Scope Advice

[ADDICT]

Just a quick question. I bought a 300 Remington Ultra Mag yesterday and put a Zeiss 4.5x14 44mm scope on it. I was wondering if you thought the 6.5x20 50mm would be worth the extra money and would it be a bit overkill? I primarily hunt deer/antelope/elk and would use the higher power more for glassing. My fear is the 6.5 minimum might be a bit much hunting cedars or shorter range scenarios.

Anyone bought/owned both or either and have some advice before I exchange the two?

PS. Does a wider objective lens allow more light in early/late day conditions. Is there that big of a difference between a 44mm and a 50mm beyond field of view?

Thanks guys.

 

[pushin_30]

40mm is lets in plenty of light, 50mm is overkill and just makes for uncomfortable cheek mount. Just my .02 I personally own a 4.5 x 14 x 40 Zeiss conquest and love it. I would stick with the one you already purchased. The larger zoom is just for small targets and long range.

 

[peez3006]

If you're looking for opinions, here's mine. DON'T GLASS WITH YOUR RIFLE! Nothing makes me more nervous than someone pointing their gun all over the country looking for something to shoot. I don't like having a rifle pointed at me. That's what your binoculars and spotting scope are for. As far as the rifle scope is concerned, I think that the one you have on there is more than enough.

Don P.

 

[ADDICT]

I should've seen that coming. Where would I be in life without wise, insightful and profound advice from experienced hunters?

I understand and apologize for my original "glassing" point being a little irresponsible sounding, but anyone who gets out and hikes a little can appreciate not having to carry binos, a spotting scope and tripod, and rifle to basically accomplish what a 20x lens could do. I don't scan the mountain with my rifle optics, I was merely referring to up-close evaluations at deer (I already identified from my "safe, unloaded" optics).

Thanks for the input though.

 

[ADDICT]

Thanks.