Scope focus / parallax- eyeball it or by the numbers?

Parrallax

I am a nold fart and can't see for s--t on a good day but I can assure you, my experience and the advice of more experienced shooters has convinced me that the parrallax adjustment of my scopes is the only truly critical adjustment.

If the parrallax adjustment is off, then every time you take your eye off the center of your scope and try to put it back, the point of aim changes.

First, I make sure the cross hairs are in focus, then I focus the primary until I can move my face back and forth, while looking through the eyepiece and the crosshairs do not move around on the target. Of course this is with the rifle stationary on a front rest (or a bipod) and a rear bag.

I don't care how fuzzy or unfuzzy the image in the scope is. If my parrallax is set correctly, I know the rifle will shoot consistantly once I get the center of the crosshairs to agree with the point of impact. That is consistantly, within my ability to hold a rifle still, while pulling the trigger.
 
and that pretty much

I am a nold fart and can't see for s--t on a good day but I can assure you, my experience and the advice of more experienced shooters has convinced me that the parrallax adjustment of my scopes is the only truly critical adjustment.

If the parrallax adjustment is off, then every time you take your eye off the center of your scope and try to put it back, the point of aim changes.

First, I make sure the cross hairs are in focus, then I focus the primary until I can move my face back and forth, while looking through the eyepiece and the crosshairs do not move around on the target. Of course this is with the rifle stationary on a front rest (or a bipod) and a rear bag.

I don't care how fuzzy or unfuzzy the image in the scope is. If my parrallax is set correctly, I know the rifle will shoot consistantly once I get the center of the crosshairs to agree with the point of impact. That is consistantly, within my ability to hold a rifle still, while pulling the trigger.

gives the complete, correct, and succinct method for properly setting parallax. If the scope, no matter manufacturer, is properly aligned and all lenses at center, and everything internally in focus, then the image will also be in focus. But the parallax can be WAY off even if the image is clear as a bottle of Everclear. Parallax first, then worry about focus clarity.
 
Two things...
Welcome back Varmint Al!

The point of my previous post was that by doing a little experimenting I have been able to achieve the best target sharpness that a particular scope was capable of...and zero parallax, this after the conventional adjustment procedure had me in a one or the other situation. Why settle for less, if you don't have to?
 
The scope

I was trying to get the parrallax to 50 yards has been back to the factory twice and each time returned with no change that I could detect. After the first trip I talked to the service manager and was assured it would be corrected if I sent it back again. They paid shipping both ways the 2nd time so I sent it back. No change but the service manager assured me it had been corrected. The actual workman stated on the paper work that the scope had been checked at 100 yards and was correct at that distance, even tho I asked for the ability to actually focus to the minimun 50 yards marked on the scope. I may try to get it corrected one more time. Max
 
Why settle for less, if you don't have to?

Because somebody with a computer wrote on the internet that there is no need to worry about having a sharp image !!! :rolleyes: Trying to hit the dot at 200 yds ??? You don't need a sharp image !!!!! He said so ! :rolleyes:

How can you distinguish mirage from a blurry image due to poor scope focus ?????
 
While one may not be able to access the maximum resolving power of a particular scope by looking at a 200 yd. target when there is mirage, one can tell when it is in sharpest focus, under those conditions, by simply moving the objective (or side) adjustment back and forth until the best image available, under those conditions, is obtained. What IS almost impossible to evaluate, under heavy mirage conditions, is whether the last speck of parallax has been removed. This is why it is a great advantage to have a scope set up so that there is no parallax at the exact point of sharpest focus. Under some conditions, one can be determined when the other cannot.
 
If you don't want to spend hours and days trying to get the scope to preform, then the last thing you want to do is follow Louis Boyd advise. I know that spending days at the range with a mirage board behind the target I did the worst thing in the world you can possibly do and did what Louis recommends and to my complete surprise, it worked. Now I can proudly say that as long as you can narrow it down to what works, you can save a bunch of twisting time. You have to start by getting the reticle in sharp focus, that means looking at what is cold and has no visible mirage. Seems like if you don't get that right you ain't never going to get the rest right either.
 
Or overexplain it ...

