I am getting older and my eyes need more viewing power. Has anyone tried the Vortex Viper or Viper HST in 4x16x50? How do you like it and what size rings did you mount it in.
I was thinking 6.5x20x50 but that may be a bit of over kill for deer.
Printable View
I am getting older and my eyes need more viewing power. Has anyone tried the Vortex Viper or Viper HST in 4x16x50? How do you like it and what size rings did you mount it in.
I was thinking 6.5x20x50 but that may be a bit of over kill for deer.
If you are going to spend that money get a Zeiss. It is 1" but the glass reduces the magnification need.
BC where you buying Zeiss for $500
I need more than 3 x 9
Not if you have good glass. It is a game changer. But I will entertain you. The viper is half the glass of the conquest so you need to do a minimum of the HS. So now you are near 600. Lets look for more than 9X. I will return.
That viper is a good scope. Spend the little extra and get the HS 4-16x50 LR (long range) and be sure to specify the "Dead Hold BDC reticle". That gets you a scope with a capped windage turret, an exposed elevation turret and a really great reticle with 1 min tics on the horizontal and vertical cross hairs. It sells for $599, had 50min of windage and 75min of elevation adjustment 30mm tube.
HST is literally brand new.
Its basically a 4-16x PST with no illumination, 44mm objective and a wire (vs. etched) reticle. Glass is the same.
I have two Viper HS 5-15x44s...HDMR they ain't, but they are good scopes and better values.
I was referring to the 50mm HS__LR scope. There is a 44 which is cheaper.
Some guys on this forum do not realize that with age, some of us have eyesight which degrades. It makes no difference whatsoever how good the glass in the scope is, if the resolution of the viewer is lower than the resolution of the glass, all the quality in the world is inconsequential. However, having a bit more magnification does help.
Its like taking the oldest 3mp Canon DSLR ever made and then only buying "L" lenses for it. You would spend 10x the money, but not see the slightest difference on most of the pictures.
If you can shoot good at 1000 yards with a 10x or 14x scope, good luck to you. There are many of us who cannot see the target at all at 10x so please excuse us when we buy 24x scopes...
How old are you West?, TXBdy?
I'm 45 but have never been able to see properly since I was a teen. Short sighted, astigmatism and floaters. Military qualification I couldn't even see the targets at 200 yards. Couldn't figure out which blob was mine.. You guys who have great eyesight better appreciate it, it does not last forever. I have had the floaters for as long as I can remember. Supposedly caused by bleeding in the eyeball at some point. So far I have been too afraid to go for LASIK. Whatever they do can be irreversible.
Given that I can now shoot 1/4 MOA groups at 100 yards, I think I am coping fine, I just want to say that some of the comments are out of line because they do not take the condition of everyone's faculties into account. I will probably never own Zeiss or a NF simply because I may never be able to utilize to any advantage the extra capability of that glass. Most of the high end stuff was made for the eyes of 19-28 year old professionals...
At 50 I experience all of that too. I was lucky to maintain 20/13 until I was 42 though. I do concur that the Viper HS is a good value and that TXBDYGRD will be satisfied. He did only ask about the Vortex and you and I as well as boiler up pushed him to the HS.
I always respect your thoughtful posts, however today I disagree. Quality Glass trumps power in a reasonable comparison and resolution is only a portion of the story. I have had the good fortune to sit down with S&B's Nightforce, Swaro's, Sightron SIII's, Steiner's USO's and Zeiss and made comparisons. And as slew of other optics. Seen it, done it, and proved it. If your eyes have deteriorated so much you can't discern the difference I feel badly for you. But not all of us have deteriorated to that point.
When it comes to camera equipment which records its image on something other than my eyeballs, I will pay for apo glass. But for something I am going to look through, it is me who is the limiting factor. Everyone has to decide for themselves where to draw the line. The Minox I returned to get my first PST scope had terrible fringing problems in high contrast areas like I had never seen before and also parallax issues that the scope provide you no means to correct. I now own a 4-16 and 6-24 FFP Viper PST and 2 Nikon Monarchs and for the moment I am completely satisfied with my Vortex scopes and their reticles. I am intending to move to Colorado pretty soon and then I will have to see whether it is my eyes, mirage or the scope which is my limiting factor.
I will emphatically state however, that there is no way that I am ever going to buy the story that simply buying superior glass is going to have me taking 1000 yards shots with a 10x magnification scope.
I have the 6.5-20x50 Vortex viper. The glass is pretty good for its price class. I have a buddy that has the Viper HD FFP 6-24x50 IIRC on his gun and that glass is pretty close to pro photographer class glass , bright to the edges, no noticeable edge distortion. But I can't go pixel peeping on it like I can with my photography gear. I am going to upgrade to this scope over time but its a $$$$ I am 32 and have been very fortunate to have excellent eyesight.
My eyes are certainly different than yours, but I found out that (much to my surprise) I was able to take shots at 1000 yards with my Bushnell Elite 10 x 40 fixed power scope. YMMV.
:focus:
I owned that scope and hated it. Couldn't get rid of it fast enough. Turrets on mine were mushy and had no repeatability. Magnification was too high to use in the field without having a backup red dot since everything up to a certain distance it simply out of focus with the fixed focus design.
I have heard of the "Chuck Yeager" eyesight phenomenon and I am sure there are plenty enough people who can spot the jerries at 5 miles. I am just saying that I can't and never will: without enough magnification.
Lots of eyesight issues are a product of lifestyle and work environment. Being jammed in a cube with a partition wall 24" from your nose for 8-12 hours a day from the time I was 24. I heard that my eyesight would stabilize after my teens, but that has not been the case. In europe there are workplace laws that do not allow the kind of workstations that are pervasive here in the US since they are known to create issues with eyesight. Its one of the reasons why they tend to have high rise buildings as opposed to single story sprawl. Cost of land is the other.
See what you started you 6'4" cattleman!
BC I am 51 and started wearing glasses when I was 29. I am in no line bifocals. And my paying job requires me to look at screens all day. So what rings are ya'll using for the 50mm objectives.
XTR 30mm lows with a Bushnell 6-24x50 on a Weaver or EGW 20MOA base.
Burris tactical medium here.
I have a 11 Hog Hunter with Warne bases. Are mediums enough?
I have an egw 20moa base on my flcp-k and it has plenty of clearance.
How think is the Warne base? Why have you decided against your usual Warne ring combo? Are you looking for something to ride low?
No BC I'm going to use Warnes but these are 30MM and don't want to have to order twice.
I have a pair of medium tactical Warne's on a hog hunter with a Burris 50mm objective, I would say I have 3/8 inch clearance using a one piece weaver rail.
Great info bc thx