sight picture shaky. The human eye can only use an exit pupil of about 5 mm--7 mm at the most. What that means is that a 6.5 power scope will not benefit from having an objective lens bigger than 33 mm or 42 mm at the very most.
>>647617
The larger the scope diameter the more light is let into the aperture an the brighter the image you see through it. This allows you to easily see on darker overcast days and your performance isn't affected.
The difference from a 30mm to a 100mm scope is quite a bit in reference to light.
>>647624
>The larger the scope diameter the more light is let into the aperture
You are correct.
>an the brighter the image you see through it
You are incorrect. When the exit pupil (objective size divided by magnification power) is larger than about 5 to 7 mm, you reach a point of diminishing marginal returns. The pupil in your eye simply cannot grow bigger than that.
>6.5x
>150yds
Nigga u srs?
>>647637
It can be done, amigo. Can you see and hit a deer at 24 yards with iron sights? I bet you can. Since 150 yards at 6.5 power magnification is mathematically equivalent to shooting at about 23 yards with no magnification, you should be able to do it. Remember that a scope helps you see, but it doesn't make you steadier, and a steady shot is an accurate one.
>>647646
Hell, I shoot with irons at 200 yards.
>>647679
This my kid can shoot 200 yards with open sights.
But
op is still a fag.
Try getting within 200 yards of a free range prong horn. Not one shot over bait.
Or
Try shooting a prairie dog from 150 yards with 3-9 x 40, the cross hairs will be bigger than the dog.
4x32 is master race.
>>647633
You misunderstand. The image you see is brighter. That is all.
3-9x is great for deer
4-16x is nice for woodchucks
8-32x is nice for long range bench shooting
That's the scopes I use for my various guns.
>>647679
Hell, I START at 200 yrds, 300 and 600 yrds prone.
Do you even NRA highpower?
>>647742
I'm with you, but I have charged free range Pronghorn up to 40 yrds and they just looked at me. Until they bolted, but 40 yrds, they are curious!
>>647856
This anon gets it
>>647856
I just sold my .22-250 w/3.5 x 10, 50mm Burris.
Goodby walking around coyote gun!
>>647646
I think you're missing his point. Who needs 6.5x to shoot 150 yards? You don't even need any magnification at all. My eyes aren't the best any more, but I do ok with irons out to 100. Beyond that I like 3-9x which carries me out to 300 comfortably.
I usually leave it on 4. That way if I need to take a quick shot at a close quarry I can, and if it's out a couple hundred yards I'll have plenty of time to dial it up. Unless light is getting low I often just leave it at 4 out to 200 yards though.
OP you are a huge faggot.
>>647839
No, it isn't. Your eye can only let in so much light. You are not going to notice a difference in the image. The only difference you will notice is the weight and cost of your scope.
>>647742
Don't take it so hard. You'll get closer next time.
http://pronghornpride.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=27&Itemid=146
>>647920
NRA competitions are one thing. Hunting is another. Don't brag to me about how far you shoot. Brag to me about how close you can get.
>>647936
He wasn't very articulate. He could have meant that 6.5x was insufficient for 150 yards or overkill for that distance. I assumed he meant the former. If the latter, then that only proves my point even more.
Why do you shoot at 300 yards? Why not just get closer?
>>648190
I'll brag about any motherfucking thing I want to douch bag!
Who the fuck are you to tell me what I shouldn't be proud of, fag?
>>648190
>No, it isn't. Your eye can only let in so much light. You are not going to notice a difference in the image. The only difference you will notice is the weight and cost of your scope.
Are you tarded? Take a look at this image. Tell me which side is brighter. Hint: both sides are larger than your eye. The one on the right would be a 30mm scope and the one on left would be a 100mm scope.
You can literally look through both scopes and see a massive difference in how bright the larger one is.
Wait. Have you ever even used a 100mm scope before?
>>648190
>NRA competitions are one thing. Hunting is another. Don't brag to me about how far you shoot. Brag to me about how close you can get.
Not him, but I've been able to touch deer while out hunting. It is pretty easy if you know what you are doing. There's a fair amount of luck involved of course. Just be careful if you try that, they will kick like a mother fucker if you spook them when you touch them.
Still, I'd rather hunt from my truck, 2 hills away, and only step out of it when I need to take a shot. 1k yard shots are the norm where I live. The shots are really cool to see on video, you can actually see the cone shape in the air as it arcs towards the deer.
>>647617
Since you took the time to write a paragraph, I took the time to read it. But allow me to shorten it up for you:
> I'm a poor fag who can't afford nice things so you shouldn't have them either, it's not fair! If I could afford a nightforce I'd be telling you how great they are.
Sorry you're poor.
>>648693
Since you took the time to write a paragraph, I took the time to read it. But allow me to shorten it up for you:
> I'm a blind fag who can't see distant things so you shouldn't see them either, it's not fair! If I could see without a nightforce I'd be telling you that you don't need one either.
Sorry you're blind.
scopes with bigger exit pupils are easier to quickly shoulder and fire. it doesn't make that big of a difference, but it's nice. so is having money.
>>648697
I'm sorry you don't have nice things. Being spiteful towards those who do won't change your situation though. Good luck and God speed.
>>648697
Hey dipshit, owning a good piece of glass is about more than magnification or objective lens size. How about repeatability and zero parallax? Just as you value the ability to get close, some of us like long distance shooting/hunting. You can't make ethical long distance kills by just holding over, you need to dial your scope. This means spending real money and with that comes high magnification and a large objective. Get over yourself, you sound like whiny little bitch.
>>648693
Laughing.jpg
+1 internet points.
OP is a fag.
>>647617
On a scale from 1 to butthurt, where would you say you are?
>>647617
>150 yards
If you can't hit a 1sqft target at 1000 yards just stop shooting, I MEAN WHAT IS THE POINT
>>647617
I see guys with two eyes walking around shooting ranges like they're going to shoot the moon. It's not just ugly. It's unnecessary. One eye is all that is needed for shooting animals out to 150 yards. If your quarry is further than that, there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to get closer. Trying to shoot further than that will only make your face all squinty. The human can only look through a scope one eye at a time. What that means is that a scope will not benefit from having an extra eye.
