POSP Driving me Mad !

[WASR]

Hi All,

I am having a b**** of a time getting the eye relief just right on a POSP 6X24. *&**%^&^%&^. It seems to be that your eye needs to be just in the perfect location or you just see fluf. I am trying to adjust the eye piece to facilitate but with little luck so far (that rubber does not move very smooth #$%^&...)

Should I go see an optometrist or is there still hope? Any tips are welcome!

This is the trouble maker:

[Caseless]

Take off the rubber eyepiece and try again. I think the rubber was designed for the naked eye without shooting glasses on.

If the stock is Warsaw-length, try an 1-inch buttpad for better LOP.

http://www.amazon.com/UTG-Model-Combat-Butt-Pad/dp/B002TUSK06/ref=pd_sim_sbs_sg_2

[echotebarknwhale]

The eye relief is kind of wonky, I have a 6x42 on my wasr, and you need to be at just the right distance to get a good picture. Once you find that sweet spot its crystal clear though.

http://i.imgur.com/8G7AS.jpg

[WASR]

The eye relief is kind of wonky, I have a 6x42 on my wasr, and you need to be at just the right distance to get a good picture. Once you find that sweet spot its crystal clear though.

http://i.imgur.com/8G7AS.jpg

It really is "wonky" I am in the middle of writing a review on the POSP scope for use with the WASR and that so far is my biggest gripe. Do you think that the picture brightness on the 6X42 really is a lot better than on the 6X24?

The other thing I did not like was the non military range finder (1.5m / 0.5m). I was hoping for / counting on the 1.7m military setup. Is this the same on yours? Did you get the 1000m Dragunov or the 400M Simonov reticle?

[echotebarknwhale]

I got the 400 Simonov, and didnt get the 1.5m/0.5m setup. I ordered mine from http://kalinkaoptics.com/rifle-scopes/posp.html and they have a whole bunch of different types available.

Also, this was taken from the www.wasr-10.com/posp6x24review
"Aperture

Just remember that a large aperture gives you brighter images than a smaller aperture at any given power in low light and will show you (resolve) more detail in all light conditions.

[WASR]

I got the 400 Simonov, and didnt get the 1.5m/0.5m setup. I ordered mine from http://kalinkaoptics.com/rifle-scopes/posp.html and they have a whole bunch of different types available.

Also, this was taken from the www.wasr-10.com/posp6x24review
"Aperture

Just remember that a large aperture gives you brighter images than a smaller aperture at any given power in low light and will show you (resolve) more detail in all light conditions.

So your POSP has the 1.7M range finder? Did you also have an issue with getting the eye relief just right?

[WASR]

Finally Done With the Review

Hi all,

Thanks for your input, it put me on the right track and helped me to (finally) get my review done! It actually turns out there is a "D" version of the scope, which allows the user to adjust the focus, so you can set it just right. I wish I had gotten one of those instead of the fixed focus on I got.

If anyone cares to read my POSP review you'll find it here http://wasr-10.com/POSP6X24Review. Constructive criticism per PM is very welcome. Particularly if you think I made any mistakes or omissions I would really like to hear about it. I spend a lot of time on this one (and learned a lot in the process), so I would hate it if there were mistakes or omissions in there.

Thanks again for your help everyone!

[motorhead]

small objective. will perform poorly in low light AND the smaller field will make acquisition more difficult.

[WASR]

small objective. will perform poorly in low light AND the smaller field will make acquisition more difficult.

For Daylight conditions and range use (where targets are not in a hurry to get anywhere) I found the 24mm objective was fine.

The picture was clear enough too, only getting my eye to focus consistently on the reticle!:-). That being said, if I would get another one I'd get the 8X42 or the 3-9XX42, just because I get a kick out of the higher magnification. I'd get it with the "D" variable focus of course:-).

[WASR]

small objective. will perform poorly in low light AND the smaller field will make acquisition more difficult.

Looking at this again, maybe I misread you the first time. Are you saying that the smaller objective will also make the field of vision smaller? (so the field of vision is not just determined by the magnification?)

[motorhead]

correct. larger objective=more light gathering and wider field. larger field=faster acquisition.

[WASR]

correct. larger objective=more light gathering and wider field. larger field=faster acquisition.

All I could find so far about the objective lens it that it make the picture brighter (like you said under dim conditions) Like for example on this site:

http://www.bushnell.com/products/scopes/riflescopes/tech-talk/

However I had a hard time finding anywhere where it says that the size of the objective lens increased the field of view. (most sites link field of view to magnification) I'll do some more research tomorrow but would you happen to have a link handy to a source I can quote? Other CalGunners are welcome to chime in too of course!

Thanks!

[motorhead]

bigger lens=bigger picture. 2 scopes of identical mag., the larger tube will give a wider field.

[WASR]

bigger lens=bigger picture. 2 scopes of identical mag., the larger tube will give a wider field.

Wikipedia basically says that it's the scope design (out of which the diameter of the objective definitely is a part.

puts it like this: Field of view — The field of view of a telescopic sight is determined by its optical design. It is usually notated in a linear value, such as how many meters (feet) in width will be seen at 100 m (100 yd), or in an angular value of how many degrees can be viewed.

This is the thing that throws me through: on the POSP scope the 6X24 and the 6X42 have the same angle of view (4o) while one objective is almost 2X as big as the other, so I guess they do have to design them to take advantage of the larger objective.

http://posp.ru/posp.html