Last light scopes

[troupe]

Tract with Schott glass, a steal on a twilight scope and illuminated for less than 1K

 

[dfanonymous]

meaning not a clutter like a tree reticle or a non illuminated reticle that's invisible like my LRTS was and my LRHS doughnut is now.

Those are usable. They are offered to people for a reason.

 

[Varmint Hunter]

I have illuminated reticles on several scopes. I have found them to be almost useless. I can normally see and shoot right up to the end of legal shooting light and have done so without turning on the illumination.
The only time that I found illumination helpful was when aiming at black bears, under a dense canopy, in falling light. The firedot helped me ensure that the crosshair was exactly where I wanted it on the black hide.
A few years ago I shot at a bull moose at first light. It was so early that I had to check my watch to see if it was legal yet. Things happened quickly and I fired off a couple shots in rapid succession. I was somewhat surprised to see the big orange blast from the muzzle of the 18.5" (45-70) bbl. I had never seen that before. In all of my haste, I never thought to turn on the firedot. However, I did see the bull and reticle clearly and dropped him.

 

[06 SB]

@ Hand Skills, My "testing" procedure is simply me shooting and using the rifles and scopes. My hunting rigs are riding in the back seat of my truck, or on an ATV ride and me carrying it over and through the woods. My target rifles get similar but less carrying and more dialing out and back a bazillion times. The manufacturers do all kinds of testing, especially the high-end scopes and I feel they are sufficient. Plus, there are lemons and demons in all manufactured products. When I go on big hunts I always bring an extra rifle if able and an extra scope (with rings and sighted in) when space or weight is an issue. I have never had to use a back up.

 

[glide71]

Leupold VX5HD 3-15x56

I second that

 

[bluedog69]

Here is what I bought. Meopta Meostar R2.
Four of us compared it to my brother in laws Leupold VX6 and my Meopta was shootable for a long time past what the Leupold was.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1578262-REG/meopta_371800_2_5_15x56_meostar_r2_pa.html

 

[Hand Skills]

@ Hand Skills, My "testing" procedure is simply me shooting and using the rifles and scopes. My hunting rigs are riding in the back seat of my truck, or on an ATV ride and me carrying it over and through the woods. My target rifles get similar but less carrying and more dialing out and back a bazillion times. The manufacturers do all kinds of testing, especially the high-end scopes and I feel they are sufficient. Plus, there are lemons and demons in all manufactured products. When I go on big hunts I always bring an extra rifle if able and an extra scope (with rings and sighted in) when space or weight is an issue. I have never had to use a back up.

Thanks for the considered and well reasoned reply. Sorry to single you out there - my response was a little hasty and I think we have a great deal of common ground.

Mounts have been the weak link for me on a number of occasions. I'm pretty well sorted in the hardware department now, but its been a journey.

I like what you said about lemons and demons in manufacturing. That is so true, and none are exempt. Some manufacturers are better than others in the QC department though!

It's up to us to verify the system after a long journey or a hard fall. That much will never change, but confidence can, and here's to building confidence through experience

 

[Peter Carollo]

Looking for recommendations on a good clear scope for last light shots, not that I prefer them it's just when then deer move where we hunt. Prefer 2nd focal place, illuminated dot or crosshair(not entire reticle), a usable hunting reticle and under $2K. Thanks.

No experience, but probably cant go wrong with this:

Leica Amplus 6 2.5-15x56i 4A Riflescope 50400

FREE SHIPPING on Leica Amplus 6 2.5-15x56i 4A Riflescope 50400

www.eurooptic.com

 

[shooters]

I don't have enough fingers to type up the last 4 years of this quest of mine to find the absolute best low light scope. Between taking out loans and selling and buying, I've literally spend tens of thousands trying to find the best.
Everything from the mid grade stuff to the highest of highest. I did what Ilya Koshkin does. Built a mount to hold multiple scopes on a tripod and look through them all from one hour before sunset to 1 hour after sunset…as well as sunrise. Into and away from the sun.
This quest ended this year.
Here are some things I can tell you.
1. Manufacturers will lie, deceive, manipulate their numbers. Light transmission, twilight factor, etc.. where and how they measure it, through which lens and through how many lenses etc.
2. I can also tell you that resolution trumps's light transmission. This is where I think most should focus on. I have optics that physically look brighter, but is hard to distinguish what you're looking at compared to optics that don't look as bright, but they resolve so much better that you can see what you're trying to see.
3. Optics with extremely high light transmission generally do horrible with glare or flare, depending on who you talk to on the definition.

