Rifle Scopes Hunting magnifications

[armor2111]

I've never hunted with an optic. Since I was 12 I've used the same 30-06 pump my stepdad got me.

Now I'm looking to break into the optic world but I cant break my thought process of not being able to find an animal at close range while looking through the scope. I really like the mark 5, what's the opinion on the 3.6 for the low end mag in a hunting situation? Or should I look at something different

 

[spife7980]

Do you have to have a tactical scope for your hunting? A simple 3-9 leupold vx2 would be fine for a first time hunter, especially if youre doing shit at 3x.

 

[smarpin]

For hunting I am a big fan of the 3-18 range, low end gives you a wide field of view and ability to pick something up close and 18x lets you stretch your legs if the situation presents itself

 

[gr8fuldoug]

In a good, basic hunting scope there's:

Leupold VX-3i 3.5-10x40mm - Duplex

Steiner GS3 2-10x42 - 4A

Burris Fullfield II Riflescope 3-9x40mm - Plex

Burris Fullfield E1 3-9x40mm - Ballistic Plex E1

Burris Four X 1.5-6x42mm - 3P#4 E Dot Illuminated

To name a few. Please feel free to give us a call, 516-217-1000, to discuss what would be best for you
Doug

 

[sam4886]

If you're used to no optics at all, I'd look at a LPVO. 1-6, 1-8, 1-4, 1.5-6...something like that - depending on budget.

 

[armor2111]

Do you have to have a tactical scope for your hunting? A simple 3-9 leupold vx2 would be fine for a first time hunter, especially if youre doing shit at 3x.

I'd prefer it so then I can mount it on my non hunting rifle the test of the year.

 

[spife7980]

Well the issue with the front focals is that the reticle gets small at minimum magnification. Long range precision and short range quickness are at odds with one another. Illumination helps, but illumination in the mark 5 is like 500 bucks more expensive. If you dont mind the money then go for it but to me thats a pretty substantial amount.

Since you said that you have a dedicated hunting rifle, I would get a simple 200 buck scope dedicated to it. Its a pain having to take scopes on and off and rezero before you want to go use it somewhere. Especially if you are just now actually getting into it and learning everything new at the same time and actually legitimately concerned with the upclose hunting aspect.

 

[SD Carpenter]

2-12 is plenty 3-18 if you're feeling frisky. An animal looks a hell of a lot bigger then you think in a scope

 

[armor2111]

Well the issue with the front focals is that the reticle gets small at minimum magnification. Long range precision and short range quickness are at odds with one another. Illumination helps, but illumination in the mark 5 is like 500 bucks more expensive. If you dont mind the money then go for it but to me thats a pretty substantial amount.

Since you said that you have a dedicated hunting rifle, I would get a simple 200 buck scope dedicated to it. Its a pain having to take scopes on and off and rezero before you want to go use it somewhere. Especially if you are just now actually getting into it and learning everything new at the same time and actually legitimately concerned with the upclose hunting aspect.

I'm not new to optics or long range, and it really only takes a handful shots to get a decent zero again. I move optics and dots around a good but depending how I'm using what rifle or for a class etc.. I move my barreled action to different chassis and stocks as well. My hunting stick weighs 27oz, my chassis is over 3 pounds. I just dont have experience with finding an animal that's up close with an optic compared to staring down at a target at known distance a few hundred yards away. And I can get an illuminated mark 5 for less than a standard one that's a demo model right now. I've had nightforce stuff before in my 98 bravo, and I like them, and was looking at the 2.5-10. But with the mark 5 at the price I can get it, I dont think I can pass it up

 

[spife7980]

Well that’s a different situation than I the impression I got. Sounds like you found a good deal and want to take advantage of it, I say go for it.

 

[profileer999]

I like to see the whites of their eyes. I use a Kahles 624i on a 300wm.

 

[fdkay]

It depends on your hunting environment.
You really don't need as much magnification as many here tend to carry.
If your shots are close, no more than 300 yards or so, than a 1.5-5 or 2-7, or something in that ballpark is entirely suitable for hunting.
One of my favorite, low power hunting scopes is the Mueller 2-7 multi-shot.

