From the back deck.

gunjunkie

She's off visitin a bull now.

303Lithgow

The difference between the top and bottom quality of glass in regards to light gathering is minimal. What you get with higher quality glass is sharpness and with addtional good lens coating the contrast is much better. With a camera lens the only way to get a "faster" lens was to get a lens with a bigger f-stop. But those same big f-stop lenses also have a shorter depth of field so what you gain in one area you loose in another.

I had a Minolta XK with a 1.2 lens. Normal is 1.7 and faster ones were 1.4. But that 1.2 lens weighted several pounds.

Now back to critters in the yard.

Dennis H

So is it the sharpness and contrast that make them seem brighter in low light?

303Lithgow

The sharpness wouldn't have much to do with it other than the psychological effect. But the contrast would have more of an effect. You have light passing through glass. The more light that passes through the glass and not being absorbed by it increases the contrast. Light can be reflected inside the glass and not escape. This would make the glass itself be illuminated. The best way to reduce this is by coating the lens.

Small diameter scopes can be dim but have nice contrast simply because there is less glass to absorb light. But in bright light they will not have as much contrast.

Yellow filters can increase contrast also. That is why I was surprised to see the Lyman had a built in yellow filter.

north country gal

Seem to have two different threads going, here.

Yes, contrast is important for a scope being used in low light. Contrast is a matter of the type of glass used as well as the type of lens coating used. Zeiss, Swarovski and all the high end optics use their own proprietary lens coatings. The Ziess T coatings are the real deal. I've tested Zeiss scopes side by side with other good scopes in low light situations and details really did stand out better with the Zeiss. Not something you'll notice in bright light or in a store, but something that does show up in low light.

As for turkeys, yes, they are tough. We actually have them up here in our north woods and, now and then, see one in the yard, though they prefer more upland areas. Talked to a biologist and he said it's been a surprise for biologists that we even have turkeys, up here. No one expected them to survive our brutal winters, but the crazy birds have actually done very well, up here.

303Lithgow

Your mention of the word glass made me stop and think. Cheaper scopes use plastic and not real glass. Those will have low contrast because plastic absorbs more light than glass. They are most often not coated but that isn't always the case. My eye glasses are plastic and are coated.

303Lithgow

Do you harvest them in the fall?

gunjunkie

Most of the posts seem to have lenses in common though.
No, not that it hasn't crossed my mind. The city annexed my place, so no hunting allowed. Some of those young Jakes need to be harvested. It's not good to have a lot more cocks than hens.
I do have other places nearby to hunt turkey, in the Spring and in the Fall. To me, they are better tasting than the white turkeys. Their breast meat isn't as white and dry.
I would like to try a Prairie chicken, if they weren't so low in number. A few years ago, when I was getting my Hunting License, a bell went off on their computer. The guy said I had won a free Prairie Chicken stamp. I turned it down because there is only one county where it's allowed to hunt them, and I didn't have a place to go in that county. Plus I like to watch them dance. I reckon they taught the Indians how to dance.

303Lithgow

I wouldn't hunt them either. Not that I'm against hunting. Its just something I don't enjoy.