Parallax ≠ focus get it focused then without touching the gun move your head, if the cross hairs move change the parallax until they stop moving.
Upvote 0
Umarex Notos and Bug Buster
- Thread starter mjb206
- Start date
I struggled with parallax issues for quite a while trying to use the info posted here and other places.
Focusing the ocular the way that is usually suggested didn't work for me as far as parallax errors.
So... I placed the gun in a mount that held it firm and focused on a flat target, such as a paper target. Then I did the parallax test. I looked through the scope and moved my head as much as I could without losing the sight picture to see if the reticle moved around target. If it did, I adjusted the ocular 1/4 turn and tried again. Then I repeated this until there was no movement.
Once I did this, I have had no problems with parallax, but when I tried to "focus" the reticle by the method usually suggested, parallax was always an issue.
Also, once I got the parallax issue out of the way, I have no problem seeing the reticle clearly.
The one thing that stuck in my mind is that your eye will adjust quickly to the reticle. To eliminate parallax, you have to be absolutely certain that you are focused on the target. That is why you NEED to use a flat target. Often people think they are focused on a target, but depth of field fools them. The objective and ocular lenses are never fooled. But the human eye is easily fooled. This is easily illustrated when people try to use a Pard or other "behind the scope" add on digital device.
So, to say it again...
Fix your gun/scope in an immovable position. Focus on a flat target perpendicular to your scope. Test for parallax error by moving your head/eye around the eyebox and look to see if the crosshair moves in relation to the target. Adjust the ocular until there is no movement.
I can't guarantee that you will still be able to see your reticle clearly, but it works for me and I can see my reticle just fine!
One other note... I used to hate small eyebox scopes, but they actually help to eliminate parallax by forcing you to get your eye perfectly centered behind the scope. Essentially: If you have parallax errors, the ocular is not set correctly or the objective is not truly focused on the target. It is as simple as that.
I hope this helps at least one person. (smile)
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Well, the saga continues. I did the parallax check this afternoon. Same yardage as before. I was dead on for a lot of the shots....some were just a little off which I attribute to me moving a tad. But, some were WAY off. Inches at about 12 yards. So either my parallax isn't quite right/my cheek weld isn't consistent enough- or something else is off. I didn't clean my Notos when I received it, and I've read folks have seen accuracy really off when they are dirty...so I gave it a good cleaning tonight. Hope to try again tomorrow.....
Upvote 0
To me it sounds like your cheek weld is off you might need another set of rings to be able to get in a position where you are comfortable and more consistent
Upvote 0
I was thinking that as well. I may have to get risers for the rings, as I'm already using Highs. I was thinking of getting a set of cantilevers to bring the scope back a bit. Although, I have found, if I move the stock in just one small click from fully extended, it seems to put me in a good spot for the eye relief. I need to experiment more with that as well.
However, if parallax is correct...and you're centered on the target....isn't consistent cheek weld less of an issue?
Upvote 0
Well if your hunting to see thru the scope it can throw you off. To set your length of pull( length from end of stock to trigger) hold your arm out at shoulder level and bend it up to the sky measure from inside elbow joint to trigger finger bent like your ready to pull the trigger. This measurement is your length of pull and is what your gun should be set at and then set up your scope. This should work well
Upvote 0
Yeah - that part I'm familiar with. Part of the issue is my Bug Buster has a shorter eye relief than I'm used to. So having to use a shorter length of pull than I have on other rifles.
Upvote 0
Copied from another post I made on this forum.
I’ve have Bug Busters and for a little bit more money, I’m liking my Vector Veyron 3-12x44 SFP better. About the same length as a BB with sun shade, 30mm tube, better turrets. I like to dial the scope if I have the chance and the Vector has decent solid clicks, BB not.
Eye relieve gave me a mounting problem with the BB on my Notos.
Upvote 0
I use a 3 MOA red dot on my bugbuster and am quite pleased with it. I use scopes on my longer range guns + 30 yards.
Upvote 0
Not great glass but for the money, there isn’t much out there to compete in that form factor as far as I know. If anyone knows of a compact scope with similar but a little better glass, I’d be very interested to hear about it.
Upvote 0
If your off 12 inches at 12 yards it is not due to parallax error. I would set up the 12 yards, start at 3 power and shoot 2 shots. Then go to 5 power and shoot 2 shots. Repeat all the way to 9 power and see if your POI changes. I have the 3x12 Bug Buster with no IL. It holds zero but clarity IMO is fair. They are a handy, lightweight scope.
You have a couple choices to extend back your scope. Buy an extended rail or offset scope rings.
You have a couple choices to extend back your scope. Buy an extended rail or offset scope rings.
Upvote 0
The first scope I had on my first PCP was a UTG bug buster. It would not hold zero from one shooting session to the next. It was not an issue with changing power it just did not hold zero. I got a warranty return authorization from UTG and sent it to them. That was several years ago. I never got anything back from them. As a result, I will never own another UTG scope. I tried contacting them. They ignored me.
I replaced it with a Hawke Vantage 2-7 scope. Similar price. It has been completely trouble free. I hope the OP does not have to replace his Bug Buster and/or gets better support from UTG but if you need to replace it and don't want to bump up in price, the Vantage in 2-7 or 3-9 would be a great choice.
I also agree the Vector Veyron is a better scope for not a lot more money. My favorite model is the 6-24 in SFP. I understand the arguments about the hold off changing in terms of the number of mil or MOA marks when you change power. But more important to me is the fact that I cannot see the reticle at lower powers in my fine reticle scopes with FFP. I hunt/pest at 6X, usually. 6X is completely unusable in my Arken 6-24 and I am sure it would also be with the Veyron 6-24. A thick reticle FFP, like my Primary Arms 4-14, is fine at 4X. Just depends on what is most important to you. To me, how many marks on the reticle to hold off is more of a feel thing than a "look up" thing. So I don't care a lot if their value changes. I care a lot about not being able to use lower powers on the scope.
