3x9 vs 4x

[okstcowboy]

Im trying to decide on a scope. I wanted a 3x9 but the Nikon prostaff 4x looks pretty good and got me wondering how much I would change magnification. If anyone has a 3x9 how much do you actually change the magnification or anyone with a 4x do you wish you would have went with the 3x9

 

[CPTBeaker]

I have a Nikon Prostaff 3 X 9 on my 15-22 and I change the magnification a lot. If I want to shoot at 100yds, the 9x is pretty handy. The 4X is great for 50yds and is parallax free at that distance, but at least for me, wouldn't be great for shooting at 100yds. I also magnify my 50yd targets after shooting them so I can inspect them easier. Also, with the 3 x 9 you can improve your skills by shooting further distance at a lower magnification, and when you've had enough of that, zoom in and have at it. I think the variable magnification just gives you options.

I guess it depends on what you want to use it for. If you ever want to move up to a 5.56/.223 AR, you would be able to make use of the 3 x 9 but not the 4x so much.

 

[Jammer]

I also have a 3-9x42 tactical scope on my 15-22 and enjoy the ability to zoom out there for those long, 100+ yard shots! The 4x doesn't allow me to see target hits at that distance....

 

[lifeinva]

Get the 9X

I have a fixed 4X on mine and about 50 yards is all I can see out to.

 

[grimreaper21]

a 4x is popular for hunting. 1-4x even more. with a quality, expensive scope you should be able to at least 200yards, but, I've never compared these cheap china ones to a quality one. Whats your price range? I'm always going to recommend $200 scopes over $50 ones.

Heres a several thousand dollar scope just because. this is 6x at 250 yards. You can also see the 500, 750, and 1000yd lines. You'll never get this out of a cheapo china scope, but I'd recommend spending more around $200 if you want to be serious.
http://www.opticstalk.com/sb-156-with-68-at-the-range_topic26123.html?KW=S&B

If you decide on a 3-9x, I'd read this thoroughly, then I'd probably buy a vortex diamondback.
http://opticsthoughts.com/index.php...mparison&catid=4:rifle-scope-reviews&Itemid=4

 

[Rangerpat]

My opinion is if you are hunting during low light times of day, the 4 X is better than the 3X9.... but for overall general use I prefer the 3X9.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I have very much enjoyed the below 4x scope for shooting 50-100+yds. It has a micro-fine reticle based on one of the ACOG that can also be lit. The field of view is quite wide and well suited for offhand shooting and is crisp from edge to edge.

3-9x is probably one of the most popular magnification ranges of all scopes sold. Some inexpensive 3-9x can get a bit funky around the edges at higher magnifications, especially when manufacturers try to shrink 3-9x into a "tactical" style scope-- my observations of those type scopes at gun shows but I don't own one.

Some guys have bipods and or primarily shoot from supported positions. If that is the type shooting you plan to do might as well get a 6-20x or something along those lines.

I bought this one from Primary Arms but Sig sells a like version for around $100.

 

[SpudShooter]

for my purposes (plinking mostly) I am likeing this new leapers scope, it is a 4x32 so it fits really nice on the 15-22 and has clearer optics then the more expensive BSA and NCstar scopes I have used before.

I went with the 4x fixed after talking with a buddy who hunts larger game. I don't need to 'zoom in' my eyes are good enough and I got a lot better scope for a lot less money. IT has an AO lens so as long as your in focus your on target but that is really the only moving part. and to me that means it is more likely to take abuse.

Here is a look through, the wall is only a few feet away but you can see the cross hairs are nice and crisp, not as nice as that 2000 dollar one though. This one only cost me $34...

Yes it has illuminted reticle but i would of gotten one without if i could of. This one sucks unless your playing airsoft and want the cool factor just leave it off.

Heading out shooting tommorow rain or shine and I will know if it held zero. I will try and get some images down range at 50 or 100 yards if you want so you can see how fine the cross hairs are at range. if you want

 

[grimreaper21]

if you can mark a target at 250 yards / 500 yards id love to see how it looks.

 

[derrelw]

I have a 1-4 power Burris scope on my Sig Sauer 556 and it's a fantastic scope for me from very close up to 50-75 yards (I'm 52 yrs old). I have a 3-9 Leupold Mark AR scope on my FN Scar 16S and it makes 100 Yards + possible for me to see and hit as my eyes aren't what they used to be.

 

[OscarDelta]

i use a 2-6x28 NcStar Compact Scope, i like the different magnifications alot. i feel like 2-6x is plenty enough for me with a 22LR. i had a 4x scope before i got the 2-6x & am definatly happier with the multi magnification. i also like to use my highest magnification to check my tagets/shots as well, thats a great plus

 

[Ufd108]

Im trying to decide on a scope. I wanted a 3x9 but the Nikon prostaff 4x looks pretty good and got me wondering how much I would change magnification. If anyone has a 3x9 how much do you actually change the magnification or anyone with a 4x do you wish you would have went with the 3x9

If you're looking at the Nikon ProStaff 4x32 (as I was) then I suggest you look at the ProStaff 3-9x40 as well. Natchez has that scope for $99.95 which is close to what you would get the fixed scope for, and physically it's not much larger than the 4x32. I bought the 3-9 for summer use when I'm at the outdoor range. For the indoor range during the winter I'm using a cheap red dot.

