Why a 3x9x50?

[Jeramie]

I was just at Walmart looking through some of their close out items. They had to Bushnell scopes, One was a 3x9x40 and the other was a 3x9x50. The 3x9x50 was actually $10 cheaper. Im assuming becuase the 50 needs the oversized rings to get the tube above the barrel. Other then that they were literally identical.

What is the point in a 50mm scope? Is it because they gather more light? Offer a larger field of view? Someone please enlighten me. Im not knocking them, just curious. All ive ever shot were 32 and 40's. Also which do you prefer on a deer rifle (answer carefully, this may constatute a new scope for my 06) .

[JimT]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

I prefer a 3x9x40 on my rifles. 50mm lenses will gather more light, but I would think a cheap 50mm would not be much if any brighter than a good 40mm..I could be wrong but......

[hutchies]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

Both of the reasons you mentioned. I like a 50mm but have a 44mm on my deer rifle. I really like the 44 because you can use low mount rings and still get more light and bigger field of view than a 40.

[AJ]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

A scope cannot actually magnify the amount of light that is received by the shooters eye. In fact, just the opposite is true. Every time the light goes through a lens or through a prisim, some light is reflected away from the shooters eye.

The larger the objective lens, the more light that enters the scope, and theoretically, the brighter the image. BUT, a cheap scope that has a 50mm obj lens with dark glass will actually transmit less light to the eye than a smaller objective lens with brighter better quality optics. When optics are of equal quality, the larger diameter will be brighter.

There is another part of the equasion called exit pupil. Exit pupil is the size of the column of light that exits the eyepiece of a scope. The larger the exit pupil, the brighter the image. To determine exit pupil size, divide the objective lens diameter by the power (a 3-9x50 scope has an exit pupil that is between 16.6mm and 5.5mm). So while a larger objective lens does gather more light than a smaller one, it doesn’t magnify that light. A larger objective lens creates a larger exit pupil, but not a brighter one. All of this sounds good for the large diameter objectives, but the eye can only receive so much light. When the light becomes dim and the shooters eyes naturally dialate, it is typically between 5mm and 7mm. So if a scope transmits a 10mm of light, at least 25% of it is wasted (no benefit). Scopes that have exit pupils bigger than 7mm are basically a waste. Going less than 5mm will decrease the quality of the image.

Yet another thing to consider is the added height necessary to clear those huge bells. They require the use of high and often extra high rings to get proper clearance. This places the shooters head higher above the stock. I prefer a more solid cheek weld and unless you have a horse head, its hard to keep your cheek planted on the comb and look through the scope. Along with the added height is added weight. Larger objective lenses increase the weight.

Personally, I prefer 44mm obj lenses. It seems to be a good compromise between the small 40mm and the larger 50mm. Usually it allows me to use medium or at most, high rings. It has good exit pupil, and light transmission. But, thats just me.

[iron buck]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

I also dislike the 50mm. I just do not like the balance they have when mounted on a hunting rifle. I much prefer the 32 to 40mm range. I have never felt that I lacked light gathering capabilities in any LEGAL shooting situation to merit the added bulk and $$$$ (in most cases the 50s cost more)

[7th]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

Well, I will put my $.02 in, I did not go that way for years thinking that the 40mm was all that was needed and then Dad gave me a 3.5X10X45 Bush I think and I loved it and now have a 6X20X50 Simmons on my 7MM Rem Mag, .300 Win Mag and .300 WSM and will not give them up.

I also have a 4X12X50 Simmons on my wifes 7mm-08 and I think it has a better view then any of the High pirced one's that I have seen.

If the Army would let me put a 6X20X50 Simmons on my M-24 I would pay for it out of my pocket and donate the Leopul 4.5X14X40 to the M-4.

Just my thoughts on this.

Frank.

[preacherman]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

I shoot the 3x9x40; but have a friend that shoots the 50 and he claims that his gathers more light than mine, but i still like my 40

[Shaun_300]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

It really all depends on the terrain and shooting distances you shoot with a particular gun as to what scope you should put on it. If you are deer hunting in dense bush, a 6-20x50 isn't the best one to use because your field of view for close range is magnified quite a bit, therefore it's hard to get your target in the crosshairs quickly. But if you are hunting in an open field, a higher powered scope works really well. Up here, I hunt deer mostly in dense bush, so I use the 3-9x40 on my deer rifles. But on my varmint rifle, I have a Redfield 6-18x50, because we hunt varmints in fields.

To me, your hunting area should determine the type of scope you use on the rifle you're using. JMO.

[wtnhunt]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

AJ gave a great explanation. The 40 mm Nikon I put on my wifes .243 is probably as bright as the Simmons 44 mag on my .270.

[AJ]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

[ QUOTE ]

It really all depends on the terrain and shooting distances you shoot with a particular gun as to what scope you should put on it. If you are deer hunting in dense bush, a 6-20x50 isn't the best one to use because your field of view for close range is magnified quite a bit, therefore it's hard to get your target in the crosshairs quickly. But if you are hunting in an open field, a higher powered scope works really well. Up here, I hunt deer mostly in dense bush, so I use the 3-9x40 on my deer rifles. But on my varmint rifle, I have a Redfield 6-18x50, because we hunt varmints in fields.

To me, your hunting area should determine the type of scope you use on the rifle you're using. JMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does this have to do with objective size?

[7th]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

Maby, I have used a scope so long that I don't fall into the "can't pick a deer out in the brush" I keep my power set as low as I can when moving and with the big lins on 6X it looks to me like a 32 on 3X but I have been using a scope on all my rifles now for 38 years and don't think about it, I just do it.

Frank.

[dogdoc]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

I have a 50mm leupold on my Tikka and had to order the taller rings for it---a great scope but if I had to do it all over again I would get either the 40mm or a 44mm. I have to raise my ever so slightly to get a good view due to the taller rings.

todd

[Jeramie]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

Thanks for the input gang. That will help in my decision. Im picking up a Handi Rifle today in .270. I was looking at 3x9x40 scopes but with the 50 being a little cheaper I considered buying one instead. After all the information it looks like im going for another 3x9x40! Ill get pics up if the Pawn Shop takes the offer. If they dont im ordering one from Walmart so either way.....

AJ, You nailed the answer once again. Thanks for the input.

[too_pointer]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

Your comb on your rifle is so high, and if you have to lift your face off it to see high mounts because of your scope, you have defeated everything

too_

[ranchand99]

Re: Why a 3x9x50?

Well,I have always shot 50+ mm scopes.They are supposed to gather more light at dark.3-9x40 is by far probably the most poular style.My first was a tasco 3-12x56,and I would have been better off with a 3-9x32.That scope didn't really collect that much light.It even had a 30mm tube.I currently use a 2.5-10x50 simmons.It's great,and collects more light than the tasco did.HOWEVER,my friend bought a 3-9x40 nikon buckmaster,and it gathers light better than my simmons.His scope did cost nearly $100 more....but that's how it is.A Bigger bell doesn't always mean it will give you more light transition.If it is the exact same line,such as if both are bushnell sportsman then go with the 50.If they aren't of the same line,but of the same brand,then the more expensive one will generally be better.(Such as the Elite is better than the sportsman)Neither may be better than what you are currently shooting.It's just a preference thing.Most of the time you get what you pay for though. Hope I helped.