I replaced it with a Hawke Vantage 2-7 scope. Similar price. It has been completely trouble free. I hope the OP does not have to replace his Bug Buster and/or gets better support from UTG but if you need to replace it and don't want to bump up in price, the Vantage in 2-7 or 3-9 would be a great choice.
I also agree the Vector Veyron is a better scope for not a lot more money. My favorite model is the 6-24 in SFP. I understand the arguments about the hold off changing in terms of the number of mil or MOA marks when you change power. But more important to me is the fact that I cannot see the reticle at lower powers in my fine reticle scopes with FFP. I hunt/pest at 6X, usually. 6X is completely unusable in my Arken 6-24 and I am sure it would also be with the Veyron 6-24. A thick reticle FFP, like my Primary Arms 4-14, is fine at 4X. Just depends on what is most important to you. To me, how many marks on the reticle to hold off is more of a feel thing than a "look up" thing. So I don't care a lot if their value changes. I care a lot about not being able to use lower powers on the scope.
Upvote 0
I've had a Bug Buster. It's short and has very little adjustment range. It needs a swept back offset mount or a cantilever on the picatinny. Unless your mount is perfect your eye relief is always off. The short eyebox compounds that.
I have several Hawke scopes on my springers. They are a lot better scope IMHO. lots of adjustment room, wider field of view, better glass, a long eyebox. They are about the same price as the Bug Buster.
They all break sooner or later. Scopes with issues are common these days. When I broke the Bug Buster i didnt bother with the warranty. I bought the Hawke Vantage 2x7x32. I broke it and they replaced it. I've broken Hawke scopes on several rifles and they replaced them. Hawke is easy to deal with and honors the warranty promply. And the scopes are a good value. They aren't the best but they punch pretty high in that price range.
I have several Hawke scopes on my springers. They are a lot better scope IMHO. lots of adjustment room, wider field of view, better glass, a long eyebox. They are about the same price as the Bug Buster.
They all break sooner or later. Scopes with issues are common these days. When I broke the Bug Buster i didnt bother with the warranty. I bought the Hawke Vantage 2x7x32. I broke it and they replaced it. I've broken Hawke scopes on several rifles and they replaced them. Hawke is easy to deal with and honors the warranty promply. And the scopes are a good value. They aren't the best but they punch pretty high in that price range.
Upvote 0
Florida_ Man, you have this scope now? If so how is the clarity on it?
I have a Hawke 4x12 on my Notos now. It has been on several springers and PCP's, had it for years. Good clear scope no problems ever. I'm looking for something to replace the Bug Buster. I want the same size but better glass and a bit more magnification. The Discover scope above is interesting. I took the Bug off and have a Leupold 6x18 on it for now but that belongs to my AR and is not a good scope for air rifles IMO.
I have a Hawke 4x12 on my Notos now. It has been on several springers and PCP's, had it for years. Good clear scope no problems ever. I'm looking for something to replace the Bug Buster. I want the same size but better glass and a bit more magnification. The Discover scope above is interesting. I took the Bug off and have a Leupold 6x18 on it for now but that belongs to my AR and is not a good scope for air rifles IMO.
Upvote 0
Eye relief with a BugBuster didn't work for me on my Notos. I ended up with a Vector Veyron 3-12. 30 MM tube, good glass, reticle lines are a little thin for my eyes but usable.
Recently I switched to my first prism scope (4X) and so far I'm liking it it. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CWBS9ZQZ?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title Red Dots don't work well for me with astigmatism, but the illuminated reticle in the Prism is clear and actually works well without the illumination. I shot good groups out to 55 yds.
Recently I switched to my first prism scope (4X) and so far I'm liking it it. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CWBS9ZQZ?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title Red Dots don't work well for me with astigmatism, but the illuminated reticle in the Prism is clear and actually works well without the illumination. I shot good groups out to 55 yds.
Upvote 0
This is my third scope on the Notos. Discovery 3-12 compact. I like it the best. Balances nicely. Clarity is good.
Upvote 0
Nearly all lower prices scopes are built in China. Lower price in this sense means less than about $500. I think all my scopes came from China. So the name on the scope like Discovery would not bother me. I have a West Hunter on my Avenger and it is fine for that gun. The only things I would worry about is the chance of "getting a bad one" and what would happen if that occurred. I paid a little more for my YH to order it from Amazon who I was confident would accept a return if it came to me not working. That might work on a scope if the issue shows up real quickly. But I try to buy most scopes from Athlon or Hawke or Arken or other companies known for good service. Those scopes haven't needed anything but I still think it is a not insignificant consideration.
Upvote 0
If you are shooting with a scope the scope is at least as important as the rifle. Expect to spend $300 bucks for one that won't give you problems with regular use.
Under that price point expect to send one back for warranty once in a while. You can get a good scope for an airgun for $125 but it's just not going to last forever. So service is important.
If you hunt with it you need better glass and a wide FOV more than you do on targets. So what works well on paper may not be so hot searching for movement in the trees or spotting a rat running along a footing.
You can shoot good patterns with any scope that holds the mark. But when you are pointing it in the bushes it's a whole new ballgame.
Under that price point expect to send one back for warranty once in a while. You can get a good scope for an airgun for $125 but it's just not going to last forever. So service is important.
If you hunt with it you need better glass and a wide FOV more than you do on targets. So what works well on paper may not be so hot searching for movement in the trees or spotting a rat running along a footing.
You can shoot good patterns with any scope that holds the mark. But when you are pointing it in the bushes it's a whole new ballgame.
Upvote 0