|
|
Post by bowbender6 on Jan 19, 2009 14:08:21 GMT -5
When adjusting AO scopes do you use the yardage marked or adjust it for clear picture?
|
|
|
|
Post by ewc on Jan 19, 2009 14:19:57 GMT -5
Clear picture.
I normally bottom mine out on the close side and adjust for the clearest picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigf on Jan 19, 2009 14:33:04 GMT -5
Bowbender, many of the scope makers have gone away from yardage marks because they are most often not accurate. At least this is what Zeiss told me when I called and asked why they dropped them. What I do is adjust it until it is clear and when I move my head the crosshairs do not move on target. You can make a mark on the adjustment, with whiteout that comes off easy, for yardages of 100, 200 ect...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Jan 19, 2009 15:22:58 GMT -5
Some brands have to be turned to infinity and then dialed back to work properly. I do the same thing as Craig and ignore the marks.
|
|
|
|
Post by jims on Jan 19, 2009 16:09:43 GMT -5
I likewise have found the yardages not accurate so I just adjust until it is most in focus.
|
|
|
|
Post by raf on Jan 19, 2009 16:09:50 GMT -5
I do like craigf says. It's usually pretty close to right on with the yardage
|
|
|
|
Post by Harley on Jan 19, 2009 17:19:41 GMT -5
There's nothing to add: You guys have said it all. I might add that, if nothing apparently happens when you turn the dial, it is BROKEN. LOL
Harley
|
|
|
|
Post by ozark on Jan 19, 2009 20:11:16 GMT -5
Would it be true or false that adjusting for clearity would depend on the users vision? Could difference in vision cause the yardage to be dead on for some and off for others? Just curious. Ozark
PS: I am guessing it will be yes it is true or false. LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by sw on Jan 19, 2009 20:19:23 GMT -5
they are most often not accurate. What I do is adjust it until it is clear and when I move my head the crosshairs do not move on target. quote] I agree on the first point. My Leu's aren't accurate - the Nightforce was close - the Weaver Extreme Elite is perfectly on, as a matter of fact, you could use it as a rangefinder  . I agree on the second point. Get it clear and then remove all parallex(the point of this anyway). Remove parallex by adjusting the AO until as you move your eye/head slightly low and then slightly high when looking thru the scope the x-hair remains motionless on the tgt. |
|
|
|
Post by petev on Jan 19, 2009 22:10:03 GMT -5
I was intending to ask this question myself b.b.6, but didn't get around to it. My Browning 4 - 12 AO is set at 60 yd. for the clearest picture, for sighting in at 100 yard. Such a discrepancy bothered me, last season, but I think the advice in the previous posts have clarified things. Good thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by raf on Jan 19, 2009 22:22:14 GMT -5
Having a clear picture is nice but not what you're looking for with AO. As SW say what you're looking for is that when you move your head from side to the side, the crosshairs don't move on your target and where the cross hairs are is your POA.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigf on Jan 19, 2009 22:39:13 GMT -5
There is a difference between the job of the side focus, or AO, and the focus ring. Adjusting the AO is not to focus the image, so to say. It is to correct the parallex. This is that the light is centered on the cross hairs. It is to remove movement of the cross hairs on the target from your head not always being exactly on the same spot of the rifle. The focus ring is to make the image clear to your eyes. Most non AO scopes have the parralex set for 100 yards, which is fine for our guns in my opinion. The process for setting an AO gun up is to adjust the AO while looking at a target lets say at 100 yards. Adjust the AO until the cross hairs do not move across the target when you move your head, if you bump the gunstock it doesn't count. When this is done the parralex is set and now adjust the focus ring until the image is clear.
If the yardage is off, by that I mean the target is at 100 yards and the AO is set for the 200 yard mark, it doesn't really matter. Now that the scope is focused correctly you just have to move the AO until the picture is clear. If it is making you feel bad though, send the scope backc and have them fix it. This is why many new scopes do not have yardage on the side focus knobs anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harley on Jan 19, 2009 23:04:37 GMT -5
Craig, I don't know if this is just splitting "hairs" or not, but the way I've spent a lifetime adjusting primary focus is to turn the focus ring until the crosshairs are sharp while the rifle is pointed at blue sky.
