$3K+ optics in low light????

E

emerson

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
22   0   0
Location
Dawson Creek
For those who have the optics in hand; at say 5-6X, how much better are the expensive scopes in low light?
I've noticed a huge difference between $300 and $600. Where does the significant improvement in low light performance become negligible? Many suggest a thick reticle without illumination. I can often see an animal clearly, but not my aiming point, sometimes even during the day in thick brush or shadows. Surely someone with deep pockets has tested this.

Note: The "#4 German reticle only" crowd has a solution that works for them. Also the "don't shoot if it might get dark quick" folks have settled on something that works for them. Gaining several minutes in the morning would change things too. Please, people that have other experience post their findings. Thanks.
 
All my S&B on a full moon night are clear to see like on a cloudy day, they are expensive but so potent... JP.
 
My ultimate low-light scope is a Zeiss Victory with the tiny red dot in the centre of the plex reticle. It has great light-gathering glass and there's no mistake where the centre of the reticle is, whatever the lighting may be. S&B has one similar which is also excellent.

To answer the question, top-tier alpha glass is the ultimate for dimmer light conditions. Generally, it keeps getting better the more you spend up to the very top in $$$. Larger objective lenses help of course, too.
 
Last edited:
emerson said:
For those who have the optics in hand; at say 5-6X, how much better are the expensive scopes in low light?
I've noticed a huge difference between $300 and $600. Where does the significant improvement in low light performance become negligible? Many suggest a thick reticle without illumination. I can often see an animal clearly, but not my aiming point, sometimes even during the day in thick brush or shadows. Surely someone with deep pockets has tested this.

Note: The "#4 German reticle only" crowd has a solution that works for them. Also the "don't shoot if it might get dark quick" folks have settled on something that works for them. Gaining several minutes in the morning would change things too. Please, people that have other experience post their findings. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that tube diameter and objective lens diameter play a significant role as well. In my experience the gains at least in low light start to diminish after the $1500 mark, all other things being equal. Could be my eyes or the specific environmental conditions but I coudn't see much if any difference between the top end glass and high end glass.
 
Lens coatings and glass quality are the main difference when approaching the ever-unattainable 100% light transmission goal. I have two 40mm alpha-glass scopes that are both brighter and cleaner than a 50mm mid-tier scope. I spend a lot of time comparing glass in many different conditions in the quest for the ultimate scope and binos. The top stuff just makes me say "wow!" and I never tire of it.

I'd buy a 10 year-old used alpha-glass scope over a modern mid-tier scope for the same money every single time. And usually I'd pay a lot more. You can go with a smaller objective and still beat the pants off larger mid-tier stuff in every way. You'll also enjoy better controls and reliability on hard-recoiling rifles.
 
remyltr said:
my S&B 8x56 works extremely well in low light conditions.
its like someone switched a big light on
Click to expand...

Yes, alpha glass with the larger lenses are truly breathtaking. With a large exit pupil (lower magnification and large objective) they really, really shine.

In low light your eye's pupil enlarges. If the beam of light exiting the scope (exit pupil) is the same size, you are maximizing what your eye can take in. If the brightness and sharpness of that beam is enhanced by premium glass and coatings, it doesn't get any better.
 
I have an old zeiss diatal C 4x32 - it is my go to in low light. The glass is top tier, the coatings are ~30 years old, and the crosshairs are thick and black. Not all German #4 or duplex Reticles are the same.

A rule of thumb is; objective / magnification = exit pupil

32 / 4 = 8mm

While this is not strictly true for all scopes, it is a close approximation.

For low light a 5mm 'exit pupil' is the suggested minimum.

Fixed power scopes have fewer lenses, and all things being equal will provide more clarity and light transmission.

It's my belief that if I can't see a target in my Leupold vx3, I will not be able to see it through a zeiss or S&B. There are diminishing returns after ~$1000. usually it's not the ability to make out the target that causes problems, it's inability to see point of aim.

An illuminated aim point solves this, but so do fat crosshairs - just don't try to shoot 1/2moA groups with the latter.
 
propliner said:
My ultimate low-light scope is a Zeiss Victory with the tiny red dot in the centre of the plex reticle. It has great light-gathering glass and there's no mistake where the centre of the reticle is, whatever the lighting may be. S&B has one similar which is also excellent.

To answer the question, top-tier alpha glass is the ultimate for dimmer light conditions. Generally, it keeps getting better the more you spend up to the very top in $$$. Larger objective lenses help of course, too.
Click to expand...

Which Victory do you have? How does it compare to the TT525?
 
Kidd X said:
Keep in mind that tube diameter and objective lens diameter play a significant role as well. In my experience the gains at least in low light start to diminish after the $1500 mark, all other things being equal. Could be my eyes or the specific environmental conditions but I coudn't see much if any difference between the top end glass and high end glass.
Click to expand...

Tube diameter means ####. Objective diameter and power along with glass quality and coatings are what give you brightness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom