Ethics of Digital

Something else occurs - much is made of the light gathering qualities/advantages of top-end i.e. very expensive traditional scopes - how do they compare especially at dusk with the new electronic scopes which cost about a quarter or less of said scopes?
I know that even my old Pards 007 and 008 have very good light-gathering qualities at dusk….
Just curious…
🦊🦊
Digital beats glass.
I used to shoot with a fella that had one of the big S&B scopes and we compared side by side plenty of times and my C50 killed it.
If you need to shoot right up to last knockings digital is king, not only that, in woodland with heavy canopy, glass has gone way before last legal light, decent digital keeps going.
 
Something else occurs - much is made of the light gathering qualities/advantages of top-end i.e. very expensive traditional scopes - how do they compare especially at dusk with the new electronic scopes which cost about a quarter or less of said scopes?
I know that even my old Pards 007 and 008 have very good light-gathering qualities at dusk….
Just curious…
🦊🦊
The current crop of digital day/night scopes (Pulsar C50, HIK Alpex, Arken Zulus) produce afar better colour image in the low light conditions at dawn and dusk than even the best glass scopes.
These scopes don't amplify the light they receive, but relative to a glass scope they make much better use of it - which results in shootable colour images well after even the best glass scopes have given up

Cheers

Bruce
 
I shoot a lightweight Tikka .243 mounted by a Pard DS35 - 70 digital day/night scope for deer. The reason for this choice of equipment is that I am nigh on 85 and don't want to have to give up stalking until I absolutely have to. Weight is paramount. All my gear is as light as I can possibly make it and I do more highseat work than anything else. However, I still enjoy the thrill of the stalk as long as the drag wont be too far!

Although I have been stalking for many years I had never done any formal training so just recently I did a DSC1 course - No reason except I wanted to. It was excellent value and I learnt a hell of a lot. Now thinking about the DSC2.

After the shooting assessment, which I passed, the assessor, who was not our course instructor, commented that on 'his' estate I would not be allowed to shoot deer with my digital scope. When I asked why ever not he said that it was not ethical and didn't show respect.

I wanted to get off home, a three hour drive, as the weather was dire and I was soaking wet, as was the assessor, and he had many more candidates to deal with so I did not pursue the matter.

Now I thought that the idea was that we should be shooting more deer at the moment - Not worrying about the 'ethics' of the modern legal equipment that is now on offer.

A scope allows one to see the target and take an ethical shot to ensure the rapid death of the quarry. Whether it uses relatively heavy glass lenses and mechanical levers and widgets or a small microchip and a screen does not seem to matter to me.

Your comments please.
Simply a daft comment by a relic, ignore him. What you are doing makes perfect sense and if anything ensures a more ethical shot, if you are otherwise struggling with your vision.
 
Personally I don’t want to use a thermal imaging device whilst out stalking. It’s not the device per se, it’s the intrusion of yet more electronics in my life. I can see deer with the naked eye. I am blessed with good eyesight and ability to see wildlife. I get huge pleasure from this.

I don’t want to walk around the countryside staring a little electronic rendition of the wild places.

Thermals are a useful tool in the armoury for some people.

Ethics are in the hands of the individuals who use the tools.
The assesor on the DSC1 course sounds like an absolute tool, a total bell end in fact, however I personally can’t stand looking through such devices and am fortunate enough not to need such junk. I Absolutely agree with Heym SR20 though, I had a thermal spotter and digital scope a few years back. I used them for a couple of months and hated every second of it, so sold the stuff.
I do love a good moon lit night time hunt using high quality glass, so clear and engaging. I shot a few wild boar at night whilst working in Germany over the winter, never would a thermal or digital set up have improved anything for me other than to bore me to sleep.
Still, if Thermal etc helps you to hunt more effectively then I’d say that’s 100% ok to use it, Indeed to deliberately hinder yourself with equipment that you can’t use well to make things more ‘challenging’ is verging on animal cruelty .
Kindest regards, Olaf
 
Last edited:
Best post for March 2024 @Heym SR20

As my old man used to say " half of the ****s getting about today couldn't find their way home if the street lights weren't on "
There is such a reliance on modern equipment and aids that if all fail it then renders most of the 'hunters' that have only ever used them as useless when it comes down to going bush and stalking up to a deer.
You learn bugger all about actual hunting by arriving at a paddock and walking up to a white blob with wind in face if that is all that you have ever done since the granting of your gun licence.
There is a real deal in finding deer sign that you interpret as fresh enough and then commence your journey in pursuit following that sign to either the win or the lose situation.
We here know that a large percentage of the modern sambar "hunters" of today displaying their "trophy" in photos taken in the flashlight wouldn't have a hope in hell of ever getting a trophy in the daylight being unaided by the modern addition of a thermal scope.

There is deer stalking/hunting and then there is the other method.

Btw the new chum wont get up to bedded deer in heavy bush (in daylight) without having done an apprenticeship in hunting when he/she has only ever used an optical aid.
Much the same with the proliferation of GPS devices, the reliance is such that the 'hunter' doesn't take note of landmarks on the journey that when the battery fails they then have no way of knowing where the **** to go.