So. From the mid grade, I've owned:
Mark 5HD, Trijicon HX, Tenmile, Zeiss V4 and V6, Tract, Leupold VX5 and 6hds, Leica Amplus, Nightforce NX8, Swaro Z6, Maven, Sightron, Steiner T6Xi and HX, Vortex and everything in between.

From the high end, I've owned:
Minox ZP, S&B Ultra Birght, S&B Polar, Leica Magnus in all their mag ranges, NF ATACR, ZCO 4/20, Swaro Z8 3-18, Kahles 318/525's, Zeiss V8 now, Zeiss Diavari, March, etc


My honest opinion. The high end only ever so slightly out do the mid level simple because of the resolution. And it's sooooo minor.
Of the high end, the Kahles, new Zeiss V8, and Minox were the brightest. The Zeiss V8 being the brightest. Contrary to what all the "experts" say, the Polar, Diavari and Z8i fell behind them. But we are struggling to really see differences here.

Of the mid grade, the best to me were the Leica Amplus and yes, the NF NX8 4-32. The NX8 gets a bad wrap for whatever reason, but my 4-5 samples of the NX8 are phenomenal. The Steiner HX and Swaro Z6 were identical to me and both being right at the top.

I'll also say if you covered all the high end optics in this list and threw in the Leica Amplus, you probably wouldn't see a difference between the Amplus and the top tier. It's excellent in low light.

If I had to just pick one mid grade and high end low light optic that was good with glare from the setting or rising sun, resolved great, awesome eyebox, bright etc, it would be the Leica Amplus and the new Zeiss V8 NA.

I'm sure others will disagree with some of this.

I guess what I'm saying is don't get to crazy wrapped up in low light riflescopes here.

 

[Koda_]

A wider FOV in low light is more valuable to me than the highly subjective light gathering abilities.

Just when exactly is the light too low to hunt that your scope is going to make the deal? 28 minutes after legal sunset and in heavy timber is not going to be easy to find a sleuth deer in the scope. But in an open clearcut or field there's enough light to not worry about the cheapest scope. Really, what are we gaining here maybe 10 minutes of extra hunting at the end of each day? Can our eyes even see the difference?

 

[Brathany]

In the end, it's all how the individual shooter sees. There are a ton of folks who just can't take a good picture with a camera. They think it's good, but to a discerning eye, it's terrible. There's a ton of things that bad picture taker doesn't process when taking the picture.

Same goes for scopes. Of all the reviewers of optics, C_Does of YouTube, nails all the aspects I look for in a scope. Trumps all the forum posts on scopes.

 

[hembrook]

When I hunted in Europe, you could hint Pugs 24/7 but when hunting deer you could hunt 90 minutes after sunset.

My preferred scope was a Swarowski 2.5-10x50mm with a German #4 reticle. It has a illuminated reticle with a small red center dot.


It is first focal plane and I picked it up for about a grand from Natchez.


Surprisingly the Weaver Classic scopes, could be had for $150 on sale from Natchez, are very clear and bright with the same #4 reticle with dot. I used both the 1.5-4.5-24 and 2.5-10x50 and 56mm. Both on 30mm tubes. Never a bad idea to try, and you can always use it as a backup…. Same scope is sold under other brand names in Europe such as "Vixen" or various others for €800 and up and they are popular.

 

[06 SB]

Thanks for the considered and well reasoned reply. Sorry to single you out there - my response was a little hasty and I think we have a great deal of common ground.

Mounts have been the weak link for me on a number of occasions. I'm pretty well sorted in the hardware department now, but its been a journey.

I like what you said about lemons and demons in manufacturing. That is so true, and none are exempt. Some manufacturers are better than others in the QC department though!

It's up to us to verify the system after a long journey or a hard fall. That much will never change, but confidence can, and here's to building confidence through experience

It is all good brother.

