Limits of scope optics question

[tenth_gen]

I have a scope that is a first focal plane 5-25 x 56. At a laser verified distance of 200 yards, with the parallax set @ 200 yards if I zoom in past 10x the sharpness of the object at 200 yards gets pretty blurry.

Is this normal? Does the object need to be farther away to zoom past 10x and maintain clarity? I live in an apartment so it makes it difficult to test the scope.

Thanks

[Robinhood]

Forget about the markings on the parallax knob. The marks are for looks on most inexpensive scopes. Some scope manufacturers call the parallax knob a focus. This is a tremendous disservice to those that do not understand parallax removal is the primary objective when adjusting the side knob or objective. If you want to use a FFP scope correctly do this in this order.

Aim the scope at something bright and one color. The sky or the side of a barn etc. Distance does not matter. Adjust the ocular lens(the one on the rear eyepiece) until the reticle is as sharp and clear as you can get it. Bag the rifle in on a sturdy table. Looking at a target at any range, adjust the parallax until the reticle does not move on the target while you move your head left to right up and down. When the reticle does not move of the target with your head movement, you have eliminated parallax. If you target is not perfectly clear you can make fine adjustments at the occular lens, usually not more than a very small left to right location. The reticle must remain clear and still. If your parallax reads something different than the actual distance, don't be surprised unless you paid $3000 plus for it. If it bothers you wrap a black piece of tape around it.

Every time you change distance you will need to modify the parallax adjustment to get a clear and parallax free view. Dialing into clarity only is a recipe for larger groups than you are capable of.

[tenth_gen]

Forget about the markings on the parallax knob. The marks are for looks on most inexpensive scopes. Some scope manufacturers call the parallax knob a focus. This is a tremendous disservice to those that do not understand parallax removal is the primary objective when adjusting the side knob or objective. If you want to use a FFP scope correctly do this in this order.

Aim the scope at something bright and one color. The sky or the side of a barn etc. Distance does not matter. Adjust the ocular lens(the one on the rear eyepiece) until the reticle is as sharp and clear as you can get it. Bag the rifle in on a sturdy table. Looking at a target at any range, adjust the parallax until the reticle does not move on the target while you move your head left to right up and down. When the reticle does not move of the target with your head movement, you have eliminated parallax. If you target is not perfectly clear you can make fine adjustments at the occular lens, usually not more than a very small left to right location. The reticle must remain clear and still. If your parallax reads something different than the actual distance, don't be surprised unless you paid $3000 plus for it. If it bothers you wrap a black piece of tape around it.

Every time you change distance you will need to modify the parallax adjustment to get a clear and parallax free view. Dialing into clarity only is a recipe for larger groups than you are capable of.

Great thanks for the advice

[yobuck]

Great explanation RH, but please explain why 2nd focal plane scopes would be treated any differently?
In fact it might serve well to explain the differences.

[Dave Hoback]

Yeah..and don’t forget to rub your stomach & pat your head while singing “I’m a little teapot”.... or maybe play parcheesi while counting backwards on a Tuesday....THAN try adjusting it. Yeah, because that’s about as arbitrary a response as the above!
Holy jibba jab :crazy:

Unless it’s ED glass the scope just won’t have the sharpness WE “Want”. I can’t even afford a $1000 scope, let alone one of these STUPIDLY priced pieces. I have an Athlon Midas that I got for a really great deal. It’s in the $700 +/- group. For the deal I got, I love it. The sharpness is what I would expect in its class. Here’s what I learned long ago: Hypothetically speaking, I don’t need to to be able to read the writing on the the target’s T-shirt to stick a bullet in the center of that shirt!

[Dave Hoback]

Great explanation RH, but please explain why 2nd focal plane scopes would be treated any differently?
In fact it might serve well to explain the differences.

There is no difference in adjusting. Because it’s Jibba-Jab. The only difference is using the reticle for range distance or hold over. FFP is gtg no matter what magnification. With an SFP scope, these tasks can only be achieved using a specific magnification. It differs among types of SFP scopes.

[Dave Hoback]

Duplicate

[Robinhood]

Great explanation RH, but please explain why 2nd focal plane scopes would be treated any differently?
In fact it might serve well to explain the differences.

