Scopes

[FirstBubba]

Couldn’t load the GIF like I wanted…Must be my poor vision

You just need to mount a scope on your keyboard, Ernie! 🤣😂

[fitch270]

Couldn’t load the GIF like I wanted…Must be my poor vision

Or a dope card. 😎

[Ernie]

Or a dope card. 😎

Nailed It!

[DakotaMan]

Unless you have 'perfect vision' you will not get the full potential of the scope lenses.

I agree that near and far sighted vision problems are corrected by the ocular lens on a scope. However other issues such as astigmatism can be remedied by corrective lenses worn by the shooter.

I HAVE however encountered a problem with "progressive lenses" that I wear to correct nearsightedness. Progressive lenses I have used all have a negative impact on my accuracy. Using such lenses that apparently have larger graduations between the changing level of correction in the glass have been unusable for shooting. They actually showed me multiple cross hairs and I had no way of knowing which was the actual one I should use. Others significantly changed what I saw as the point of aim. I can not use progressive lenses in long range shooting with any of the scopes I use for that. In competition, my scores go way up when I shoot without progressive corrective lenses. For competition where accuracy is real important, I simply use plain non-prescription safety glasses after adjusting my ocular lens..

[DakotaMan]

I finally mounted my Vortex 3-7x Crossfire Rimfire scope on my Ruger 10/22. It previously shot 3" groups at 50 yards with the cheap factory scope that came with it. This is Vortex's bottom of the line scope so my expectations weren't too high. I did buy one though because my brother was so happy with his. I also put a new Kidd 2 lb trigger in it at the same time. I am so happy with it now. I'm getting nice consistent 1/2" or less 5-shot groups at 50 yards.

This is a five shot group on a 3/4" dot at 50 yardst.

[Ernie]

Well said.
You figured it out.

[jhjimbo]

I finally mounted my Vortex 3-7x Crossfire Rimfire scope on my Ruger 10/22. It previously shot 3" groups at 50 yards with the cheap factory scope that came with it. This is Vortex's bottom of the line scope so my expectations weren't too high. I did buy one though because my brother was so happy with his. I also put a new Kidd 2 lb trigger in it at the same time. I am so happy with it now. I'm getting nice consistent 1/2" or less 5-shot groups at 50 yards.

This is a five shot group on a 3/4" dot at 50 yardst.

Very nice, don't change a thing.

[jhjimbo]

I agree that near and far sighted vision problems are corrected by the ocular lens on a scope. However other issues such as astigmatism can be remedied by corrective lenses worn by the shooter.

I HAVE however encountered a problem with "progressive lenses" that I wear to correct nearsightedness. Progressive lenses I have used all have a negative impact on my accuracy. Using such lenses that apparently have larger graduations between the changing level of correction in the glass have been unusable for shooting. They actually showed me multiple cross hairs and I had no way of knowing which was the actual one I should use. Others significantly changed what I saw as the point of aim. I can not use progressive lenses in long range shooting with any of the scopes I use for that. In competition, my scores go way up when I shoot without progressive corrective lenses. For competition where accuracy is real important, I simply use plain non-prescription safety glasses after adjusting my ocular lens..

Based on the number of cones and rods a healthy eye has, it can resolve 147 lines per inch - or 296 pixels per sq. inch - max.
A top quality scope is capabpe or much greater resolution, therefore, the human eye is the limiting factor and will never reach the resolution of fine lenses.
How many line pairs per inch can a human eye resolve?
Quora User, Optical Engineer, Ophthalmic Surgical Instrumentation R&D A human with normal vision (20:20 on a Snellen eye exam) can resolve details as fine as 30 line-pairs per degree. At a viewing distance of 12", this means a person with 20:20 vision will be able to resolve 140 line-pairs per inch.

[DakotaMan]

Very interesting jimbo. I'm not sure how to interpret those facts though. Yes, the human eye has limitations on resolution, however, the scope can increase image magnification and eliminate parallax to assist in precise aiming and even though the target may appear to be less clear than ideal, as long as the shooter puts the cross hair image in the center of the target image, they will hit well. My nearsigntedness is pretty bad but I can still adjust my ocular lens and hit 1000 yard X-rings and 3-inch wide p-dogs just fine without corrective lenses.

[CD2]

I got an SWFA standard 12x for rimfire stuff to 100 yards.

Havent even tried it out yet.

For hunting guns, its to the point that its vx3hd or better. Was looking at the new S&B model.

https://www.schmidtundbender.de/en/n...s/3-18x42.html

Sucks but am now looking at stuff 1 to 2k. And I aint made of money.

Figure less but better stuff might be the way to go.

[CD2]

I got the SWFA for maybe NRL22.
plus a general 12x is nice to use when testing loads to 100 yards. Cheap enough to keep as a testing scope. Dont care about ring marks.

But hunting stuff is getting upgraded optics as needed.

Yup, my 35 rem wears a vx1 2-7x.
It may get a Steiner 1 to 4x.
Ugly, but checked one out at range, actually 1 to 5x pxi or whatever.
1500.bucks.

It was stunning.
would be awesome.on a custom Home

But proly not kill better than what i already have.

Sucks being practical LOL

[CD2]

Ive had 4 brand new Leupolds messed up from the start. 3 were repaired and 1 replaced. Zero problems after. That out of about 2 dozen bought new and a dozen or so bought used. Used ones were fine.

Am about done w their stuff. They used to be good looking for classic rifles, but have uglied the whole line so might as well buy euro.

Or Nightforce

[CD2]

BTW 20/40 vision isnt good.
That means you see at 20.what normal sees at 40.

20/20 is normal.

20/15 is better.

20/10 is 1 % of the population.

Even if you have great lenses there are other aspects to vision, like tracking etc.

An optometrist is not an opthalmologist.

[CD2]

My vision degraded to 20/ 15 in my mid 40s.
its gotten worse.
Tracking is dead on. Retinas great and no scarring of lenses.
But my left eye doesnt turn left LOL.

Born that way. But tracking is perfect in all other.

Like the eye specialist said....people would.kill to have your vision, even w the left issue.

Id sit on the rifle looking through scope, look left w right eye and itd lose focus and turn my left eye to dominant.

Switch back and forth, in and out of scope, no head movement.

Hell i learned that as a kid, i just did it.

Now pushing 60 i can still do it but eye fatigue comes on fast as does a dull headache.

Getting old sucks. Can buy better gear but not use it like I could if I was younger.

My adaptability is reduced so am more critical. Eyebox is a biggie. Lens clarity. And....it pizzes me off no end if theres blur at edge of.image.

Yeah, we dont look there when aiming, but spending $ we shouldn't tolerate such crap either.

I want good color, detail and flat image. My buds VX5 or 6 was good. As was a range members Steiner.

Stuff in the shadows was not able to hide.