Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Best low light deer hunting scope.

Has anybody compared the Leopold vx3i to a zeiss conquest in low light?
Also would consider Minox or Vortex.

Going to go with either 3-9x40 or 3-9x50.


What is your favorite low light scope for deer hunting?


Regards,
Dan

Leupold 6x42 with a Post and Duplex or Heavy Duplex reticle are good in low light.

I hear Schmidt and Beneer is pretty good too, I've never looked through one.

I have a VX6 1-6, and it is very impressive at dawn.

My favorite is a Kahles CL 3-10X50. It's better than a Conquest 3X9 and better than the new Conquest HD5 2-10X42

It's all moot though since I could shoot during legal light even with my oldest 2-7X33 Leupold Vari X.


Unless you are bumping up to the high end Vortex Razor, I would pick the Leupold. I just have more confidence in it as an all around good scope with a balance of features.

"Best" is an ambiguous word. The Schmidt & Bender 3-12x42 Klassic is about as good as it gets in low light. Yes I own one. powdr

Powdr speaks truth. "Best" in this instance gets into scopes costing far more than either that the OP mentioned.

All I can say is that the VX3 from 4-5 years ago was spanked pretty good by the same-era Conquests, to my eye. It was a color balance thing as much as anything; the Leup coatings went a bit yellow in really low light and the Conquest was more blue-white. Made a very noticeable difference for me, at the bitter end of low light, in the western Oregon jungle.

A LOT has changed since then, optically, and almost all for the better.

Ok let's say in the under $700 range....

For under 700 it will be hard to be the conquest.

For my short range rigs I also run Kahles Helia C but 3-12x56.. They can get you in trouble

Anything with a good German #4 reticle!

AMEN TO THAT! :>)

Trijicon 2.5-10x56 Amber dot.

David

The Trijicon would be tough to beat if low light was your normal hunting condition, heavy cover cloudy days. Objective diameter makes a difference my 3-9x50 beats my 3-9x40 Conquest any time for low light and the HD 5 3-15x50 beats them both. If you found a 30mm tube and 56mm objective in your price range it might not be light or sleek but would.be bright in low light.

Leupold, Zeiss, Nikon, take you pick

I'm a Leupold guy but my Zeiss 3x9x40 Conquest is definitely brighter at first light!

I hunt low light and in thick woods quite often.

This year for deer I be rockin' 2 Leupolds. Both are 2-7x33. One with #4 firedot, and one with heavy duplex. I like both of these reticles for low light hunting and have taken may deer using HDs and #4s. The Trijicon with amber or green triangle is also very good.

Even though I am a Leupold slut, I feel what reticle you use will make more difference than what brand, given similar priced models.....

X2
Too many folks focus on the brand scope and completely forget about the reticle. It doesn't matter if you can see the deer if you can't see the reticle. A more practical approach to scope decisions would be to pick your brand based on the reticle.

Amen. Any $400 scope nowadays will get you past legal shooting light, easily. I've owned several Euro scopes that had, IMO, inferior reticles (too thin) and were virtually worthless to me. The S&B Summit is one that comes to mind.

Hate to disagree with my old pal JG; but Ive aimed at 100's of deer past shooting light with my Summits, and have never lost a reticle on an animal yet.

Until it was night time of course.

If I were REALLY worried about it I wouldn't use it.

Since I haven't seen a Vortex I would buy I will mention some I have purchased. If you get a good Swarovski z5 5-25X52 it is excellent in low light. I had four and two were terrible in low light. I have two Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50's. One is better than anything I have compared it to in any light. The other is like the two Swarovskis....terrible in low light. I bought three Bushnell 4200 4-16X40. They didn't seem as bright, but were better than the two bad z5's and the one 6500 scopes in low light. Better than all except the one 6500 was the Leupold VX-6 4-24X52. It was so close to the good 6500 that had to go back and forth between the two before deciding the 6500 was better. My son-in-law took about one second to tell me the 6500 was better. I asked him to check again. He said, "Yep. It's clearer and brighter."

With all that said, the Leupold has the boldest reticle.

Is it possible that eye sight may have something to do with it?