 

[bluedog69]

I don't have enough fingers to type up the last 4 years of this quest of mine to find the absolute best low light scope. Between taking out loans and selling and buying, I've literally spend tens of thousands trying to find the best.
Everything from the mid grade stuff to the highest of highest. I did what Ilya Koshkin does. Built a mount to hold multiple scopes on a tripod and look through them all from one hour before sunset to 1 hour after sunset…as well as sunrise. Into and away from the sun.
This quest ended this year.
Here are some things I can tell you.
1. Manufacturers will lie, deceive, manipulate their numbers. Light transmission, twilight factor, etc.. where and how they measure it, through which lens and through how many lenses etc.
2. I can also tell you that resolution trumps's light transmission. This is where I think most should focus on. I have optics that physically look brighter, but is hard to distinguish what you're looking at compared to optics that don't look as bright, but they resolve so much better that you can see what you're trying to see.
3. Optics with extremely high light transmission generally do horrible with glare or flare, depending on who you talk to on the definition.

So. From the mid grade, I've owned:
Mark 5HD, Trijicon HX, Tenmile, Zeiss V4 and V6, Tract, Leupold VX5 and 6hds, Leica Amplus, Nightforce NX8, Swaro Z6, Maven, Sightron, Steiner T6Xi and HX, Vortex and everything in between.

From the high end, I've owned:
Minox ZP, S&B Ultra Birght, S&B Polar, Leica Magnus in all their mag ranges, NF ATACR, ZCO 4/20, Swaro Z8 3-18, Kahles 318/525's, Zeiss V8 now, Zeiss Diavari, March, etc


My honest opinion. The high end only ever so slightly out do the mid level simple because of the resolution. And it's sooooo minor.
Of the high end, the Kahles, new Zeiss V8, and Minox were the brightest. The Zeiss V8 being the brightest. Contrary to what all the "experts" say, the Polar, Diavari and Z8i fell behind them. But we are struggling to really see differences here.

Of the mid grade, the best to me were the Leica Amplus and yes, the NF NX8 4-32. The NX8 gets a bad wrap for whatever reason, but my 4-5 samples of the NX8 are phenomenal. The Steiner HX and Swaro Z6 were identical to me and both being right at the top.

I'll also say if you covered all the high end optics in this list and threw in the Leica Amplus, you probably wouldn't see a difference between the Amplus and the top tier. It's excellent in low light.

If I had to just pick one mid grade and high end low light optic that was good with glare from the setting or rising sun, resolved great, awesome eyebox, bright etc, it would be the Leica Amplus and the new Zeiss V8 NA.

I'm sure others will disagree with some of this.

I guess what I'm saying is don't get to crazy wrapped up in low light riflescopes here.

All I have compared is a Leupold VX6, my Meopta Meostar R2, and my wifes Swaro Z8i.
At 600 yards away at the edge of green soybean field the Leupold lost leaf definition about 15 minutes ahead of the Meopta. The leupold basically turned into a dark blob where you couldn't tell where the beans ended and the tree leaves started. The Meopta still showed individual leaf definition, and you could still tell the beans from the trees. There were 4 of us that all agreed on this. I own the Meopta and my brother in law owned the VX6.

The Swaro honestly was so close to the Meopta that there really was no difference in the two until the last 1 to 1.5 minutes of the comparison. At which point you had to just say can't see at all anymore. So the Swaro might gain you 1 minute of "seeability".

Now my boys and I compared the Meopta and Swaro on probably 4 or 5 different nights. Legal shooting time is 30 minutes after sun set. Every night we were watching our cows and calves out in the field about 100 to 300 yards away. The Meopta and the Swaro would take us to about 30-45 minutes after legal shooting time.(1 hour to 1.25 hours after sunset)

How I started looking into this is the fact that I have pigment dispersion glaucoma. We don't use these scopes to hunt after legal time, but at least I can still see great with my Meopta when legal time ends. I had lost about 15 minutes(sometimes 30 minutes) of seeing clearly, so I was done 15 minutes before legal time was up. Yes, I could kill a deer no problem, but judging a rack was out of the question. Now I see like 30 years ago again.