Rifle Scopes Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

Johnson184

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Dec 12, 2008
185
14
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Hey all,
I'm considering getting a USO SN3 scope. I plan on shooting at distances of 100-400 yards, and then gradually expanding as my shooting improves. I have some noob questions however...
Is there such a thing as too much magnification?
I'm debating on either the SN3 3.2-17x or the SN3 3.8-22x
Seems like there's not much of a difference between 3.2 or 3.8 on the low end, and having more top end magnification seems like a no brainer. (But I'm a noob, so I'm not sure if there's some drawback that I'm not realizing)

On another note... shouldn't I be going for maximum objective size? Like getting 58mm instead of the 44mm? It seems that the only tradeoff is slightly larger scope for better light transmission.
Thanks guys.
 

hershey

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Oct 14, 2007
68
0
northern ohio
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

i am a noob too, but in hopes to see someone answer part two of your question, i will contribute what i can.

mirage and target acquasition is the issues on high power scopes, my 20x super sniper is worthless for quick target issues, and mirage can really mess w/ my day at the range, but for me it was budget compromise, i got a reliable scope for $250, will i go 20x on my next one? probably not.

the ability to dial up in ideal conditions is good, but the ability to dial down in poor is more important i think.

on bell size (and tube size) i believe it has to do with how much light it can collect, which i believe from that perspective bigger is better, but i know there are some con's to that to, but don't know them all. one i can state is i mounted one 56mm scope and had it so high to clear everything that i could get no cheek weld. i remounted it on a different rifle w/ a tall cheek piece and like it allot better.
 

Hoploman

osok
Full Member
Minuteman
Mar 2, 2007
102
36
Palm Harbor, Florida
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

It's better to have and not need, than to need and not have. However, for practical shooting, spotting scope magnification levels aren't needed. Avoid the Hubble-syndrome some folks have. It takes away from much more important field of view which is a part of situational awareness. For fun on the range, who cares. Crank it up and shoot bughole groups.
 

superde

Gunny Sergeant
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 7, 2003
1,367
222
Bryan, Texas
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Johnson184</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It seems that the only tradeoff is slightly larger scope for better light transmission.
</div></div>

And weight. The 58 will be heavier.
 

Greg Langelius *

Resident Elder Fart
Full Member
Minuteman
Aug 10, 2001
9,041
5,268
AZ
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

22x is not excessive out to 400yd.

I have 24x available and use it regularly at SR/MR distances.

Mirage vs magnification becomes an issue somewhere beyond those distances, and definitely affects the suitibility of mags beyond 18X (for me anyway) at 1000yd.

Basically, I'd rather have the mags and not need 'em all, all the time, than not have them, and have a situation where I could have used them but didn't have them available.

Greg
 

Sterling Shooter

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jun 10, 2004
2,842
13
Louisville, Kentucky
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Johnson184</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey all,
I'm considering getting a USO SN3 scope. I plan on shooting at distances of 100-400 yards, and then gradually expanding as my shooting improves. I have some noob questions however...
Is there such a thing as too much magnification?
I'm debating on either the SN3 3.2-17x or the SN3 3.8-22x
Seems like there's not much of a difference between 3.2 or 3.8 on the low end, and having more top end magnification seems like a no brainer. (But I'm a noob, so I'm not sure if there's some drawback that I'm not realizing)

On another note... shouldn't I be going for maximum objective size? Like getting 58mm instead of the 44mm? It seems that the only tradeoff is slightly larger scope for better light transmission.
Thanks guys.</div></div>

Magnification only relates to good shooting when it's required to establish and maintain recognition for where the barrel is pointed. The concept is relative to target size, distance and equipment/shooter capability. For example, if your target is a tennis ball at 1000 yards, magnification will help you identify the target, you've got to see it to hit it, right? Yet, at 1000 yards, unless you're a real hard holder shooting a laser like bullet from an awesome rifle, the magnification is pretty much useless, other than perhaps clarifying your miss of the tennis ball. Bottomline, just think about the reality of the matter. BTW, using the BDC carry handle peep sight on an M4, a good shooter can get good hits, in most conditions, on the sort of target the M4 is designed to hit, out to about 600 meters with M855 ammo. Point is, it's all relative.
 

doc76251

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Dec 5, 2003
1,747
41
Virginia Beach, VA
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

Two things to consider

Size (length and diameter)

and

Weight.

If you are going to drive to the line and flop down neither one will be an issue. If you are going to run and gun or hump long distances take a good look in the mirror and decide how much that weight and size will affect your performance.

A larger objective will transmit more light. Objective in mm / power = exit pupil size.

58/22 = 2.63
44/22 = 2.0
58/17 = 3.41
44/17 = 2.58

How much YOUR eye can use is subjective.

Shoot me a line if I can help you out.

Cheers,

Doc
 

LoneWolfUSMC

Lt. Colonel
Full Member
Minuteman
Jan 9, 2008
7,386
13
Southern Indiana
www.8541tactical.com
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

The SN-3 3.2-17x is fine for 100-400 yard shooting. Too much magnification only applies when you are talking about fixed magnification scopes. The only other consideration is weight. High mag variables tend to weigh more than lower magnification versions.
 

TOP PREDATOR

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jul 19, 2008
4,595
80
51
SCRANTON AREA PENNSYLVANIA
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

if weight and size isn't an issue, not much difference on the low end between 3.2 and 3.8 for close shots, however i would prefer the more mag on the high end. while the larger bell will give you more light and therefore a brighter sight (which is a + with higher magnification), one drawback is that you'll probably have to go with higher mounts, which leads to cheek weld and eye alignment problems (and a sore neck without a elevated cheek piece).

you can always back the 22x down to 17x, but can't bump up the 17x to 22x. i always found it handy to have the extra magnification, even if i didn't use it all the time.
 

steve123

Lt. Colonel
Full Member
Minuteman
Mar 16, 2008
9,166
1,663
none of your business
Re: Too much magnification possible? (Noob questions)

Johnson184,

I've been out most most mornings this week working on loads for 3 rifles.

The scopes are a fixed 20x, variable 8-26x and 4-16x.I've been shooting groups at 100 yards so I've noticed a big difference between 26x-16x when aiming at small objects...always wishing I had more magnification on the other scopes.It's just useful to have.

I end up using the higher magnification for spotting hits on steel/paper instead of my spotting scope most of the time.If the mirage is up then I just dial it down to lower mag.

IMO on the huge objectives.They let in a tiny bit more light and are better suited for dusk/dawn but really make for a LARGE scope and heavyish.OK for shooting from one position but cumbersome for trekking around with.

I've been wanting a 3.8-22x44TPAL USO for a while.

Steve