Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

40 or 50 MM scope ?

Rooster52

New member
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
Messages
1,818
What do you prefer a 40 MM or a 50 MM objective on your hunting rifle scope?
 
For years a 40,then saw the light(pun) on having 50 for low light/ and dense brush viewing of Blacktails,pigs,etc
Recently went to a Ziess in 44 for open country I now live in. 40 for mz.
 
X3^^^, 50 mm is just to big, especially these days when everyone is trying to shave weight off .
 
You would need to be shooting at 8x or higher to benefit from the 50mm lens. The human eye can only dilate to 7mm at best, and as you age this decreases. So in a nutshell, anything with an exit pupil of over 6 (obj size in mm / magnification x) is wasted.
 
I don't dislike 50's, I own several but I do prefer 40's on a hunting rig.

..this right here. I use the 50's to hunt whitetails during dusky/dawny legal light....and pigs in fringe light. 40's go to the mountains. Also, IMO 40's look better in perspective to the classic lines of a hunting rifle.
 
5-10 years ago i would of swore by the 50's but as glass and my budget have gotten better i typically lean towards the 40's on hunt rigs now. quality glass manufactures that make 42/44's are usually about perfect for my eyes and have no/minimal noticeable light loss over the 50's

C
 
Check out episode 9 of the Meateater podcast. His guests are the guys that own or manage Vortex optics. They give a lot of good information on the objective diameters and when you get to the point that you can't get anymore light through a 50mm than you can a 40mm. I can't remember the details but they dumbed it down enough that even I understood what they were saying when I was listening to it.
 
You would need to be shooting at 8x or higher to benefit from the 50mm lens. The human eye can only dilate to 7mm at best, and as you age this decreases. So in a nutshell, anything with an exit pupil of over 6 (obj size in mm / magnification x) is wasted.

This is what they were talking about on the podcast.
 
My preferences are not based on anything scientific, but I like a 50mm obj on a 30mm tube and a 40mm obj on a 1" tube. Scope just seems to fit the gun and or shooter a little better in my opinion.
 
I like my 50mm (300 WM) but it has it's draw backs:
It's heavier, requires taller mounts, bigger surface so more glare so you need a sun shade so it weighs even more. With the extra weight & height the mounts and rings take more recoil punishment.
But I love that extra couple of minutes of low light viz.
the rest of my weapons have 40's and they do fine.
 
Check out episode 9 of the Meateater podcast. His guests are the guys that own or manage Vortex optics. They give a lot of good information on the objective diameters and when you get to the point that you can't get anymore light through a 50mm than you can a 40mm. I can't remember the details but they dumbed it down enough that even I understood what they were saying when I was listening to it.

This is a really good enlightenment on that subject and many others in the optics world
 
The center of the scope's height vs. the center of your muzzle opening is a distance you want as small as possible for accuracy of shots. I tend to shoot close range so having the optimal set-up is not something I lose sleep over and mostly have 50mm on my rifles.

I have looked at 40mm side by side with 50mm and I like what I see through the 50mm better. Could be real or just in my head but 50mm work for me.
 
PEAX Trekking Poles

Forum statistics

Threads
110,816
Messages
1,935,453
Members
34,888
Latest member
Jack the bear
Back
Top