Thread: Worth changing from 2.5-8 to 3.5-10

Hi all
As my eyesight gets worse, I've contemplating of upping the magnification of my scope a little.
I'm thinking of changing from a VX3 2.5-8 to a 3.5-10.

So the real question is do you think such a small increase in magnification will be worth it?
I need to balance its use between bush work and clearings (up to 300m).

And if your going to suggest an alternative scope please keep in mind that lens quality/clarity has to be equal or better and I prefer reasonably light scopes and 25mm tubes.

Yep loopys are over rated haha. Honestly you wont gain fuk all a little exra mag. By a super slam or a bushy 6500 same price bracket. I dont hate loopies i just think every thng is better more for less. This is just what id do.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Also am xrunk:screwy:

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Depends on your budget. I have been going through the same proccess over the last 5 years. I first noticed I was having trouble using my 4x redfield but could still use my 4x khales no worries, still can actually. Glass quality is very important I have found. Have upgraded my loopy 1.5-4 for a swaro 1.7-10 I recon that is about the right jump and when I can't see with it I will have to use a shotgun.
If you can afford it a z5 would see you out and a z6 illuminated is the icing on the cake. Cheers Ackley

No.

I'm not sure that you would notice any difference in your bush hunting as you will still have the scope cranked down but out over 2 - 300 metres that extra 2 times magnification will be noticeable and just what the doctor ordered. Of course you could totally insulate yourself and go for a 4 - 12.

Objective lens diameter also comes into it. The 2.5-8 only has a 36mm objective lens (I think?) where as the smaller of the 3.5-10 has a 40mm objective lens. Having a larger objective lens will increase the amount of light coming into your eye under given conditions at a given power (i.e. the 3.5-10 will give a brighter image in low light when set on 8x than the 2.5-8 scope).

Absolutely agree with Ackley though. Glass quality speaks for a whole lot as well.

might be better spending money at the optometrist ?

i spend only a fraction of the time hunting looking through a scope.

most of the time it is just plain eyesight, followed by binocs, and very little time through the scope.

Its the latest visit to the optometrist that has me thinking about this issue in the first place

bugger don't think that small an increase in magnification is going to make a big difference.

are you wearing specs that you can use with binocs and rifle scope ?

yip got both and the 3.5-10 is far better for shooting small things far away

the 2.5-8 is a good scope, but the 3.5-10 is much better. I run one on my 243 as my main rifle

try shooting 300 with 8 power, its bloody hard. its nolonger neck shot material

Yes. Quantum leap and huge advantage. Got 4x VXIII. Will upgrade all as finances allow.

I love how Leupold still is stuck on 3x zoom ratio in The Year Of Our Lord 2013


Where's the VX4 2-8x36, 3-12x40, 4-16x50? At least then they'd be in the early 2000's instead of the 80's.

Originally Posted by Bill999

try shooting 300 with 8 power, its bloody hard. its nolonger neck shot material

I agree, not enough field of view, I like to dial it back to 4x.


It's all familiarity and training with your equipment and mindset I think.