View attachment 358237
Absolutely spot on, it’s largely what I think too. Still, if it helps someone with poor eyesight, then to a certain degree it’s a good thing.
Kindest regards, Olaf
 
Hmmm.
Interesting and as usual diverse views.
I guess the simple fact is that electronic sighting devices are an inevitable progress in the spotting, sight acquisition and effective shooting of deer and no doubt have their genesis, like do many other inventions in man’s ever greater efforts to kill his fellow man.
Whether you love or loathe them is as ever a matter of personal choice; the fact is that they do have advantages over “traditional” sights in use in differing scenarios and it seems that every five minutes yet another variation comes out offering even greater improvements - again it is your call but to stand in the way of any progress i.e. something for the greater good is a hard one to defend.
I just wonder if that long-gone Dutch fella who allegedly invented the telescope received the same amounts of praise, criticism and ridicule way back; regardless, his efforts seem to have caught on - probably thanks to Gallileo and one or two other ahem, “far seeing” individuals…
🦊🦊
The first person to apply for a patent for a telescope was Dutch eyeglass maker Hans Lippershey (or Lipperhey). In 1608, Lippershey laid claim to a device that could magnify objects three times. His telescope had a concave eyepiece aligned with a convex objective lens. One story goes that he got the idea for his design after observing two children in his shop holding up two lenses that made a distant weather vane appear close. Others claimed at the time that he stole the design from another eyeglass maker, Zacharias Jansen.
 
A scope allows one to see the target and take an ethical shot to ensure the rapid death of the quarry. Whether it uses relatively heavy glass lenses and mechanical levers and widgets or a small microchip and a screen does not seem to matter to me.

What more to say, perhaps I am unethical in using a good scope with excellent resolution, perhaps a 1960 4x20 air rifle scope is?
 
Still, if it helps someone with poor eyesight,
If its that poor they shouldn't have a firearms licence imo.
I guess the simple fact is that electronic sighting devices are an inevitable progress in the spotting
Yeah yeah yeah but there will be no progress when the batteries fail especially for those that never did an apprenticeship in hunting/stalking etc.
 
I have had a digital scope, but after a year got rid of it. I couldnt really get on with it. It was a Pulsar.

I have to say that these digital scopes are good, but I find they are only really useful if you are on a night licence. Which I have done a few times, with and without a digital scope. If you have GOOD glass on your rifle, then in many instances this is sufficient, in my opinion. A small powerful light weight green light on top of the scope works just as well I find.
In the mention of Fallow, and or Sika, many are shot in low light conditions, and a good scope is a must, but I can also see the advantage of a good night vision too.

This chap mentioning he would not allow people on his estate with anything but a normal scope, is to my mind talking b....ks. But then there are lots of would be stalkers talking b...cks these days :).
 
There goes that closed mindedness again.
No not at all but you Toastie are welcome to have an opine also and I suggest that you are wrong in thinking that once a person buys a rifle, equips it with the latest pulsar or whatever they instantly become a deer hunter.
There is a learning curve in life and there is an even bigger one in stalking deer. It is patently obvious that there are many that have inadequacies when it comes to stalking rather than shooting or collecting.
Yes we have the so and so`s with 1000`s of deer to his/her credit that were shot in a stubble paddock at night with a thermal (or light) and I say put them in the forest without them ever having done the learning curve and they will come back to earth very quickly.
 
If its that poor they shouldn't have a firearms licence imo.

Yeah yeah yeah but there will be no progress when the batteries fail especially for those that never did an apprenticeship in hunting/stalking etc.
The battery in my Pard lasts about four hours. It takes about ten seconds to change. It is slightly larger than an AA battery. I always carry three and two for my Pulsar spotter. (8 hours total). What more do I need?

Many stalkers shoot with spectacles. Wait till you get old and your views will change my friend.
 
The battery in my Pard lasts about four hours. It takes about ten seconds to change. It is slightly larger than an AA battery. I always carry three and two for my Pulsar spotter. (8 hours total). What more do I need?

Many stalkers shoot with spectacles. Wait till you get old and your views will change my friend.
He is old. And a miserable bu##er as well. :lol: . Who said that. :coat:
 
I shot deer for a good few years with iron sights. Again in deciduous woodland as a job with nothing better than a 6x42 scope, which suited me. I also shot Sika under a night licence with a green light torch on top of it. All the gear is great if you need it but my hound winds deer for me. If I can't identify deer and confidently shoot them with a straight 8x56 S&B in the evening light I go home. Whatever happens to float your own boat is up to the individual, but like playing pontoon I think I'll stick.
The assessor was a dickhead as a final comment.
 
Wait till you get old and your views will change my friend.
When I was in my 20`s anyone older than 50 was 'old' when I was in my 50`s anyone older than 70 was 'old' now that I will be 72 this month anyone older than 90 will be 'old' You aint old yet Merlyn at a miserable 84.

I am an 84 year old ******. According to what I read in the papers I can't finish that sentence any more. I might be in a 'transition phase'. I find I don't sleep well these nights. I keep having to get up and pee but now I have to go look in the wardrobe mirror first to see whether I should stand up with the seat raised or lower it and sit. Life is very confusing for us olduns. It was never this difficult for my dad or grandad. (Not sure about my grandma as she started to grow a straggly beard in her nineties).
 
When I was in my 20`s anyone older than 50 was 'old' when I was in my 50`s anyone older than 70 was 'old' now that I will be 72 this month anyone older than 90 will be 'old' You aint old yet Merlyn at a miserable 84.
He is old John, cos he's one step ahead of this miserable old git.😤
 
Back
Top