Do I give up much by going from 40mm to 32 or 36 mm?

[ThunderStick]

   Here's the rub.

   I am leaning twards a lightweight scope in the 2-7 range for white tail hunting. How much light gathering will I give up over a 40mm objective by going to a smaller size? With my other 3200s, I could probably take a close shot ofter legal shooting hours, in the open, in the woods it's a little darker.

   I am tossing around the Bushnell 3200 2-7, Burris 2-7, Mueller 2-7 multishot, and the Weaver V 2-7.
   A local shop has started carying the Mueller brand and I must say it looks impressive. I had a Bushnell 3200 3-9x40 and was impressed. I must admit that I have read good reviews of the Multishot, does anyone know what the paralax is set on this scope at? I can find nothing on this. The Weaver looks like it may be the most compact and light weight of the lot, but I know nothing of this line of scopes. I'm trying to keep my budget in check and under $200. Scope to go on a .260 Rem. cal rifle.
Thanks

[Graybeard]

Most 2-7s aren't 40 mm anyway. You do give up something but that something is mostly not a big deal. The average human eye can expand from around 4mm-7mm max and us old farts can't do the 7mm anymore and are lucky to top out at 5mm. So as long as your exit pupil is that your eye will never see the difference really.

BUT eye placement is more critical the smaller the exit pupil so you have to really keep the eye properly aligned or it can black out on you with the smaller exit pupils. For an example try looking thru a Burris 3-12 handgun scope.

At 7X a 35 mm objective gives you that magic 5mm exit pupil so it will seem as bright to your eye if you're an old fart like me as one with a 40 mm objective and as far as the criticality of eye position you'll hardly notice the difference in that either if it's a 2-7 and if you don't max it out then you'll notice it even less.

For the most part tho I seen 2-7x33s as most common and they are just fine as long as they are good quality and multi-coated.

[Siskiyou]

When I recently went looking for a scope for my old Marlin 336 one of my objectives was to find a scope, which I could mount close to the receiver.  Something that was close to the old 4x scope I was replacing.  I failed myself when I selected a scope.  I purchased a Burris Fullfield II 2-7X35.   http://www.burrisoptics.com/fullfield1.html#2x7x


The power ring on the rear eyepiece is huge and I had to use high rings to clear the receiver/hammer.   I have shouldered the rifle a number of times with the scope on it and the tall mounts do not seem to create a problem, but I would like to get my cheek down lower when sighting.  I was able to mount an old Weaver 2.5x7 lower on the receiver in the past.

I made the round of sporting goods stores after Christmas hoping to do some scope comparisons.   They had a lot of scopes for long-range applications but little or no stock in the 2-7x slot. 

I have a rifle with a Weaver V9 (3x9-38MM) scope on it and one with V10 (2x10-38MM) scope on it.  I took this buck on the run using the 2x10-38MM scope. 



I credit the scope to my success on that day.  The buck was running in a pine shaded, brush covered area.  I was leading the buck in my crosshairs.  The cross hairs seemed to light up and easy to see.  The low mounting of the scope enhanced my ability to quickly mount the rifle, and track the deer. 

The ability to mount a scope low is an advantage not a disadvantage.  While the mention scopes are not high priced, they do a good job in legal low light conditions.  From my prospective the influx of large objective lens came from Europe where hunting after dark is legal.  In the States I have hunted in legal shooting time starts at ½-hour before sunrise, and ends 1/2 –hour after legal sunrise.  The 32MM, 35MM, and the 38MM objective scopes do a good job within legal shooting hours.

Using legal shooting hours and sometime beyond I went out back the other day with two scopes in hand.  One was an of outdated 35+ year old Weaver 2.5-7x and the other was the new FFII 2-7X35.  A tall spike Blacktail/California Mule deer mix was feeding in the failing light.  The FFII outperformed the older scope.  It seemed to light up the buck who was 65-yards away.  I kept switching scopes and the FFII did a better job.  I sure would have like to have a current Weaver 2.5-7 scope to compare.  There has been a great improvement in lens coating over the years.

Down slope there was a bunch of does, and fawns in a more shaded area of oak canopy.  The FFII did an outstanding job, and I believe the field of view was better.  In the long run I think I will be satisfied with the FFII, despite my criticisms. 

I have a 270 Model 700 with a 2x10-44MM scope on it.  It is not a bad combination, but I think it slowed me down slightly this year when getting on a buck.  The buck was successfully taken with one shot, but it felt awkward. The combination worked great on another buck at long range when the time frame was longer.  For me the advantage goes to the 2x10-38 over the 2x10-44.

Past experience with the old Weaver 2.5x7 indicates that four hundred yards is my limit on deer and antelope.  The advance lens coating on the FFII might push that range.

[WyoStillhunter]

Back in the day I had a Weaver V8.  That was the 1960s.  It went away in some sort of trade long ago.  Since then I have used fixed power scopes in 2.5X, 3X, and 4X with one exception.  Six or seven years ago I bought a Leupold Rifleman 2-7X33 which I now have on a M700 Classic Limited .223.

In the last 40 years the only scope I've had with an objective larger than 33 is a fixed 4X42 Sightron (one of the earliest of the Sightron line).  It is too big for my tastes but performs very well.  It came on a used M700 Classic Limited .35 Whelen and was promptly replaced by a Weaver K2.5.  Now I use the big Sightron 4X as my spare scope and it's been on several rifles for load testing, etc.

A good quality 2-7X30-something is the classic all around scope in my opinion.  Nowadays the 3-9s are more popular but I prefer a trimmer scope.  As a matter of fact I just ordered a Leupold FX II 4X to go on a M700 Classic 6.5X55.  In recent years I have passed two rifles off to my son, both wearing Leupold M8 4X scopes.

You give up nothing important with an objective of 33.  Graybeard pretty well outlined the technical reasons for this statement.

Good luck with your choice.

[ThunderStick]

   I think this has been one of those times, when we (I) have gotten caught up in in the "bigger is better" rush. I have a cheepo BSA 4x32 on my .22 that I adjusted the paralax down on. Now that I think about it, I have always been able to hit any squirrel at their normal moving times.
   The 3-9x40 3200 elite with fire fly will let a fella with decent eyes shoot far outside the legal big game shooting hours in TN! I also have one of these scopes in 4-12x40 AO and have shot coyote by the full moon light, with no artifical light source.
   I have decided that on my new rifle I want a more trim package and I guess I realy am not gonna be giving up any LEGAL shooting time!