You can take anything, regardless of how simple, and overcomplicate it.........jackie

Here is an explanation on parallax adjustment that I copied into a folder for future reference that should cover it all. I can't remember the source. It's long but pretty good. Art :)

Scope Parallax and Focus

The author is a man named Paul Coburn and his job is evaluating optics for a living. He is highly regarded in the field and does testing for some major companies. So no if's, and's or but's regardless of if you agree or disagree with the writting style he is giving the straight poop on the subject. Here it goes...

I've answered questions about scope parallax about 300 times, and it's always a long drawn out thing, going several e-mails, and a few phone calls. It doesn't seem to make any difference how long the guy has been shooting, this one always keep screwing guys up.
OK... here goes (Whew, this is gonna be a long one).
There are several things that go on inside a scope, and in the eyes at the same time. Some of them work against each other.
But some terminology first... and we'll leave out lenses that are there to correct some optical or color errors, but don't have anything to do with image forming.
We'll start at the front of it all, and work back.
1 - The "Object"... the thing that you are looking (shooting) at.
2 - The "Objective". The front lens is called the "Objective"... it forms the first image of the "object" we are looking at (that's why they call it the Objective)
It is the lens that "captures" all the light, that is solely responsible for the image quality of the scope... if it is poor, you can't fix the poor image later.
This lens is usually made of two different types of glasses (called "elements") sandwiched together, and is called an "Achromat".
The Achromat is fully color corrected for blue and green. The red wavelengths are partially corrected, but have what is called "residual color errors".
This is the normal type of objective used in shooting and spotting scopes. In quality, they can vary from badd, through sorta OK, to pretty damn good.
If one of the elements is made of an "ED" glass, or a "Fluorite" (CaF) glass, the two element lens can be very good to friggin' outstanding.
In some instances, objective lenses are made of three elements, and all three colors (blue, green, and red) are completely corrected. This type of lens is called an "Apochromat", and this is the finest lens that can be bought. The best of these can also have "ED" glass, or Fluorite as one of the elements.
3 - The "First image plane". The Objective focuses the light to make an image of the subject, just like a camera lens. This image is upside down, and right/left reversed. This is the first image plane, but NOT the "First image plane" that is talked about when shooters talk about reticles.
4 - The "Erector lens"... (if it is a group of lenses, it is called the "Erector cell"). Because the first image is upside down/wrong way around, we (as shooters) can't use it... so we flip it around with a simple optical group called the "erector cell". This cell gives us a new image that is right way around, called the second image plane. Moving this cell causes this second image plane to move... so micrometer spindles are put against the cell, to get elevation and windage adjustments.
5 - The "Second image plane". This is the second real image plane in the scope, and this is the image plane that shooters call the "First image plane" when talking about reticles. In a fixed power scope, or in a variable with a "First image plane reticle", the reticle would be placed in this image plane.
This is where Premier Reticle puts those magical "Gen II" reticles.
6 - The "Zoom group". In a variable scope with standard (non-magnifying) reticle, the zoom group of optics would follow #5. This group of lenses can change the size of the image plane in #5 and then form a new (third) image plane behind it.
7 - The "Third image plane" In variable power scopes, this is the plane that the reticle is placed in. By being here, it allows the image to change sizes, but the reticle to stay the same size. In the context of reticles, this is the image plane that is referred to as the "second image plane"
8 - The "Eyepiece". This optical group is like a jewelers loupe. Is is (or should be) a super fine magnifier. It's only job in the whole world, is to focus on the reticle.
Let me repeat that for those that live in Rio Linda...
THE ONLY JOB FOR THE EYEPIECE IS TO FOCUS YOUR EYE ON THE RETICLE!!!!
It CANNOT adjust, or compensate for, or do anything else when things look bad in the scope, or when you can't hit the target... and you CANNOT use the eyepiece to try to correct for parallax. That is sheer folly at best, and raw stupidity at worst.
