Reply To: I'm liking my new 4-12×50 Hawke Airmax, so far!

Forums Optics, Scopes, Rings, & Mounts I'm liking my new 4-12×50 Hawke Airmax, so far! Reply To: I'm liking my new 4-12×50 Hawke Airmax, so far!

Link

nced
Participant
Member

A few comments/opinions:
“Hawke 4-16×50  is really heavy”
They are heavy but not what I call “really heavy” compared to other scopes I’ve used. LOL……the Hawke is actually a couple ounces lighter than my 3-12×44 Optisan Viper.

“optics are really really bad – one can go Wikipedia and search for optical aberrations. Hawke Airmax got all of them! I can not imagine how bad are bigger magnification hawke scopes.”
I can see .177 cal pellet holes in my paper target at 50 yards with this scope so I really don’t care about “optical aberrations” if it doesn’t affect my aiming or how well the scope snaps in and out when scope rangefinding. 

“Hawke is pretty expensive – for about $100 above one can decent Leupold.”
Really? My Hawke was delivered to my door on sale for under $200. The problem with a “decent Leupold” is the fact that I need a 10 yard close focus and that means that I’ll be stuck with a Leupold VX-2 Rimfire 3-9×33 EFR Rifle Scope for about $400. The VX-2 scope I looked through years ago didn’t have especially good optics even compared to the 3-12×40 Bushnell trophy, but perhaps that has changed At only 9x this scope, while lightweight and small it would be near useless for scope rangefinding shooting hunter class at field target matches. Except for the target dot reticle the Leupold VX-3 Riflescope, Target Dot Reticle, 6.5-20×40, Matte, EFR  would be a very good scope for hunter class field target turned down to 12x and the VX-3 optics are really good but the problem is the $800 price tag. For a lot more money this Leupold could be sent in to have a useful mil dot reticle added. LOL……perhaps the “Mark 4 LR/T 4.5-14x50mm (30mm) M1 Illum. Ret.” would be an even better choice at about $1600.

“Just looked at your pics and fixed my post”
LOL….just noticed your correction and I do agree that the side focus Airmax is rather expensive, however I do see them on guns used for field target so they must be useful. The problem with the side focus Hawke AirMax 30 SF 3-12×50 (for me) is the weight of the beast at 27.5 ounces!

Anywhoo……..when dealing with my “Social Security plus odd jobs income” there are compromises that need to be made when it comes to airgun optics and of priority is the need for a tought springer rated scope, a 10 yard minimum sharp focus at 12x, a “dotted reticle” of some sort, snaps in and out of focus well when scope rangefinding, and optics that are adequate to resolve .177 cal pellet holes in a paper target at 50 yards! One $300 scope that I used for a while that had good optics, was light weight, snapped in and out of focus well, and focused sharply down to 10 yards was the 3-12×40 Vortek Diamondback. Problem with that scope was the fact that when sitting in a sun lit shooter box at a field target match there was so much flare coming through the rear ocular lens that the image of a target set on a shady lane was completely washed out.