Is 6x too much magnification for small game hunting inside of 50 yards? Thinking that I might want an Athlon Midas Tac 6-24 mainly for target shooting, but don't want to limit my ability to pop a squirrel if one gets in the way.
Is 6X too Much?
- Thread starter IRBent
- Start date
Their head fills up the scope view with more magnification so you actually have less chance of a miss. Also you can see where to hold over better when zoomed in more. Only downside to zoom is your adjustable objective needs to be set accurately and it will not have much leeway for distance that's in focus. Well beside you notice your movement more if not supported.
6x is fine for lowest setting. My 4-16x is either at 6x or 16x lol
6x is fine for lowest setting. My 4-16x is either at 6x or 16x lol
Upvote 0
When hunting/pesting I set my scopes on 6X regardless of their magnification range. It's worked on 45 squirrels so far. It was a little high on a racoon that was less than 10 yards away recently but I did not want to be that close to a possibly rabid racoon anyway. I took a step or two back and was fine. Getting the parallax set for the distance makes at least as much difference to me as the magnification. I occasionally use higher magnification, usually by accident, and the only issue is finding the target. At 6X I have no significant problem.
Upvote 0
Currently that's me, 4x or cranked all the way up, and all the way isn't enough in my opinion. Midas Tac it is, unless someone has a better alternative that's cheaper too.
Upvote 0
Most of my pesting is at 3x or 6x. This is night-time pesting in the dark, with a thermal. 30 yds or closer, 90% of the time.
Upvote 0
I use a 4-16x and for walking around close ups Im happy to have the lower 4x vs a 6x or higher. If you are going to be fixed position and know your ranges a higher zoom can be really good too.
Upvote 0
I find 6x just a bit too much to quickly find something that is not readily seen such as a small target in deep cover, but I can and do live with it on a some hunting / plinking guns. I like 1x to 4x better on the low end for my old eyes to pick the target out of the clutter. If the lowest I had was 10x, I would probably miss many a target of opportunity which is why my 10-50x Sightron and 8-80x March scopes are not on outdoor carry guns.
When actually on the target and shooting on a rest, if time allows it, I prefer at least 20x and lean heavily towards 60x+.
When actually on the target and shooting on a rest, if time allows it, I prefer at least 20x and lean heavily towards 60x+.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Last season, I used 8x for squirrel season. It worked fine for most cases. I had one that I missed, but I misjudged distance and shot way over it. But for shot placement it worked great. Previous years hunting with a rimfire I always used 4x. But with the airgun, 8x seemed to be fine.
Upvote 0
On Sunday I shot and killed 35 birds using 6x for 90% of my shots, using a 6x24x50 Athlon Helos FFP MOA scope ranges from 20 to 54 yards.
Upvote 0
All my pesting rifle scopes are set at 8x.
Same as my monocular. Practice looking at a small target with your eye and then use the scope.
Same as my monocular. Practice looking at a small target with your eye and then use the scope.
Upvote 0
In FFP scopes of low magnification that have thin-ish reticles I like to have illumination. Personally I'd rather have a Helos G2 4-20 or a ETR 3-18 than a Midas TAC if using 6x and lower with the illume on. The ETR has the advantage of mostly daylight bright illume with exception of the brightest days.
But for specifically hunting or plinking inside of 100Y I like my Helos G2 2-12x42's. That MIL reticle is awesome for fast shooting and it also has illume.
Upvote 0
No doubt, I wish the Midas Tac had illumination. I have an Athlon 4-14 and want more magnification for punching paper. The HD glass in the Midas Tac is why I was thinking it might be great.
Upvote 0
Lol I have had all 4 scopes you mentioned. The exact ones. I find the Helos 4-20 to be the better all around scope of the group. The illumination and Christmas tree reticle over the 4-16 Midas tac, the weight and size savings over the 3-18x50 Ares ETR. I prefer the size of the 2-12x42 Helos but being only 2oz lighter than the 4-20 decided it was worth it. And the reticle is better for precision shooting. Now if the 2-12 was in the 20oz range it's probably all I'd own as I do love that little scope. And regularly used it on 4-6x. The 4-20 I keep around 8-10x usually.
Upvote 0
I had the 4-16 Midas tac and have the 4-20 Helos and glass wise I don't think you'd notice much difference if any. I love my Helos more than I did the Midas tac
Upvote 0
I like the Helos G2's over the TAC's as well. Slightly less IQ in them but they have locking turrets and illume.
Upvote 0
Shoot it enough and you can get use to just about anything. I typically use fixed power scopes these days because I almost never turned down my scope anyway and I like to get use to one sight picture across all of my guns. This had to change recently because the targets are getting further out there and very small, but I was shooting 10x for quite a few years, now I'm at 16x. For over 30 years, on my FWB124, I only had 2.5x and it didn't prevent me from smoking chipmunks at 50y. I have run a 1x 3 moa dot at 65y quite well too. It doesn't matter with practice, 6x is really versatile, no compromise on anything really. Our targets with airguns are really small, use all the power you can handle. Higher powers definately help with shooting bugs.
Upvote 0
I have a midas tac and a gen2 helos I like helos better as far as glass goes it doesn't really seem to be any different
Upvote 0