If you expect it to do anything else, then stop wasting your time with long-range shooting, cuz you are never gonna make it past mediocre... and take up golf!!
OK... now that you know what the insides are like... lets move on. We'll use the zoom scope for our examples. cuz if you can understand the zoom scope, then the fixed scope is a walk in the park.
In the scope that is set for infinity range, the object forms an image behind the objective (the first image plane)... the erector cell "sees" that image, and flips it over and makes it right way around in a NEW image plane (the Second image plane). The zoom group adjusts the size of this image plane, and makes a NEW image plane (the Third image plane) that is the desired size. There is a reticle placed in this last image plane, and the eyepiece focuses on the reticle AND the image at the same time.
When things are good, that's how the scope workie!
---
But... now the booger falls into the soup... IF the third image plane and the reticle are not exactly, (and I mean EX-ACT-LY) in the same place, then your eye cannot see them LOCKED together as one picture.
It sees them as two separate pictures, and the eye will look at each separately, and the eye can also look AROUND one to see the other.
---
Lenses are measured in metrics (aka Millimeters). Not because the Europeans wanted the metric system 20 years ago, but because optical strings and chains of lenses (like scopes) are really a string of numbers.
There are constant ratios of "this divided by that's" that give image sizes, "F-ratios", and image locations. It's so damn easy to do the engineering using a 10 based system that the optical guys were using the metric system way back in the 1800's.
The objective has a "Focal length"... this is the distance behind the lens that the first image plane falls when making an image if a subject that is at infinity (or very damn far away).
If the objective has a focal length of 100mm, then the image of that 1000 yd target is 100mm behind the lense.
But the problem with geometric optics (which is what we are dealing with here), is that they follow the laws of geometry... and optics make triangles like rabbits make babies.
AND... in an optical chain, when you change one thing, one angle, one ANYTHING, everything else follows along and changes BASED on the ratios involved at THAT stage.
If we take that same target, and move it to 100 yds, the image in the scope moves BACKWARDS, going further into the scope. Not by much, but it doesn't take much, cuz we're dealing with very small distances inside the scope, and very high magnifications.
How far the image moves back, and what it's new position is, is predictable by the mathematical ratios of the angles formed by the subject and the first image... OR (for us dummies that lost our slip sticks) by the ratio of the distances to the Target and the focal length, multiplied by the focal length. then ADDED to the focal length.
The target is at 100 yds (91440mm), the focal length of the objective is 100, so the displacement is 1/914 x 100, which means that the first image is now at ~100.1mm. Hmmm only .1mm, that doesn't seem like much.
Read the following paragraph twice...
In a 1x scope, 0.1mm would mean nothing... but this displacement is repeated throughout the chain, AND if any of the optical groups change the image ratio (aka image size), then the displacement (aka ERROR) is changed in direct proportion to the increase in magnification. So in a 3x scope, it would be .3mm, and in a 10x scope, it would be 1mm, and in a 30 power scope, the image would be 3mm behind the reticle.
Now, you should have seen a pattern in this last paragraph.
READ THIS TWICE!!
With the same error in the objective (scope focused at 1000, and target at 100), the parallax INCREASES WITH MAGNIFICATION... got it?
If not, READ IT TWO MORE TIMES!!
OK... now, if we do the same math for closer distances, like 50 yds, and 25 yds we will see that the error gets really big, so that with a target at 50 yards, and the scope set at 35 or 65 yds, the parallax makes the combination un-usable.
---
Parallax is... when the image of the target, and the reticle, are NOT in exactly the same plane, and by moving the eye up and down... or side to side, either the target OR the reticle appears to move in relation to the other.
You might see the target move and the reticle stay still, or you might see the target stay still and the reticle move over it... both are exactly the same, and which you see, is only a matter of your OWN perception.
It is NOT possible to have parallax while moving up and down, but not have it when you are moving side to side.
If you think that is what you have, you have other problems... either you are moving the rifle, or you have eye problems.

