Parallax, is this normal

[coolbox]

I have been shooting my CZ550 Varmint with a Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40 LR scope, with side focus (parallax adjustment).
I adjusted the parallax at 200 meters (219 yards), and noticed that the parallax adjustment at 200 meters does not need to be changed at 600 meters (656 yards) and 800 meters (875 yards). Is this normal? Or is there something else I need to look into?
At 200meters, I can still see a bit of reticle movement, no matter where I adjust, but none at 600 or 800meters.

 

[Grumulkin]

You say the parallax is adjusted for 200 meters and also that you can see a little reticle movement at that range. If you can see reticle movement, it's not adjusted correctly.

 

[jmr40]

People over think the effects of parallax. A quote from Leupolds owners manual.

scope focused for 150 yards has a maximum error of
only 8/10ths of an inch at 500 yards). At short distances, effects
of parallax do not affect accuracy (using the same 4x scope at 100
yards, the maximum error is less than 2/10ths of an inch ). It is
also good to
remember that, as long as you are sighting straight
through the middle of the scope, or close to it, parallax will have
very little effect on accuracy.

It takes a pretty accurate rifle and shooter for .8" at 500 yards to mean anything.

 

[Dave P]

"remember that, as long as you are sighting straight
through the middle of the scope, or close to it, parallax will have
very little effect on accuracy."

But not everyone gets enough practice to be sure were are " sighting straight
through the middle of the scope".

So setting the parallax correctly, allows the shooter to put his eyeball any place he wants, and still great accuracy.

"adjustment at 200 meters does not need to be changed at 600 meters (656 yards) and 800 meters (875 yards). " Sounds OK to me.

 

[rbernie]

I have found that the marks on the focus adjustments when properly focused do not necessarily correspond to actual distance. I pretty much ignore them, and just focus for clarity and stability.

 

[murf]

i second that notion. most ao scope hash marks are quite a bit off the mark.

murf

 

[coolbox]

Thank you everyone.
I did not set parallax based on marks or hashes. I checked for picture clarity and reticle movement.
The thing that confused me was that there was no need to adjust for 600 or 800. I guess I should not worry about that anymore.

 

[Walkalong]

I have found that the marks on the focus adjustments when properly focused do not necessarily correspond to actual distance. I pretty much ignore them, and just focus for clarity and stability.

Yep.

 

[taliv]

depends on the scope. often that is correct, but more often than not, they don't line up because the diopter isn't set correctly.