If you are hunting out west and expect to take shots in excess of 300 yards, then you can bump up the mag range to 15 or 18 power on the top end.
When you start looking at the very high mag scopes, you'll need to consider the price, as a cheap high magnification scope is worse than a cheap low magnification scope.

There is a lot to be said for the tried and true 3-9 power scope.

 

[chevy_man]

Mine have 2-10, 3-12, 4-12, etc. I don't have anything for big game that goes over 12x.

On the other hand I don't have any varmint rifles that are less than 16x on the high end, mostly 6-24x

 

[ken4570tc in WY]

2-12 is plenty 3-18 if you're feeling frisky. An animal looks a hell of a lot bigger then you think in a scope

My trophy moose was so close that 2x was too strong. I had to just guess how high above the bottom hairline to hold. I missed the heart about an inch high. Fortunately, the .458 400 grain Speer flat nose soft point took out enough arteries he went down within sixty feet. There is no perfect solution for all circumstances. On a rifle, keep the low end at 3-4x and you'll be fine. On a handgun, it takes a lot of trigger time to get use to acquiring your target quickly with the long eye relief.

 

[Campt413]

If you don't need a "tactical" scope I would highly recommend the VX-6HD 3-18. I had one and it was very nice glass for the money.

 

[SD Carpenter]

If you don't need a "tactical" scope I would highly recommend the VX-6HD 3-18. I had one and it was very nice glass for the money.

It's the same glass as the mark5hd... It's a very nice scope for sfp

 

[Colorado S14]

I hunt out west, have a 4-14. Last 3 kills were 361yds, 375yds, 55yds and I used 8x, 8x, 4x respectfully. Never wished for more than 8x would have loved 2x.

 

[HEnrI]

6-20x is lots for hunting in mid to extended range!

 

[carbonbased]

When I got into optics I wanted to see my reaction to higher end SFP and FFP scopes. I’ve bought a Razor Gen II 4.5-27 for prairie dogs and have a Leupold Vx-6HD 4-24 with a Varmint reticle.

For me, FFP was the deal for prairie dogs, but as someone that’s going deer hunting after a 36 year break, I see the value in SFP. Just glassing around the woods with both scopes illuminated and at their min mags really hits home the fact that SFP has some serious advantages in that environment. I guess it depends how far you’re shooting at how big of a target you have.

The VX-6HD I have came with their sweet flip caps and an electronic reticle level. On the down side, the new scope had significant CA issues that were fixed very, very promptly by Leupold. I wish I had chosen a lower mag model, but I was running an experiment for prairie dogs, not deer.

Unless you have identical picatinny rails on your guns (not a sure thing), swapping may be a pain. As someone who intensely dislikes mounting scopes (it has to be done right), if I were you I’d buy a cheaper SFP 1.5 or 2-8/10/12 for the hunting rig and something FFP else for the target gun. OR GO RED DOT lol.

 

[MakeSawdust]

If you're used to using scopes for other types of shooting you will be fine. I've handled running coyotes at 10 yds with a 4.5x scope on the low end. The field of view on the mark 5 is pretty good if I recall correctly.

 

[DangerRanger]

I prefer 4-16 or 3-18, a good lower power for closer stuff and enough to shoot further than I am proficient on the top end.

I shot a running yote @ 50 yards last year on 6x as well as a beaver @14 feet on 4x no issues with close stuff personally

there is some public near me I’ve considering using a 1-6 on

 

[Healy]

For hunting swamps and deep timber or inside 200 yards I really like a sfp 2-10, 3-9, etc. Bean fields and open prairie 250, 300 yards beyond I like to use a ffp scope 4-16,5-20,6-24

 

[beetroot]

For a dedicated hunting scope where you anticipate hunting under 100 yards a lot, a 2-10/2-12 would be my pick. The VX5/VX6 with the firedot is a excellent close range reticle when set at 2x. I really wish Leupold still did the firedot Windplex in the 2-12.

For a more medium range/general purpose magnification range 3-15/3-18/4-20 would be my pick.

The 3.6-18 would make a good hunting scope, lightweight and compact. I wish the fov was a little wider but otherwise it'll do just fine.