HOW TO SET UP A SCOPE!

This is the only way to do it...
First, screw the eyepiece out (CCW) all the way, until it stops.
If you wear glasses, put them on.
Hold the scope up and look OVER the scope at the sky, and relax your eyes. Then move the scope in front of your eye.
The reticle should look fuzzy
Turn the eyepiece in 1/2 turn, and do the same thing again. You will have to do for a while before the reticle starts to look better. When you start getting close, then turn the eyepiece 1/4 turn each time.
Do this until the reticle is fully sharp and fully BLACK immediately when you look through the scope.
Than back off one turn and do it again to make sure you are in the same place.
Then LOCK the ring on the eyepiece, and leave it alone forever!
Second.
Set the scope down on something sold, where it can see something at a long distance... half a mile of longer is good.
It can be on the rifle, and rested in sand bags at the range... but pick something at least 1000 yds away... even further if possible.
If the scope has an "AO" Adjustable objective, then set it for infinity, and look at the distant object, and move your head from one side to the other, or up and down if you prefer.
If the reticle seems to move, there is parallax.
Change the distance setting and try again... if you are very careful, you can move your eye, and adjust the distance at the same time, seeing which direction gets better.
With front objective adjustments, you can turn them either way without worry... BUT with side adjustment scopes, like the MK4-M3, the M3-LR, or the other LR family of scopes, the adjustment must ALWAYS be made from the infinity end of the dial. Turn the adjustment all the way until it stops (past infinity), and then start turning it in a little at a time, until there is no parallax. If you "overshoot" the proper setting, you can't just turn back a little, you must go back to stop at the end of the dial, and start over again.
While "AO"s dials are locked in place, and if the indicated distance doesn't match the real distance, there's nothing you can do about it... the side focus dials are not locked in place.
Once you have found the setting for infinity on the side focus models, then (CAREFULLY) loosen the screws, and set the dial so that little sideways infinity symbol is lined up with the hash mark, so it is calibrated. You can also make little marks or put on a paper tape for other ranges instead of using the round dots that don't match any range.
Now you can set it to infinity, but remember that you MUST turn the dial all the way past infinity to the stop, EVERY TIME before going from a close range to a longer range.
If you are set for 500 yds, you can go directly to 100 yds, but if you are set for 100 and want to set it to 500, you MUST go all the way back to the stop, and then go to 500
This is because there is a fair amount of backlash (aka SLOP) in this wheel linkage to the focusing cell, so you can set it only from one direction to make sure the slop is always on one side. The other problem with it is, even if you decided that you wanted to calibrate from the other end... the recoil will push the cell back. SO you must ALWAYS set these dials from the infinity end of their scales.
To make it easy to not have to remember... I always start from the end stop, when I change range, no matter which direction I'm going in... it adds about 0.023 seconds!
 
This is my favorite ...

Retical and Parallax Adjustment ... by Wally Siebert

1. Adjust the "eyepiece" by unscrewing it until it is fuzzy.

2. Point the scope at the sky, a white wall or a fluorescent lamp.

3. Turn the eyepiece "in" one turn. Take a look. If fuzzy, do the same routine until the reticle is sharp and black.

4. Lock the eyepiece and leave it until your optometrist gives you a new prescription.

5. Direct your attention to the target and "adjust the parallax" setting until the target is sharp and clear!

6. This setting can vary from range to range depending on the elevation.
 
This is why it is a great advantage to have a scope set up so that there is no parallax at the exact point of sharpest focus.

In my experience, when I have the eyepiece adjusted correctly then the above statement is correct. I turn the obj back and forth on each side of 'sharp' finding an equally blurry image and then back the other way equally blurry until I have a good idea of where the center is then I stop it there. This is the sharpest image. With the eyepiece adjusted correctly there is no parallax at this point or maybe the eyepiece might need just the most minute tweak. This tweak makes no discernable difference in the image sharpness.

Now if I stop the obj at the center and there is lots of parallax [ requiring a 'substantial' turn of the obj to dial out the parallax] what does this tell me ??? It tells me I made an error when adjusting the eyepiece for reticle sharpness. I turn the obj to eliminate the parallax and then adj the eyepiece to achieve the sharpest image and reticle that I can.

This seems like a very simple verification of eyepiece adjustment but it always attracts the most virulent attacks. People try to misconstrue it as saying the eyepiece affects the parallax which of course it does not.

For me it always seemed like there was a relatively large range of eyepiece adjustment that would give me a sharp reticle. Setting the parallax to zero and then tweaking the eyepiece for maximum sharpness seems to have a very well defined place where the eyepiece wants to be.
 
Last edited:
In some...

Retical and Parallax Adjustment ... by Wally Siebert

1. Adjust the "eyepiece" by unscrewing it until it is fuzzy.

2. Point the scope at the sky, a white wall or a fluorescent lamp.

3. Turn the eyepiece "in" one turn. Take a look. If fuzzy, do the same routine until the reticle is sharp and black.

4. Lock the eyepiece and leave it until your optometrist gives you a new prescription.

5. Direct your attention to the target and "adjust the parallax" setting until the target is sharp and clear!

6. This setting can vary from range to range depending on the elevation.

This may work with some scopes, however; there are some excellent scopes that when properly adjusted for parallax at the target distance, do not exhibit the clearest focus. Adjusting the eye piece lens to compensate for this is NOT the proper procedure. I'll pick the proper parallax adjustment every time.

virg
 
My Advice

to someone who has a scope that is not in clear focus when the parallax is adjusted out(and you need to verify this is a constant malaise in all the temps and humidities(air is a gas throught which you look and it expands and contracts with temp)) and this bugs you, is to sell it and look elsewhere.
 
