Vortex Crossfire II VS Diamondback

Both of these scopes seem to get pretty good reviews, one of which is a bit cheaper. I'm going to be shooting a realistic max range of 300-350 yards at paper and medium game so I've been looking at the 4-16x50 CrossFire and the 4-16x42 Diamondback. I like the idea of a 50mm Obj. since it stays gray and cloudy here for most of the hunting season and more light is always better right?

I'd like to hear from Crossfire and Diamondback owners about whether or not they thought the Crossfire was satisfactory or whether it really is necessary to go to the Diamondback. I'm not trying to shoot match with this gun, but accurate 1 MOA groups out to 350 yards is necessary for what I'm trying to accomplish.

Thanks.

And one more question. Can you share your experience what is your favorite hunting pack with trustly loops? I read a lot about loops and found good article https://simplycarry.com/what-are-the...ck-straps-for/ , I didn't know but they are very important for comfortable hunting and traveling. I had eberlestock blue widow and was thinking about getting a new one. So, hope for your help.

had a diamondback HP 4-16x44 with bdc reticle i used it for 1 fall and gave it away. would be ok for a target rifle scope in good light conditions. low light conditions the scope was horrible, cross hairs are so fine their hard to make out. I upgraded to a viper hs 4-16x44 glass was better. it let in a bit more light in lower light conditions but still super hard to see the gross hairs. vortex i find also has a weird eye relief if your on 10x+ magnification.

and ps larger objective lens has nothing to do with letting in light

Again, this seems like common sense. But the size of the objective lens is directly tied to the magnification range of the scope. Have you ever noticed how lower-magnification scopes usually have a small diameter objective lens, while high-magnification scopes have larger ones? That's because the combination of these specs is what creates the scope's exit pupil size.
The exit pupil is the disc of light that actually hits your eye. This disc needs to be the right size in order to have a bright, clear image all the way through the magnification range. You can visualize this by taking an un-mounted scope, holding it in your hand with the objective lens facing up. Put a white piece of paper on a table below it and shine a flashlight through the scope. Make sure the scope is the same distance away from the paper as it would be from your eye if you were shooting. With the light shining through the scope, you should see a disc of light hit the paper on the other side. Move the scope up and down to see how the disc goes in and out of focus. Adjust the magnification, and you’ll see the disc get bigger and smaller.
There’s also a very ease mathematical formula to figure out what size your exit pupil will be. It’s the diameter of the objective lens divided by the magnification. This will give you the exit pupil diameter in millimeters.
FOR EXAMPLE:
If you have a 1-4x20mm scope that's on 1x, the equation looks like 1/20 = 20mm exit pupil. If it’s on 4x, it would be 4/20 = 5mm exit pupil
Now let’s say you have a 3-18x44mm scope. If it were on 8x, the equation would be 8/44 = 5.5mm exit pupil. Almost the same as if the 1-4x scope was on 4x.
The other thing to consider is how much light your eye can physically use. It actually varies by age. When you’re young and your eyes are fresh and new, your pupils can dilate quite large, maybe to 7 or 8mm’s. But as you age, your eyes age, as well. Your average 35-year-old eye may only be able to dilate to 4 or 5mm’s. So yes, we could definitely create a scope that gives you a 30mm exit pupil, but your body wouldn’t actually be able to absorb all the light.
fun fact of the day :P

Correct, money gets you low light capabilities not objective and tube size.