at what magnification range does parrallax correction via AO or SF become desirable or even essential? what i think i know: seems the high end scopes of 10x or less don't have it; my hands on tells me that,for me >10x,it is needed; heard just that "on the street". 65y.o eyes with trifocals and some astigmatism. there is at least 1 medium level (high end to me) scope tops @ 12x with no adjustment offered. over about 6X would be shooting only know distance paper. hunting i use the lowest mag i can get away with and hold on & see heart lung area. FOV and exit pupil matter to me there. thanks for any explanations or input.
Rifle Scopes magnification and parallax question
- Thread starter mosin46
- Start date
Re: magnification and parallax question
You nailed it. I would say 10x is where it gets bad but that's not to say it doesn't exist at 10x. I shot a marksman course out to 1000 yards with my NF NXS 2.5-10x that doesn't have parallax.
450-500 yards is where it got real bad between sight picture & reticle focus that I had to use the diopter adjustment to find a happy medium focus between reticle & target.
That NF is great for a field/hunting rifle, but for a target set up where I expect 500+, I will never make the mistake of having a scope without parallax. I would take a Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x over the NF, with the USO 1.8-10x TPAL being my ideal pick.
You nailed it. I would say 10x is where it gets bad but that's not to say it doesn't exist at 10x. I shot a marksman course out to 1000 yards with my NF NXS 2.5-10x that doesn't have parallax.
450-500 yards is where it got real bad between sight picture & reticle focus that I had to use the diopter adjustment to find a happy medium focus between reticle & target.
That NF is great for a field/hunting rifle, but for a target set up where I expect 500+, I will never make the mistake of having a scope without parallax. I would take a Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x over the NF, with the USO 1.8-10x TPAL being my ideal pick.
Re: magnification and parallax question
distance determines the importance of AO (more important at closer distance) magnification is considered to increase the error but I have never seen a clear explanation of why
non AO centerfire scopes are set at 100 yd ( or some 100 m) with the potential error greater (in moa) at 25 yards, than at 400 yds
the error is only potential because if the eye is kept at the center of the exit pupal there is no error (good luck with that unless you have beyond human abilities like a few on this site claim)
distance determines the importance of AO (more important at closer distance) magnification is considered to increase the error but I have never seen a clear explanation of why
non AO centerfire scopes are set at 100 yd ( or some 100 m) with the potential error greater (in moa) at 25 yards, than at 400 yds
the error is only potential because if the eye is kept at the center of the exit pupal there is no error (good luck with that unless you have beyond human abilities like a few on this site claim)
Re: magnification and parallax question
thanks. i am a way imperfect human machine. but,another question rises. parrallax correction being a bigger issue at LOW range? didn't know that. actually,a non-issue. WTD in the woods @ 50 +/-even i can hit. exit pupil and FOV are the deal there. wanting to get the best out of my "package" @ 200+ on paper. i am trying,without sucess,to talk myself into burris BD 3-12. has no parallax but illum (which i care less about). $600 +/- budget AAAAH!
thanks. i am a way imperfect human machine. but,another question rises. parrallax correction being a bigger issue at LOW range? didn't know that. actually,a non-issue. WTD in the woods @ 50 +/-even i can hit. exit pupil and FOV are the deal there. wanting to get the best out of my "package" @ 200+ on paper. i am trying,without sucess,to talk myself into burris BD 3-12. has no parallax but illum (which i care less about). $600 +/- budget AAAAH!
Similar threads
