Nikon prostaff series?

[brent19]

I have a Remington BDL 7mag, thinking about putting a Nikon prostaff 3x9x50 on it instead of the 40mm. Are these scopes pretty good for the money. I know this series is there low end compared to the buckmasters etc. Thanks For any reply's

[RocketRider]

Great scope for the $. I've had a few and had no problems!


RR~

[dbd870]

I have 1 Prostaff and while it's not as good as the high end scopes I would much prefer it to many of the lower end models. I still think Weaver gives you alot of scope for the dollar as well.

[Combat Triad]

I have one on both my 30-06 and my Muzzleloader. I think they are well worth the money. I've never owned a Leupold or other high end scope, mainly because of the money issue. But in my price range the prostaff was the best choice in my opinion.

[mwezell]

First off, let me say that I am a huge fan of Nikon scopes. I think that they represent one of the best values in scopes on the market today. The Prostaff is not as good as the Buckmasters, and the Buckmaters is not as good as the Monarch series and IMO, the Buckmasters is the best value of the line. Now, if the scope power range that you are considering is 3-9 variable, I would go with the Buckmasters 3-9x40 instead of a 50mm prostaff, and here's why:

First they are basically the same price! and second is here:

The short answer:
In practical terms, the 50mm scope will be brighter than a 40mm scope only under a combination of the highest magnifications and the very darkest conditions. Otherwise, a 50mm scope is delivering more light than your eye can use. In addition, a 50mm scope will pull your head up off the stock and also be heavier as well as more expensive than a similar model in 40mm.

The big objective is a hard myth to bust, because we have become so conditioned to bigger is better. On a riflescope, though, a bigger objective does not always guarantee a brighter image. Here's why.

The long answer:
The scope.
The exit pupil on a riflescope is the actual width of the beam of light that leaves the eyepiece. If the beam of light that leaves the eyepiece is larger than the opening in your eye, the riflescope is delivering more light than your eye can use. You can calculate the width of this beam of light (exit pupil) in millimeters on your riflescope by dividing objective size by the magnification setting. A 3-9x50 set at 5x produces a 10mm exit pupil (50 divided by 5). A 3-9x50 set at 8x produces a 6.25mm exit pupil (50 divided by eight) . The higher the magnification setting, the smaller the exit pupil (beam of light) your scope produces.

Your eye
In order for your eye to open to its maximum, you must be exposed to conditions of total darkenss for at least thirty minutes. Most people do not hunt under these situations, but for the sake of argument, let's say that they do. Under these conditions, the average widest a young persons eye can open is about 7mm (some individuals 8mm), but most folks who hit their forties will find their eyes can open no more than 5 or 6mm. By age 50, you're doing good at 5mm. It's part of the aging process.

According to the math, if your eyes can, and are, open to 7mm, a 3-9x50 delivers more light than your eye can use at magnifications below 7x. For eyes that are open to 6mm, magnifications below 8x waste light. For eyes that can only open to 5mm, magnications below 10x waste light - in other words, all magnifications on a 3-9x50 when your eyes are only open to 5mm, deliver more light than your eye can use.

Since very few people hunt under total darkness, they will not be shooting with eyes that have opened to 7mm. Under typical low light situations, your eyes will be open to 4 - 6mm at best.

Once again, do the math. For eyes that are open to 5mm - typical for low light adapted eyes - a 40mm riflescope is still delivering more light than your eye can use at magnifications below 8x. Since most deer are shot at much lower amgnifications than 8x, a 3-9x40 will do anything you need to do in terms of low light shooting. If you want to spend more money, you are dollars and performance ahead to invest in a better quality 3-9x40, rather than jump to a 3-9x50. Quality will have a greater impact on performance.


So, unless you are looking for a higher magnification scope it is a waste to go with a bigger objective. Part of this is my opinion, but most is factual information. Big scopes can look cool, so if that's what you want, go for it! But I think you are better off buying better quality and leaving the big lens to people that don't know how they work/or don't work:).-----Mike Ezell

[kyfuzzyface]

I have one buckmaster 4x12x50 and two Prostaff 3x9x40 just ordered a new prostaff 3x9x50 for the 22/250 replacing the old 4x12x50 Bushnell BDC Banner. For the money I don't think you can beat them IMO!!

[Little Scout]

Best scope I've found for the money! Looked through Leupolds for the same price and they didn't beat'm! Only scope I'll buy from now on will be Nikons!