Now after reading some recent stuff on here its very obvious there are some seriously knowledgable people when it comes to optics, so be gentle with me as I am learning.
these are more observations rather than statements of fact or questions, and the terminoligy will make the experts cringe - but I know what I am trying to say
Parallax.......I have had a lot of different scopes over the years from £50 Rhinos to several Leupolds and a £2000 March.
I have always followed the general instructions re adjusting the eyepiece, we have all read them the purpose seems to be to get the reticle in focus for the user they generally follow the ines of the scope set to infinity looking at the sky adjust until its sharp.
A while back i found this explaination and my attention was grabbed, it was more sensible to me:
This is more about getting the scope picture focus and the reticle focus "in the same place" as it were, following it did make a difference, it is as if the general description puts the reticle somewhere near the right spot in the in focus range, this method puts it in the middle - with me?
One major observation I did make when I first got the March scope (2.5-25 x 42) was that it had an increbidle edge to edge clarity and depth of field, but if the focus was adjusted within a particular depth of field there was only one very precise spot where the "head bop" would reveal no aparent movement of the reticle in relation to the sight picture, it is almost as if there is a spot within the in focus range where the scope is truly parallax free
Not sure what this means, also not sure if its an advantage or a disadvantage, not noticed it anywhere near as much with any other scope I have had.
Anyway its been playing on my mind for a while and i just had to vent it while Big Bro is on