Low light delimma... VX-II 50mm vs VX-3 40mm

[HogHunter1203]

Need some advice

I bought one of midway's blemished leupold scopes (VX-II 4-12x50) the other day to put on my Rem 700 .270 after I robbed it of the old Vari X III which now resides on my AR. The problem is I just got an offer for a VX-3 4.5-14 x 40 for a hell of a price; however, it's still more expensive than the vxii by about a Benjamin.

My question is... for a fair balance of longer range (300-500 yds) and low light hunting, should I keep the VX-II or take offer on the VX-3?

I'm very much a novice when it comes to optics so any advice would be great. Thanks.

 

[jmr40]

The VX-3 with a 40mm lense will transmit more light to your eye.

The amount of light getting to your eye is a factor of several things. The scopes objective size in millimeters divided by the power tells you how large a beam of light comes through the scope. A 50mm scope set on 10X lets in a 5mm diameter beam of light. Exactly the same as a 40mm scope set on 8X, or a 20mm scope set on 4X

On lower, or higher powers that beam of light will be larger, or smaller. But most human eyes only dialate to 5mm, so for most folks anything over 5mm is wasted. For someone in their 20's with above average eyesight a larger light source might be useful.

Once you understand this concept you realize that a 50mm lense is only an advantage over a 40mm lense if set on 10X and the 40mm lense is set on 9X. On any other power setting a 40mm lense is equal or better.

But that only tells you the size of the beam of light coming through the lense. A scopes light transmission rating tells you how bright that beam of light is. Low quality scopes let in only 80-85% of the light, regardless of the size of the objective. Most mid-grade scopes are in the 90-95% range and most high end scopes are in the 95-98% range.

I don't know exactly what Leupolds ratings are for those specific scopes, but the 50mm VX-II is a much older generation scope. The VX-3 is not only using much newer technology, but is 2 or 3 steps up in quality. The light tramsmission will be quite a bit better even with a smaller lense.

 

[Haxby]

Since you already bought the VXII, you could keep it and hunt happily ever after.

How do the prices on those two scopes compare to the price of a new VX2 4-12X50?

 

[HogHunter1203]

Thanks for the replies.

The VX II was roughly 350. the VX-3, roughtly 450 but has the Boon and Crocket reticle, which has it's appeal. Optics plant has the VX-2 version of my vxii for 479.

Guess I could always get the VX-3 and just find another rifle so I can mount 'em both....

 

[jmr40]

Leupold has upgraded their scopes twice in recent years. When they went to the VX-1, 2, or 3 vs the roman numeral VX-I, II, and III, they made major upgrades. Again just this year,starting in January, they revamped their entire lineup again, but without changing their names. It is hard to tell the difference at a glance but if you can verify it is a 2012 production scope you are getting the newest generaton and best quality scope.

A current VX-2 at around $300 is basically last years VX-3, but at a cheaper price. I consider this the best value in a scope today. I recently bought a new production VX-1 for $199. It is a much better scope than some older VX-III's I own, and right with a 2010 VX-3.

I used to recommend Burris, Nikon, or Redfield to those looking for a budget scope, but at the same price todays VX-1 is a far better scope.

 

[Haxby]

A year ago, the VXII 4-12X50 was selling for $480. If I was in your place, I'd keep the 4-12, pass on the 4.5-14, and not worry about getting another scope until I needed one.

 

[HogHunter1203]

The scope is stamped VX II on the rim of the objective and the box says VX II. As far as I can tell the thing is blemish-free. One thing I did notice is the word "leupold" is printed on the side of the dials instead of the traditional leupold "L" symbol. Perhaps this was just old stock they were trying to get off the shelf...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2