Low light scope that won't require a loan?

T

tipper

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
BC
Hi all, wondering if anyone has a suggestion on a decent scope for lower light conditions? I have a few diamondbacks but I'm really not a fan of them as far as eye relief and lower light conditions. I know you get what you pay for but I'm not a rich person lol
 
I've been really happy with my Leupold, however it is a bit of a pricier VX3, depending on your budget. They do have great eye relief. Though pretty much what I say means nothing. Listen to Jerry, he knows his stuff.
 
Leupold 3.5-10 x 50 VXL-3 with illuminated reticle, or the same thing in 56mm. They aren't exactly cheap; until you compare the price to those that are a bit better. Then they start looking like a bargain. Mount low too.
 
my zeiss conquest performs well in low light, the real issue with this forum is your 10 dollar cheap may be someone else's 100 dollar cheap so it's best to outline your budget with the original question.

also a few things you need to know about scopes, lower magnification scopes will appear brighter then high magnification scopes, larger tube diameters will also allow more light to enter the eye piece, in order for some high mag scopes to allow in the same amount of light they need a larger tube diameter, this is great until the mounting height required to mount the scope causes you to lose your cheek weld, and for this reason alone I have never understood the usefullness of a hunting scope with a bell larger then 44mm on the objective
 
Valid point except objective lens size has no bearing on what the actual bell diameter ends up being. Have a look at the listed measurement of the scope to see how varied this is. Depending on the bell, you can have the same diameter with varying lens size.

Also, we are only seeing 1/2 the diameter difference in how it affects a scope location... all being equal. So there is a whooping 6mm difference between a 56mm and 44mm bell... or under 1/4". Not a whole lot in the great scheme of things AND many hunters will actually see better with taller scopes... especially all those eye glass wearers.

Many modern stocks actually have a taller comb line which favor a taller mounted scope anyways so these larger bell scopes really aren't a neg.

BUT if you need to see in low light and a big bell scope is needed, a raised comb solves all ills.

Simple.

Jerry
 
Tenguns said:
I guess I'm the only one who noticed you weren't a rich person.
Click to expand...


All the more reason to get it right the first time. Poor people are their own worst enemy when it comes to optics, because they will tend to buy a total piece of crap first, then soon realize that its not good enough and get something a bit better that will satisfy them until they find out what good is. With a bit of luck, by the third one they will get what they should have bought in the first place, but will have cumulatively spent enough to buy the great stuff they will never have.

It sort of like a tragic comedy.
 
I have a Meopta Artemis 2000, and it seems to do really good in low light conditions for a mid-range $ scope.
 
Meopta 3-12x56. Illuminated reticle is about $1100 and non-illuminated is under $900. I'd go for the non-illuminated. In BC we are permitted to shoot 1 hour before sunrise to 1 hour after sunset. Let me tell you, first few and last few minutes are DARK. I shot a nice buck this year that I would not have been able to shoot without excellent optics. The rifle I normally use is a Leupold VX6 2-12x42 with B&C reticle. I would not have been able to shoot the deer with that scope. The one I used wears a Victory HT 2.5-10x50 w/o illumination but with heavy crosshairs. It is an expensive scope. The Meopta received excellent reviews in a test performed in Finland wherein it beat out numerous scopes and was right up there with the big $ scopes. Results:
A test board with E letters in different sizes on separate levels(the same as used for the driving tests) where placed 110 yards away. The test results show how many rows could be seen through the scope at different times during the evening. If a minus (-) sign is placed after the row number, it means that it could not be determined where the E pointed (up, down, left or right). The test results are in Finnish, but here is a translation table:

- riv = row
- ei n�y = could not be seen

The test where done during winter time conditions.



