oldelkhunter

I am looking at getting a 1" tube scope for Whitetail hunting only. Does anyone have experience with a Kahles 3.5x10x50mm or a 3x9x42 and how does it work in low light situations and what kind of reticle does it have? I like the dimensions on the 3x9x42 better than the 50mm and wonder how much am I giving up in low light.

stubblejumper

I don't have a kahles but I do have four 3x10x42 swarovski a-lines and they are bright enough for shooting at all legal hours where I hunt.The 3x10x42 a-lines are just as bright as the 3.5x10x50 varixiii in my opinion but with less weight and bulk and they can be mounted lower than 50mm scopes as well.

oldelkhunter

Stubble Jumper ... The last 42mm scope I owned was a Swarovski 1.5x6x42 30mm scope... I remember it as being a very good low light scope just wanted to be sure a 1" 42mm would do the trick and I guess it does based on your feedback. 50mm Leupolds are pretty much useless in low light conditions , having used their scopes for awhile I still don't know why they ever brought that size objective out.

trailer

One thing that hasn’t been mentioned between the 42mm and the 50mm is the field of view. I have a Nikon with the 42mm and a Leupold with the 50mm and both have the 30mm tube and found quite a difference in the FOV. This is comparing 2 different makes of scope.

If you compare two Kahles or Swarovski scopes, both with 1” tube. One would have the 40mm and the other would have the 50mm obj. lens. The 50mm should be much brighter, that’s if you’re comparing apple to apples. The 50mm should also be better for low light conditions?? Right...

I used my Leupold with the 50mm lens last year for deer hunting and found it to be nice and clear for hunting in low light conditions. I didn’t find it to be useless. It was excellent for hunting in the woods and it wasn’t that bulky that I could carry it, although I don’t hunt in the hills. All my hunting is done on flat land.... I was just questioning the comment being made that’s all.....,

skeeter 7MM

The main tube size(30mm) will not do anything to the brightness or clarity, it is really just more to due with strength gain over the 1" tube. In most cases the 30mm gives more adjustments than the 1" tube as well. The brightness and clarity has more to due with the glass and the muliticoating they use on the glass. The 50mm will gain less than 2% over the 42mm in light gathering abilities, comparing apples to apples(same model, glass and coatings used), so yes it should be brighter but is it going to make a difference with quality optics and usable under legal light probably not.

I think SJ was saying the better the optics(glass & coating) the less the useful gain in the objective size for brightness.

It is really a matter of preference and what you need the combo for, if a higher mount will force your cheek off the stock then it is better to go smaller, if you need to pack it on a horse or carry the rifle the small/compact issues will take effect...if none of this applies to you then you can go with either.

I know very little about Kahles but there lifetime warranty is (or at least was) not transferable like many other manufacturer's. Which is the only dig I have really heard but it does make it less appealing to those forking out top cash for a scope.

trailer

Skeeter, I never realized that going with a higher mount had anything to do with the cheek on the stock. I guess this affects the accuracy when shooting. I was always under the impression that the higher mount wasn’t good because the scope ended up being farther apart from the barrel and that shooting at long distances would be a problem with accuracy. Never made much sense...Learn something new today. Thanks.√

oldelkhunter

Trailer, it is pretty frustrating seeing a deer perfectly at about 150 yards away at last light with a pair of Leica 8x42 binos... and then putting up your rifle with a 50 mm scope on it and it looks like a grey blur....

akbound

Hi oldelkhunter,

I have never owned either of the Kahles you've asked about....but I have owned their 1.5X6 power. I do not recall the size of the objective lens but it had a 30mm tube. I do remember the objective wasn't really large...and that scope passed all the light a human eye can distinguish. You reach a point of diminishing return on objective size. (And when the exit pupil diameter exceeds the ability of the human eye to distinguish the existing light....it doesn't make any more difference as measured by a human eye.)

Remember not only will that be affected by the size of the objective lens...but by what power your scope is set at as well. You can turn down the power to increase exit pupil diameter on a scope. But many other factors will play an important role as well. Good lenses will transmit more light than poor lenses. The coating on the lenses will have an affect on light transmission. And if "all other factors are equal".....a 30mm tube will pass light more efficiently than a 1" tube.

For more information concerning exit pupil and light transmission go to:

http://web.ask.com/redir?bpg=http%3a....htm&qte=0&o=0

Then scroll down to:

Understanding Exit Pupil Detail Resolution

To See The Light
Light Gathering vs Light Transmission
Relative Brightness vs Twilight Factor


There are only a handful of short paragraphs of information, (don't be intimidated by the URL). It is easily understood and concise. And though it is written regarding binoculars....exactly the same information applies to scopes.

Hope it helps!

trailer

Oldelkhunter,.Know I understand so I’m sorry to say, but the problem isn’t with the scope it’s with the Leica binos. They are way to clear to use for hunting......Just kidding or like they say LOL...Good luck in your new scope...]

oldelkhunter

trailer...I may end up getting the Leupold anyway...maybe there was something wrong with the one I was using or it was way dark but I have spoken to tons of optics "Experts" and to the one they say use a 50MM for best low light performance...