Quote:
Originally Posted by ODDJOB UNO
the bigger the far end ocular the higher you will have to mt scope off of barrel which is bad. the lower you can mount the better. example 40mm ocular will be lower than say 56mm ocular which will be higher off of barrel.
the lower the scope to the barrel THE BETTER!
simple would be pick scope/than pick rings from leupold and then pick mounts from leupold.com
|
But the bigger ocular will have better clarity then another scope with smaller ocular if they do the same magnification..
eg
4 x 20 will be darker then 4x50
It's about finding the balance between clarity, tubeheight(and resulting parallax) and required magnification..
Simply saying that a lower tube is better then a higher tube is just silly
Why else would anybody make 56mm scopes if that were true.
Big scopes have there purpose, and for those that need em, they will no just consider those scopes "Bad" but they just require more input from whoever is using it to compensate for the increased parallax at shorter ranges..
So if 4x magnification is all you need, one is prolly better off with a smaller ocular
if 20x magnification is needed, then you'll have no choice then to go big. but i will be more difficult at shorter range.