Zeiss 3-12x56 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 2 riv.-
Zeiss 2,5-10x50 17.00: 2 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 2 riv.-
Swarovski 2,5-10x56 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 2 riv.-
Schmidt&Bender 2,5-10x56 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 2 riv.-
Meopta 3-12x56 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv.- 20.00: 2 riv.-
Swarovsik 2,5-10x42 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 1 riv.
Kahles 2,5-10x50 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 1 riv.
Kahles 3-12x56 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 1 riv.
Docter 3-12x56 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv. 20.00: 1 riv.
Docter 2,5-10x48 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv.- 20.00: 1 riv.
Schmidt&Bender 1,5-6x42 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 1 riv. 20.00: 1 riv.-
Meopta 3-12x50 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv.- 20.00: 1 riv.-
Karl Kaps 2,5-10x56 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 1 riv. 20.00: 1 riv.-
Bushnell 3-9x50 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 2 riv.- 20.00: ei n�y
Bushnell 2,5-10x50 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 1 riv.- 20.00: ei n�y
Burris 2,5-10x44 17.00: 3 riv. 17.30: 1 riv.- 20.00: ei n�y
Leupold 4,5-14x50 17.00: 3 riv.- 17.30: ei n�y 20.00: ei n�y
Shirstone 4-12x56 17.00: 2 riv.- 17.30: ei n�y 20.00: ei n�y
Click to expand...

and a second test:
Ok, the test was conducted in the following conditions. 19 scopes with 56mm objective and illuminated rectile or red dot were chosen. A silhuette of a deer was placed out on a field abt 20 feet away from the testers. Then they waited for the sun to set. They looked through the scopes and when it was not possible to see the deer anymore, they put the scopes away.

Scopes tested were the following:
Barska Euro Pro 3-12x56IR
Docter Classic 3-12x56R
Docter Unipoint 3-12x56R
JahtiJakt 4-16x56
Kahles CBX 3-12x56L
Leupold VX-L 4,5-14x56
Luger PRO-NA 3-12x56
Meopta Meostar R1 3-12x56RD
Micro Dot 2,5-10x56
Night Force 3,5-15x56NF
Nikon Monarch E 2,5-10x56 SF M IL
Schmidt & Bender Zenith 2,5-10x56 FD LM
Swarovski 2,5-10x56 L LD
Vixen VF 2,5-10x56
Weaver Classic Extreme 2,5-10x56 SF
Zeiss Classic Diavari 3-12x56 T*
Zeiss Victory Diavari M 3-12x56 T*
Zeiss Victory Varipoint 3-12x56 T*
Zeiss Victory Diarange M 3-12x56 T*

At 4pm the deer was difficult to see the deer without a scope. Also at 4pm the first scope was put to the side. This was Barsk. The next seven in the order of how difficult to see were Luger, Vixwn JahtiJakt, Weaver, Leupold, Micro Dot and Nikon. All within 40minutes (4pm - 4:40pm).

With the rest of the scopes it was still possible to see the deer picture to be able to make a shot at it. The moon started to give some light, so the deer picutre was moved to a darker place. After that the scopes were put in an order by which it was hardest to see the picture and so on. The two scopes that fell out first were Meopta and Schmidt&Bender. The next two scopes were Kahles and Docter Classic It was still somewhat possible to see the outlines of the deer with Docter. The next two were Docter Unipoint and Zeiss Diarange. Zeiss Victory Varipoint was a bit better than the last two. Swarovski PVI-2 and Zeiss Classic Diavari were on the same level, a little better than the varipoint. The last scope on the table was the Zeiss Victory Diavari.

The test also included other parameters which I will not mention, simply because the test was 6 A4 pages and I am only interested in the low light performance. They also measured light transmission, which gave totally other results. But what counts in the end is what you see through the scope and not the measured numbers.

Please note that this is my translation of a test that was conducted in a Finnish hunting magazine last month. I do not take any responisbility of the outcome of the test itself.

To MrGman, the scopes that I would recommend is Meopta Meostar and Docter Classic. They are good low scopes for low light hunting at a reasonable price. The best you can get, if you are prepared to pay, is of course Zeiss Diavari, both victory series with loctec coating and the classic series. For daylight hunting only I would for sure chose another scope.

From: LowLightHunter Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:59 am
Sorry It should be 55 yards! They put the deer picture 55 yards out in the field. 55-110 yards is quite a normal distance for low light hunting on deer or wild boar.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom