Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Rich Coyle
Optics Apprentice
Blind as a bat
Joined: October/22/2010
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 231
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 16:19 |
Dale Clifford wrote:
Whether my experience verifies is immaterial, irrelevant, hearsay, and more of same conjecture. That the z6 would be better, a six year old could deduce from the cost.
The z6 shows more on 12x than the nf on 12x. comparing the z6 on 12x to a NF on 32x is a fools errand. | I can see by the second sentense that you beleive you get what you pay for. I hve discovered and proven to those who will take time to look through my Nightforce, Swaropvski z5 and Bushnell 6500 side by side in normal daylight that the most expensive comes in last with the three mentioned. Any six year old who looks through them will deduce from the experience that you get what you shop for. When you are looking for detail you leave you Nightforce 32X at home? Why have the higher magnification scope? I think you are in a minority here and in the hunting fields. When I compared the above scopes in normal day light looking at the line chart 521 yards away the Nightforce required 12X. The Bushnell 15 1/2X and the Swarovski required 16 1/2X. For me it is not a fool's errand to know which is the best for seeing detail.
|
|
Rich Coyle
Optics Apprentice
Blind as a bat
Joined: October/22/2010
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 231
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 16:23 |
RifleDude wrote:
Increasing magnification does in fact improve your ability to see detail in low light or for that matter in any light, but only to the extent that there's enough ambient light to enable you to use the additional magnification and the optic is good enough that image quality doesn't suffer severely at the higher power. | I have maintained this from the beginning. Those who want to find fault prefer to disregaurd that tid bit of info from my posts.
|
|
supertool73
Optics God
Superstool
Joined: January/03/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 11814
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 16:54 |
Rich why do you keep trying to push this in topic after topic after topic? We have all argued against you every single time you do this.
Seriously what is the point of this? We will never agree with what you are tying to push.
I am seriously asking, what do you think you are accomplishing here?
|
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."
|
|
tahqua
MODERATOR
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?
Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 9042
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 16:57 |
Rich Coyle wrote:
RifleDude wrote:
Increasing magnification does in fact improve your ability to see detail in low light or for that matter in any light, but only to the extent that there's enough ambient light to enable you to use the additional magnification and the optic is good enough that image quality doesn't suffer severely at the higher power. |
I have maintained this from the beginning. Those who want to find fault prefer to disregaurd that tid bit of info from my posts. |
Really Rich, where have you maintained that since you've been here? Where is that "tid bit"? Your friends and any little kid can see that you get"what you shop for" Yet, your observations are contrary to what the vast majority of optics users post here. You have not mentioned, where I have perused your past posts, that higher power is still better in low light once you get smaller than the exit pupil with magnification increase. Once again you want to speak of 15 1/2X with brand X and 161/2X with brand Y. It just won't stop with you in your little world. You just want to argue.
|
Doug
|
|
Dyelynn
Optics Apprentice
Joined: March/07/2011
Location: Washington
Status: Offline
Points: 231
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 17:04 |
Rich Coyle wrote:
When you are looking for detail you leave you Nightforce 32X at home? Why have the higher magnification scope? I think you are in a minority here and in the hunting fields. When I compared the above scopes in normal day light looking at the line chart 521 yards away the Nightforce required 12X. The Bushnell 15 1/2X and the Swarovski required 16 1/2X. For me it is not a fool's errand to know which is the best for seeing detail. |
you completely missed the point of what he said. either your reading comprehension is very poor or you are purposely being obtuse, as someone else said. i realize this is an argument that has gone on for a while between rich and several other members. it's obvious that rich either doesn't understand how his personal circumstances invalidate his opinions from what most people coming to this site are looking for, or he is genuinely and blissfully unaware of how inaccurate his arguments are. in either case, what's the point, other than 1 post to educate anyone reading his posts, that he has a somewhat unique outlook on optics that is in complete opposition to what the other contributors to this message board beleive. and that in most cases his "facts" or "objectivity" is in fact opinion and conjecture.
|
|
supertool73
Optics God
Superstool
Joined: January/03/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 11814
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 17:16 |
Rich Coyle wrote:
When you are looking for detail you leave you Nightforce 32X at home? Why have the higher magnification scope? I think you are in a minority here and in the hunting fields. |
You are in the minority Rich. Most big game hunters do not use hubble telescopes as hunting scopes. Why do you think 3-9x scopes (and similar mag ranges) are the most popular hunting scopes. Bright, low powered, lighter weight, scopes are popular for a reason.
|
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."
|
|
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR
Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9318
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 17:30 |
|
Freedom is something you take. Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given.
|
|
supertool73
Optics God
Superstool
Joined: January/03/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 11814
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 17:39 |
|
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."
|
|
Roy Finn
MODERATOR
Steiner Junkie
Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 18:04 |
If you guys have had enough let me know cause the Rich Coyle Show is coming to an end.
|
|
mike650
Optics God
Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 14569
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 18:12 |
Roy Finn wrote:
If you guys have had enough let me know cause the Rich Coyle Show is coming to an end. |
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
Rich Coyle
Optics Apprentice
Blind as a bat
Joined: October/22/2010
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 231
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 18:20 |
"My goal here is to try and create a anecdotal ranking to help people make better informed decisions, I would like to hear from people who have used these scopes so that we can be as realistic as possible, Please rank the scopes you have used as to their visual clarity as a whole, and to make it a little easier, on a 1-10 scale graduated in .25 points"
I am curious how many of you folks who have come on the attack have posted your scopes according to the original poster's request. I cooperated. What is the benifit of your posts if you didn't?
|
|
Rich Coyle
Optics Apprentice
Blind as a bat
Joined: October/22/2010
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 231
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 18:25 |
tahqua wrote:
Rich Coyle wrote:
[QUOTE=RifleDude]
Increasing magnification does in fact improve your ability to see detail in low light or for that matter in any light, but only to the extent that there's enough ambient light to enable you to use the additional magnification and the optic is good enough that image quality doesn't suffer severely at the higher power. |
I have maintained this from the beginning. Those who want to find fault prefer to disregaurd that tid bit of info from my posts. |
Really Rich, where have you maintained that since you've been here? QUOTE] If you check you will find that I posted when it gets too dark to see, it is too dark to see no matter what scope you are using. For some that is later or earlier than for others. What does this have to do with the original poster's request. After all he did write "anicdotal". No where did he request that some of the poster go on the attack of any of the other posters.
|
|
mike650
Optics God
Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 14569
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 18:36 |
Rich Coyle wrote:
If you check you will find that I posted when it gets too dark to see, it is too dark to see no matter what scope you are using. For some that is later or earlier than for others.
|
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
Bitterroot Bulls
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 3416
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 18:39 |
[QUOTE=Rich Coyle] If you check you will find that I posted when it gets too dark to see, it is too dark to see no matter what scope you are using. For some that is later or earlier than for others. [QUOTE] Rich, you MUST be able to see that the second sentence directly contradicts the first. Well I am done with this thread. Thanks a lot space_weazel!
Edited by Bitterroot Bulls - June/14/2011 at 18:40
|
-Matt
|
|
Rich Coyle
Optics Apprentice
Blind as a bat
Joined: October/22/2010
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 231
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 19:21 |
Bitterroot Bulls wrote:
[QUOTE=Rich Coyle]
If you check you will find that I posted when it gets too dark to see, it is too dark to see no matter what scope you are using. For some that is later or earlier than for others.
[QUOTE]
Rich, you MUST be able to see that the second sentence directly contradicts the first.
Well I am done with this thread.
Thanks a lot space_weazel! | Do you think everyone sees the same. Some folks can see when it is too dark for most of us. Others can't see well soon after the sun sets. Where's the contradiction?
|
|
Klamath
Optics Master
Joined: May/20/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1308
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 20:45 |
Space weazel,
The main thing I see with your original post is that you are trying to reinvent a more perfectly rounded wheel. There is not now, nor will there ever be, a truly inclusive list of the rankings of scopes from top to bottom. The reason is that there are all types of scopes for all types of uses, those scopes come at all kinds of prices. The people who use those scopes come in all sorts of forms, with different eyes, different expectations, and even different user requirements within the same genre of scope, in other words all big game scope users use all sorts of rifles and calibers and hunt in different situations, so no where will you come up with universal agreement about what is better than what. Same with target scopes, varmint scopes, tactical scopes…
Glass clarity (whatever the heck that means) is probably a poor sort of way to approach the issue as well. Good optical glass is no longer the technological challenge it once was and there is good, clear glass in all kinds of instruments today. The glass of the better lower to mid price stuff is far better than it was a few years ago, and getting better all the time. The upper echelon of glass is probably at, or even beyond the area where more improvement will do the eye little good as some of it is as good as many eyes can use anyway. A scope is a first a gun sight. It must mount on the firearm, it must have precise and repeatable adjustments, it must be able to stand the rigors of recoil, among others, so as others have said, all you need is enough “clarity” for your purpose. It is only secondarily an optical instrument, even though the optical aspect of a scope has taken on more sizeable importance over the last few years.
Going on another note, to the moderators in particular and to everybody else in general, concerning one Rich Coyle. The moderators are going to have to either outright ban him or flag his posts with a warning and give him his own personal category, Optically Challenged. This may be sort of extreme, but left unattended his issue will grow. He can’t be left alone without adult supervision and every single thread he gets involved in disintegrates like this one. So a moderator/moderators will have to deal with this guy. Or everybody will have to ignore him. The former is more likely and more effective than the latter.
To directly answer Roy, I am more than tired of Rich Coyle’s wandering optics show.
Edited by Klamath - June/14/2011 at 20:51
|
Steve "Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron
|
|
tahqua
MODERATOR
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?
Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 9042
|
Posted: June/14/2011 at 20:51 |
And this particular show is locked. space_weazel, please post another thread and we will try to make it good. In the mean time, this circle jerk is toast.
|
Doug
|
|