 

[tacticool22]

I know some will think this is overkill, but a 3-9x50 works great for me. It gathers a LOT of light and the field of view almost makes it feel like cheating.
a 4-12x50 would be great for any hunting rifle. Wally World has them for less than $100.00 and Swarovski can be found for $1500.00 or so.
3-9 stands for the power range 3x magnification to 9x magnification. The x stands for the diameter of the objective lens in millimeters. So 3-9x50 reads 3 to 9 power by 50mm.
If you get a fixed power, go with the largest objective you can fit and/or afford,

 

[yeren]

For MP15-22 i bought used m8 6x leupold, which was cheap quality scope with exelent eye relief, very bright even in dark days and compact size. For serious bench rest days i can put a Meopta 4-16 tactic, which is perhaps best you can buy under 1000$/€. Unfortunately I have not got time for benchresting yet.
Cheap china scopes=> remember : buy cheap, buy twice.

 

[grimreaper21]

For MP15-22 i bought used m8 6x leupold, which was cheap quality scope with exelent eye relief, very bright even in dark days and compact size. For serious bench rest days i can put a Meopta 4-16 tactic, which is perhaps best you can buy under 1000$/€. Unfortunately I have not got time for benchresting yet.
Cheap china scopes=> remember : buy cheap, buy twice.

I could argue just for the sake of arguing that the Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 (or 6-24x50) FFP, Mil/Mil is the best scope under $1000

 

[tacticool22]

I cannot in any way argue the point ~ buy cheap, buy twice.

 

[okstcowboy]

If you're looking at the Nikon ProStaff 4x32 (as I was) then I suggest you look at the ProStaff 3-9x40 as well. Natchez has that scope for $99.95 which is close to what you would get the fixed scope for, and physically it's not much larger than the 4x32. I bought the 3-9 for summer use when I'm at the outdoor range. For the indoor range during the winter I'm using a cheap red dot.

awesome thanks for the link ive never been there before

 

[grimreaper21]

I cannot in any way argue the point ~ buy cheap, buy twice.

amen! instead of buying two crappy $70 scopes, just get a 150-200$ one.

 

[txf15crewchief]

The Leupold VX-1 is a pretty good scope for the money; I had a 3-9x50 and it was a joy to shoot with. Very sturdy and come with Leupold's lifetime guarantee.

 

[SpudShooter]

I got to shoot again and am still very satisfied with my bug buster, I took the camera with but it was pee soup fog so I didn't try to get any new pics. soon as i have a clear day I will get one for you.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I did quite a lot of reading about scopes before my last purchase (probably just enough to make me dangerous) but I find myself disagreeing with a lot of what I read here, especially about needing a large 50mm objective on a 3-9x scope to get more light...

The exit pupil on a 3-9x 50mm will range from about 16mm at 3X to about 5.5mm at 9x. Varying with age and the individual... on a bright day the pupil of your eye is only about 2mm, 4mm around dusk, and a fully dilated pupil in total darkness is about 7+mm.. and if you are an old fart your pupils may not dilate much over 4mm. Midnight shooting?

All things being equal (especially when you are looking at dime store optics), the downside of a 50mm objective include a heavier scope, using tall rings and risers, further away from the bore, cheek weld complications, more parallax and not as good depth of view as a comparable 40mm.

 

[tacticool22]

A larger objective just gathers more information and has a larger field of view. The weight can be negligible to equal from a 50 to a 40. I know on long outings (Oregon Elk) ounces = pounds and pounds = pain.
My 50mm's co witniss with my iron sights. I made sure of this so I didn't have the different cheek weld, tall wobbly rings, no different parallax than any other scope and superior field of view. More information into the objective lens, more out to your eye.
My binocs are 12x50. The difference betweenthose and 10x50 is amazing. I tried a 12x30 and will never carry those again.
But this is all opinion of course.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

A larger objective just gathers more information and has a larger field of view.

From what I am reading... Simply buying a scope with a larger objective lens does not necessarily mean that you are getting a larger field of view.

For example: Bushnell 4200 scopes-- 2.5-10x 40mm and 50MM shows to have the same field of view (actually, the 40mm shows to have a slightly larger field of view at 2.5x.). // Someone mentioned Vortex. The Viper HS 44mm and 50mm show to have identical field of view.

It appears to me that the design of the scope (within the magnification range) has as much or more to do with the field of view than just grabbing the big one on the shelf.

Bushnell - Elite 4200 2.5-10 x 40mm, Matte [422104M]

 

[tacticool22]

Yes, there is a lot more to scopes than just the numbers on the outside of the box. Everything adds up to be a superior, marginal or inferior product. Nothing beats a side by side comparrison. Let your eyes decide before you break out your wallet. What is the greatest thing for one person can be nothing more than a paperweight and expensive lesson for another.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Yes, there is a lot more to scopes than just the numbers on the outside of the box. Everything adds up to be a superior, marginal or inferior product. Nothing beats a side by side comparrison. Let your eyes decide before you break out your wallet. What is the greatest thing for one person can be nothing more than a paperweight and expensive lesson for another.

Field of view is a specific measure, not dependant on the user (absent glaucoma). But I do agree that there is a lot of myth and hype about optics that a side by side comparison can sometimes resolve as to the usefulness for the user.