No magnification when grouping?

[MoreVideoTed]

Can someone please tell me why Ted always uses anything OTHER than the maximum scope magnification when attempting long range grouping? It seems to me like the highest magnification at ANY range would always produce the most accurate groups.

 

[Swing360]

I feel like my best groups come at the 8-10x out to 50yds opposed to 16x (max on my scope) even in the rest it seems like I move about too much at higher magnification and then I start focusing on that which just messes me all up. Maybe similar circumstances?

 

[Broberts1]

I can't speak for Ted, but I tend to use the magnification that is going to get me closest to a full mill dot or full half mill dot (1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 ect..) holdover for my desired range. At some ranges you may end up with some "bastard" holdover like 3.2 mils. Not having a fixed point of aim for a given range always results in broader groups for me. If your reticle is in the second focal plane then the reticle does not scale with your magnification and in many circumstances max magnification is not always the best for long range. Also, depending on your rifle you may not reach the longer ranges at higher magnification. Try playing around with your reticle magnification in chairgun pro and it will give you an idea of what I'm talking about. 

-Brad

 

[gorgata]

its also due to he wants to see the pellets travel at max the field of view is a lot smaller so as the pellet travels its much harder t see it for the full distance

 

[pulps]

Even at 20x on my hawke sw scope the target looks tiny when looking through a camera as opposed to looking directly with my eye. I find it amazing that he or anyone can make 100+ yard shots through a scope cam.

 

[45super]

Whenever you increase magnification, any aberration or imperfection in the optic increases as well, your mildots may look more like footprints on higher powers. Here in Texas when the temperature is over 90 f, mirage becomes a real problem @ 18x or above.