What is the predominant optics on the dark continent?

[Neil Molendyk]

My .416 Rigby has a Leupold VX3i 1.5-4.5 with the German No. 4 reticle. I have been thinking of changing it out for something illuminated. Maybe a Trijicon Accupoint.

I chose a Trijicon Accupoint 1-4 German No. 4 lighted recticle on my 416 Rigby because my opinion is to get closer if I can. The lighted recticle is especially advantageous when aiming on a black skinned target like cape buffalo and sable.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

I agree with Bullet Safaris, open sights are correct for closer is stuff like DG. It is not so much the sight picture as the instinctive correct positioning of the rifle to the body. Everyone knows about lateral alignment and the talk is of cast-off, but so too in vertical alignment important. Obviously the line of sight with a scope is significantly above the line of open sights, so unless you also fit a cheek piece raiser to bring you to the scope line, how can that be comfortable, instinctive, ergonomic? I am a lover of fine wood and fortunately have a rifle that fits me perfectly. When I originally got it I was hell bent to fit a scope. Verney recommended strongly against that, wrong stock profile, etc. then I decided upon a red dot reflex, and sage guys at the range said 'shoot the thing a while man. Well I did and many trials later I am thoroughly convinced that this rifle will stay just as it is. Scopes have their place, of course yes, but on close in, ie 100m in, I will trust fit over glass.

 

[Dwight Beagle]

As in most things firearms related there is no consensus. There are people advocating for scopes and people advocating for iron sights on very close shots on dangerous game. Who to believe? If I remember correctly Finn Aagaard was a proponent of scopes on dangerous game rifles and of leaving them on even for very close work. I’ve always leaned toward that sentiment and it jibes with my experience shooting raging out of control whitetails, syphilitic man-eating coyotes and deranged armadillos.

 

[cal]

I like the look of the Leupold VX-6 HD 1-6 as well. Simple reticle with red dot, small exposed turrets for dialling for longer shots (initially I didn't want this but I think it could work well for longer shots on plains game). I am definitely taking whatever scope I decide to get off for any follow up shots on DG in thick stuff.

 

[Lhleggtowner]

Open sight are quick.
They are reliable.
Practice with them.

When chips are down at less that 15 yards a scope is only in the way regardless of power and you will only need to shoulder and put the front blade on the buffalo.

If he's standing at 30 or 40 you will have the time to hit him well with either option.

Dont sacrifice Top end magnification on a buffalo gun for the 1x emergency idea.
The upper range of magnification is very important to a client hunter (average age 60 years and eye sight is going down for most) 4x or 6x just isnt a lot when there is a sea of black bodies at 85 yards or when a bull is bedding in the shade in a thicket... it happens every season without fail that a low power scope costs a hunter a trophy buffalo because he cant see it.

I want the hunter to see what I see (or more) through my 8x binoculars with 20/20 vision.
This leads to a better chance at a good first shot...prevents problems and is the most important shot.

Very true that these 1x to 9 or 10 or more can do it all. They are pretty new and a good development for dangerous game rifles.

1x capable or not I'll still ask you to take it off when we follow up in 8 foot grass or thick bush!
It's a covey flush at that point boys and I dont see many scopes quail guns

That is a great answer I appreciate the insight.