Low Light scope?

ishootlittlebucks · Nov 1, 2017

I have a few Zeiss Conquests that I like a lot in pretty low light. What I have found that works best, for me anyway, is to use a set of binos to decide if it's what you can shoot, then just use the scope to shoot. I don't have expensive binos. Even with them I have an easier time seeing horns and counting points than with a scope. I can only imagine what a good set could accomplish. I think it has something to do with using both eyes.

Rich M · Nov 2, 2017

I think it is the quality of the glass, the coatings, the prism, and the purity of the gas inside. Two eyes does help with depth perception.

People name brands and forget that most all the brands have different levels of glass. The quality is directly proportionate to the co$t$.

I try to stay away from the better glass as it ruins you.

letliloneswalk · Nov 2, 2017

Schmidt and Bender. But high $$$$$

M77 Ruger · Nov 2, 2017

zmgsvt said:
Went from the 56mm trijicon to the 3-15x56 Leupold vx5hd and find it a bit better at low light. It also beats out my swaro z3 50mm.

But he doesn’t want to spend 1500 on one. For the money trijicon wins

killerv · Nov 2, 2017

Must not be hunting in Ga. 30 min after is all I have known.

I just don't see how an hour after could possibly be safe for anyone. Must not have a lot of public land up there.

lonewolf247 · Nov 2, 2017

Meopta Meopro 4-12x50 would be hard to match, for the money. I think the Meopro is the best bang for the buck.

model88_308 · Nov 3, 2017

Own Zeiss and love them. Excellent low light brightness. However, I'll take a good scope with illuminated reticle over any without. Remember a couple things here... looking at animals and deciding how big or good they are is for binoculars, scopes are not for looking as your rifle is always attached and aiming. Secondly, seeing antlers and points are not the same thing as aiming at the vitals on a deer/hog/bear or whatever. Seeing plain crosshairs on an animal is what "goes" before seeing the animal, rack or points.

No scope without IR can match a quality scope with IR in low light. If you're worried about "electrics" the first VX-R I bought about 6 yrs ago just got a new battery, replacing the original last season. IF the battery should somehow fail, you still have a quality non IR scope. Simple as that.

drmajor · Nov 21, 2017

OK, a little research-
Options in glass seem to be=
1- Trijicon Accutpoint 56mm- $900
2- Vortex Crossfire II 3-12x56 AO- $300
3- Leupold VX-3 56mm- $1200?
4- Lieca ____x56mm $1300
5- Zeiss I think they have 56mm- $$$$

The Vortex is popular in SC for hogs- I am sure a lot of that is price, but it is pretty good glass. Better than my Nikon Pro Staff 3-9x40.

The Trijicon is really nice- and fair value @$300. Pretty clean.

Didn't get to see Leupold or Zeiss, but Lieca is super!! Cleanest glass I've seen. Just can't handle $1200.

whchunter · Nov 27, 2017

This

Is this the same one?

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Meopta-MeoPro-4-12x50-BDC-Rifle-Scope-537910/39859061

drmajor · Nov 27, 2017

No. Looking for 56mm & BRIGHT.

Rich M · Nov 28, 2017

Thought about you when I was doing some online shopping - saw a VX3 2.5-10x50 mm for $329. There were 2 left and I had to force myself not to buy one.

Was in the clearance section at midway or optic planet.

KKrueger · Nov 28, 2017

Calculate exit pupil diameter to determine the best power setting for low light. The exit pupil diameter is how wide the beam of light is on the shooters end of the scope.

Divide the objective diameter (in mm) by the power setting.

Using a 3-9x40 for example.
9 power your exit pupil diameter will be 4.44
3 power your exit pupil diameter will be 13.33 (A lot more light)
6 power your exit pupil diameter will be 6.66

Once the exit pupil diameter exceeds the diameter of your eye's pupil diameter you will gain no more benefit from it. In low light conditions your pupils may get as wide as 7mm but typcially will be closer to 4mm.

Using your scope at lower power settings in low light will help.

When you are at the ideal exit pupil diameter is when higher quality glass really plays a roll in showing a brighter clearer image.

drmajor · Nov 28, 2017

I have two scopes & I assume the glass is a large player..
1- Nikon Pro Staff 3-9x40
2- Leupold VX-2, 3-9x50.
There is a big difference in image in any light, but especially in low light.

Our club has a $100 fine for <6 points. That is very hard for my 68 yr old eyes to see at 100 yards at dusk.

Easier on the Leupold- glass being much better but seems teh 50mm helps also.

So in my attempt to see more, my logic says a 56mm w/ 30mm tube will gather more info.?.