There is no difference Yobuck. That will work for any scope with a parallax adjustment as you know.

Dave, I'm sorry if I offended you. Not everyone is on top of their game like you are. Did you disagree with my instructions? Did I leave something out? Do you have another method or are you just having another bad day? If you need anything let me know.

[yobuck]

Well not to break up another nice party, BUT, much hoopla has been bandied about regarding scopes.
And much of that has more to do about selling scopes than it does scopes.
Give somebody who knows how to use a scope any of them, and they will make it work for them.
For certain applications, one could have some advantage over another, especially in the target shooting world.
But there could be disagreement over that also. But certainly the dial matching the reticle design makes sence.
With a first focal plane scope, (FFP) the reticle size increases as the power is increased.
Whereas in a second focal plane scope, (SFP) it stays the same size thruout the power range of the scope.
Those can be major differences for a hunter, especially when shooting at a small target at long distances.
As for holdovers, hunters as compared to target shooters tend to be a rather crude lot.
For example if your shot at a deer missed wide right, the spotter would be apt to tell the shooter that his shot was about a foot off his arse.
Hold on the end of his nose and shoot again. So using the reticle for gauging the space just wouldnt happen very often.
Another thing that takes place often in that same situation, would be the spotter simply asking the shooter if he saw the hit.
If so, then the shooter would be apt to hold steady on the target, dial the reticle to the hit, then shoot again.
No counting clicks, just spin the dial over to the hit.
So what difference does the type of scope make?
The later scenario would of coarse depend upon the experience level of the shooter.
Care needs to be given when looking into a scope when dialing, as it can be confusing
As for ranging a target at least accurately with a reticle of any type when hunting, is simply BS, much the same as (reading) the wind.
A better way and one which can be both fun and educational, is to just guess the distance, then dial that in and shoot.
Then use the method above to get on target, then count the clicks back to zero and save the information for next time.
Rocks tend not to move around very much from year to year, a few of those scattered on a hillside gives you all you need without using any range finder.
I used that very system to kill my first and only black Bear with a first round hit at about 700 yards.
Never ranged it, and didnt turn the dial on the scope. fact is it didnt even have a dial.
I was using a portable bench with a bipod and following the bear in my scope as it was running up the hill we had been glassing across a valley from where we were set up.
I didnt think it was going to stop till it broke over the top and was gone. But about 3/4 the way up it did stop, and i asked my son how far.
He looked at the page in our book for that spot which was already open, and said 7/750. I put the 700 yd dot in the 3.5x10 Leupold on top of his shoulder and touched off the 162 gr Hornady in the 7x300 Wetherby.
Was it luck? sure it was, but so was seeing the bear to begin with.
Its always more luck than good anything, but best not screw up the anything part, so cheat all you can by way of preparation for those rare moments in your life.
Buy whatever scope strikes your fancy, but learn how it works without thinking about it, because time dosent always permit learning on the job.

[Dave Hoback]

A lot of that is pretty sound yobuck. Reminds me of a very good friend of mine. He is a hunter through & through. And he appreciates top shelf glass with ED glass. Although his favorite is still just simple cross hairs. He uses the reticle for Target only. And he’s not into any kind of bullet drop compensation, etc. He uses a laser range finder and puts in his dope. Then guesses from there if needed.

[yobuck]