Virg, and Greg
My Bausch and Lomb 4200 36X required a little improper adjustment to arrive at a point where parallax is zero and focus is at peak sharpness. (as have 2 or three other scopes that I have run across) Why would I have wanted to get rid of a scope that so easily made to work properly? Works trumps proper just about every time. It's called thinking outside the box. If what you are doing doesn't work, try something else. As I said in my first post, because this truth has not been officially blessed, posted it becomes a lightning rod. So be it. It is still the truth. You can always get rid of the scope or live with sub par performance it that pleases you.
 
It's like a kid throwing a tantrum. Hands over the ears "I DON'T HEAR YOU I DON'T HEAR YOU !!!!!!!"
 
Boyd

Virg, and Greg
My Bausch and Lomb 4200 36X required a little improper adjustment to arrive at a point where parallax is zero and focus is at peak sharpness. (as have 2 or three other scopes that I have run across) Why would I have wanted to get rid of a scope that so easily made to work properly? Works trumps proper just about every time. It's called thinking outside the box. If what you are doing doesn't work, try something else. As I said in my first post, because this truth has not been officially blessed, posted it becomes a lightning rod. So be it. It is still the truth. You can always get rid of the scope or live with sub par performance it that pleases you.

that was my point, live with it or sell it. I've had several scopes that were a bit out of focus when properly adjusted to remove parallax, and I just lived with them because they were holding point of aim so well. --Greg
 
My point was that perhaps you could have had your cake, and eaten it too, as I have. Holding point of aim is largely a function of the erector tube pivot and the turrets and opposing spring(s). Fiddling with the front (or side focus) or eyepiece focus has no effect of the mechanical properties of either. Knowing this, years ago, I thought that I would have nothing to lose by trying a little unconventional adjusting to see what happened. What happened was that is some cases I have been able to arrive at a point of adjustment where there was no parallax and the scope was properly focused on the target at the same time. In trying to share this discovery on the internet, I have been told that what has happened is impossible by more than one person. Trust me, it worked just as I have reported (but not in every case) , and if this information benefits a few who realize that they risk nothing by trying what I have reported, then I have done what I set out to. What has been somewhat amazing is the forcefulness with which some have disagreed. Oh well...so be it.
 
Boyd ...

Thanks for passing on the results of your exploration. I'm going to give your technique a try and see if I can tweak my scope into a little more clarity at zero parallax. I've never been one to embrace the status quo. Keep up the good work. Thanks again. Art :)
 
The 4th lens

I have two B&L 36 power scopes. One of which is as good as my frozen
36 in fixed mounts for holding poi. It does exhibit some paralax in a
horizontal plane and none in verticle when adjusted in conventional ways.
Having talked to people that deal in lenses and eyes, it is thought that
some astigmatism could cause this. I have never been able to eliminate
it completely but by adjusting the eye piece have made it far better.
The 4th lense in this system (eyes) relegates this to a personal adjustment.
There is no black and white there, only what works
 
My point was that perhaps you could have had your cake, and eaten it too, as I have. Holding point of aim is largely a function of the erector tube pivot and the turrets and opposing spring(s). Fiddling with the front (or side focus) or eyepiece focus has no effect of the mechanical properties of either. Knowing this, years ago, I thought that I would have nothing to lose by trying a little unconventional adjusting to see what happened. What happened was that is some cases I have been able to arrive at a point of adjustment where there was no parallax and the scope was properly focused on the target at the same time. In trying to share this discovery on the internet, I have been told that what has happened is impossible by more than one person. Trust me, it worked just as I have reported (but not in every case) , and if this information benefits a few who realize that they risk nothing by trying what I have reported, then I have done what I set out to. What has been somewhat amazing is the forcefulness with which some have disagreed. Oh well...so be it.



It is the only way that has worked for me on any of my Leupold scopes. I've gotten to the point that I now do the eyepiece focus before I mount any rifle scope. That includes scopes of 1.5X all the way up. Yes I do the focus with my regular eye glasses on.
 
Back
Top