RE: my eye are big-so maybe that will help?

Palmetto State has in store- Vortex Crossfire, Trijicon Accupoint, & Leica...all w/ 56mm objective. Love the Leica - SUPER clean but $1200 is too steep.

Like the idea of Tritium pin in Trijicon. Have one on my bow... Perfect. $850 It's fairly good, but not a Leica.

Vortex Crossfire is very popular due to price- $300. It is in similar clarity to the Nikon.

Hard to tell on light gathering in store.

I have Leupold VX-2 is on my 30-06. It is nice, but at dusk, I can see movement but not what it is..

SuperCreech · Dec 28, 2019

I have had a nightforce shv 5x20x56 illuminated moa , trijicon 5x20x50 Accupoint and a leupold vx5 HD 3x15x56 in the last two years and all three have great glass but in low light the vx 5 is unmatched with the fire dot reticle

Professor · Dec 28, 2019

Tangent Theta TT315P
3-15x57

Bubba_1122 · Dec 29, 2019

hooksnhorns said:
Meopta meostar. 3-12x56.

Have shared thoughts in other threads, but this is what I have (I’ve shot Leupold for many years).

The Meostar is a phenomenol scope. Not cheap (but half of the $2000 that you mentioned)

Clear. Crisp. Low light capabilities are amazing.

I putter around with sports photography some. Not unusual to spent 3-4 times (or more) on a camera lens than on the camera body. The glass in photography is that important. It dictates the quality of the picture.

The glass we put on these rifles is equally important (Or at least that was my rationalization for spending more than I ever have for a scope). It allows us to fully utilize all our daylight shooting time. Also allows a level of accuracy that we wouldn’t otherwise have.

For me I bought the Meostar and at 64 years old I expect to use that scope for the rest of my hunting days (and I hope and pray that’s a long time). Hope one of my grandsons gets it when I’m done.

Jim Boyd · Dec 29, 2019

I would comment on the reticle, also.

I am sure other manufacturers offer this too, but the Meostar can be purchased with the German #4 reticle in the second focal plane.

This reticle has been around a long time but it is reported to “train” your eye to the intended aim point.

It was definitely my favorite back when I hunted with a rifle.

bman940 · Dec 29, 2019

This year my hands on experience with low light scopes completely changed. Meopta's Optika6 line has amazing low light abilities. I took 2 nice bucks this year with my 3-18x50, one at 60 yards and one at 299 yards. I loaned another rifle topped with a 3-18x56 to a young man who took his first buck ever. He watched the buck in the woods for 25 min at 90 yards waiting for legal light. He dropped him in his tracks withthe .308 Win. He has since purchased a 3-18x50 scope and Optika binos. Awesome European glass and features hunters want for a fair price.

BriarPatch99 · Dec 29, 2019

Scopes do not "gather" light ..... scopes allow the available light to be passed through the scope with as little loss as possible....

If the light is not "there" then there is no way amplify it because normal scopes(that are available to the average hunter) have no way to amplify light....

It comes down to several things ....great glass ....great coatings and great design ....
Get all three of those into one scope and you will have a great scope ....that allows as much light as possible to reach the eye ....

Again scopes DO NOT gather light ....

chrislibby88 · Dec 29, 2019

M77 Ruger said:
Trijicon accupoint 2.5x10x56mm gathers light better then my other zeiss scopes. For low light I have haven’t seen much better

I run one of these too. It’s magnificent. You could shoot in the dark with a little moon light. The fiber optic/tritium illumination is very helpful, and no batteries!

I will say this to the OP though, objective lens size makes a difference when comparing two scopes of the same glass quality. I would take a 30-40mm objective lens scope with superior glass to any budget 56mm scope, so don’t get too hung up on bigger is better. Better glass is better, and that’s what costs money.

I’ve heard the Meopta R1 series has one of the best twilight transmission rates of any scope out now.
Steiner stuff has exceptional glass too.
We all know Swaro has good glass.
High end Leupold stuff is good, but the cheap stuff is cheap, same with Vortex, you really gotta drop $1000+ before you start getting into the quality glass (I’m sure some folks will argue their $200 leupold is the best thing ever, but go try some Gucci glass then report back)
To me, an illuminated reticle is the ticket in low light.

Also, when shopping look at the exit pupil size, this is the size of the focused beam of light leaving the eyepiece lens. If it is smaller than your actual pupil then you aren’t getting maximum light transmission. Also, the higher you zoom, the smaller the exit pupil. Lower magnification ranges offer the largest exit pupil and project the brightest image.

Low Light scope?

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Attachments

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Share this page