Your method (adjusting the focus ring while sighting a target at a given distance) sounds more like adjusting a pair of binoculars for a given distance, which we know means the binoculars aren't then optimally adjusted for distances nearer or farther.
If I'm wrong I'll start doing it your way. Explain it to me.
Harley
|
|
|
|
Post by petev on Jan 19, 2009 23:06:33 GMT -5
Most non AO scopes have the parralex set for 100 yards, which is fine for our guns in my opinion. Question: isn't the AO needed when you go to a wider range of magnification, than say 3-9? That is why I got mine with the 4-12 scope, because I thought that with that much range of mag., you needed to adjust the objective to get rid of parallax as you moved from one end of the range to the other. |
|
|
|
Post by Harley on Jan 19, 2009 23:10:26 GMT -5
Petev, I'm responding without really thinking it through, but I think the increased magnification just makes any parallax more visible; it doesn't add to the parallax.
Harley
|
|
|
|
Post by dannoboone on Jan 19, 2009 23:32:10 GMT -5
Just got a couple pointers to try on this thread, even though I've
been using AO's since day one, over 35yrs ago!!
Clarity has always been good with better Weavers and Bushnells
by adjusting AO. I have a Banner 4-12 which must have been "pick
of the litter" and has always had accurate AO adjustments. But got
a Banner 6-24 last year that is workable, but not even close. Go
figure. Ozark, you have fantastic insight. Darn right, it depends on
the user's vision, and how well the scope is focused in the first
place. Harley, gonna have to try your "pie in the sky" way to focus! ;D
petev - your Browning is actually a Bushnell 3200. I have one, too
but the yardage references are apparently more accurate. Do you
have the focus ring adjusted correctly for your eyes?
|
|
|
|
Post by DBinNY on Jan 19, 2009 23:39:56 GMT -5
dannoboone, your avatars are always classics ;D.
|
|
|
|
Post by petev on Jan 19, 2009 23:53:43 GMT -5
dannoboone- I have the focus ring adjusted for my eyes as best I can. At my age the eyes change in a pretty sneaky way, but your comment on your old and new scope hit a nerve with me. I have had so much trouble with new scopes that I bought in the last five years, but I held on to two that are 15- 20 years old and they are parallax free, and clear, and no waviness when you move your head. I in fact sent one scope back to Cabellas and they gave a full refund, and another to Thompson Center Arms and they replaced it, agreeing that the parallax was out. It's frustrating and mind boggling. Also, I am very satisfied with the Browning scope, it just gave me an uneasy feeling when the clarity and parallax were best when the AO ring was set at a totally different yardage. Allright, I'll ask the question: Where's the pride? (meaning the manufacuturers)
|
|
|
|
Post by joe21a on Jan 20, 2009 9:29:26 GMT -5
Some times the marks are close and work if you need to set it quickly. I usually set mine to clear view then just used if the target walked in at a different range. I not longer use AO scope and am much happier.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigf on Jan 20, 2009 13:45:07 GMT -5
Craig, I don't know if this is just splitting "hairs" or not, but the way I've spent a lifetime adjusting primary focus is to turn the focus ring until the crosshairs are sharp while the rifle is pointed at blue sky. Your method (adjusting the focus ring while sighting a target at a given distance) sounds more like adjusting a pair of binoculars for a given distance, which we know means the binoculars aren't then optimally adjusted for distances nearer or farther. If I'm wrong I'll start doing it your way. Explain it to me. Harley Harley, your close. If you do it my way once, you never have to do it again. What you are doing with the meathod I described is setting up the scope so it focuses at a certain range and the parralex at the same time. Once it has been done, just adjust the AO until it is clear from then on, you can assume that the parralex will be correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Harley on Jan 20, 2009 14:28:05 GMT -5
Craig, I'll try it, but won't be convinced until I see it happen. Maybe I can learn something.
Harley
|
|
|
|
Post by craigf on Jan 20, 2009 16:27:08 GMT -5
Craig, I'll try it, but won't be convinced until I see it happen. Maybe I can learn something. Harley I will make a deal with you, if it doesn't work I will eat a whole stick of deer sausage in your honor! ;D |
|
.