A lot of that is pretty sound yobuck. Reminds me of a very good friend of mine. He is a hunter through & through. And he appreciates top shelf glass with ED glass. Although his favorite is still just simple cross hairs. He uses the reticle for Target only. And he’s not into any kind of bullet drop compensation, etc. He uses a laser range finder and puts in his dope. Then guesses from there if needed.
Well Dave today laser range finders are the rage as well they should be. Most of them can be placed in a shirt pocket. They are relatively inexpensive with some very good ones costing under $500. And they usually work very well, but the key word is usually. For one thing they dont like bright sun, and that can cause issues. They also dont like it when snow is falling, or even a light rain. Of coarse hunters never encounter those things anyway. lol
I had a Swarovski lazer for about 5 years because one of my friends had one and liked it. I didnt like mine and sent it back to the factary for testing.
When it came back it was better, but after a few times of it not showing up when i needed it, it found a new home. I now have a Leica for about 4 years, its much better for consistency than the Swaro was but it dosent like sun either and will sometimes fail to range due to that. One of my sons bought a Sig a couple years back for about half the price of mine. Side by side they both work as well at least on the days we tried them. Ill tell you something else,
ranging a building at a mile, and ranging a bear running up a hill are far different. First off you wont even be apt to find the bear to even range it.
One of my friends were with us as we were hunting that day. He was very experienced at glassing and was using the exact same glasses i was on a tripod. He never saw the bear till it was dead, because he couldnt get on it while it was running thru the trees at that distance. One more thing about lazers, the pictures you see in the adds of a hunter ranging with one hand while making a sandwich with the other is like lots of other things, BS.
I have a special tripod for mine with about an 8” wide top supporting a rabbit ear bag, and thats what we use to cradle the lazer when we range with it.
The Leupold scope i mentioned was bought in the early 80s, and by the way, it sits in a Redfield mount. lol
BUT, realize if you can that there were no knobs at that time, unless you were using a target scope like a Unertle, and we used those also, but not on that gun. There werent any Nightforces or many of the others either in the early 80s.
The targets we used to make up our book years ago were in fact ranged with a range finder. But that was also pre lazer days when the only range finders were the old military coincidence type which are not very portable. I still have one and it is always in my vehicle while were hunting. It never fails to show up for work regardless of the conditions. So long as you can see the target, you will get an accurate range every time.
The bear story happened 15 years ago when i was a much younger 70. It mounted life size and still resides in our camp.
I still have the gun with the same scope (and mount), but i did sent it back to Leupold and had just an elevation knob added in addition to its custom multi dot reticle.
Now Dave you have also mentioned ED glass several times. Like other forms of ED, there is a cure for that. lol
The best cure is sitting down behind 2 sets of exactly the same optics at the same time and compare them.
At very first light, and very last light, you might find a slight difference.
Otherwise you will not.
Take a spotting scope for example having ED glass, the only ED glass in the entire scope is just the inner element of the objective lens.
All the other glass used in that scope regardless of the brand, is plain old glass just like the ones sold with the regular glass.
The eyepieces used are the same for both scopes, and again, regardless of the brand.
So ED like many other things today is mostly just BS.
If you havent done a comparison test i suggest you do.

[Dave Hoback]

Valid points. We can agree to disagree on some things. However, your stories are quite interesting my friend. Always a pleasure reading them. Thank you for sharing them.

[yobuck]

Valid points. We can agree to disagree on some things. However, your stories are quite interesting my friend. Always a pleasure reading them. Thank you for sharing them.
There will always be disagreement and differences of opinion, and thats a good thing because thats how we progress.
But then when i was about 15 years old, i watched through an Argus spotting scope as a then young man named Arthur Cook shot a perfect 400 score at a regional 4 position smallbore match.
He used a model 52 Winchester rifle with a Unertle scope with apparently pretty good ammo as well.
The 52 Studebaker we rode to the match in cost about $1000 brand new.
Can you imagine my parents even found their way all the way to Florida in it (and back), without interstate highways, and a GPS telling them where to turn.
But then gas stations gave free information and road maps also. Except in Georgia to them yankees. lol
How crude and backward a world it was.

[tenth_gen]

So I had the rifle and scope out in the bush on the weekend. It works just fine

https://imgur.com/a/HarNcV2

[Robinhood]

Nice photo! How did that method of setting up your scope work?

https://i.imgur.com/dRp4wQU.jpg

[tenth_gen]

Nice photo! How did that method of setting up your scope work?

Thanks, it worked well. I know a fair amount about photography and that helped me understand as well.

To sum it up: What I saw was loss of depth of field as magnification increases. Parallax (focus) is less of an issue at lower magnifications because your depth of field is large enough that everything is in focus. As you zoom in depth of field decreases and adjustments to the parallax become more sensitive. This effect is intensified if you want high magnification at a close distance. Camera zoom lenses work the same but you can gain depth of field by using a smaller aperature which you can't do with a rifle scope

[Robinhood]

I think I just saw a glimpse of a Sasquatch in the right center of that photo.

[Totosdad]

NOT sasquatch, his name is Daryll