Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Do I have to compromise on a scope?

Notice that 8x56 gives you a 7mm exit pupil, which is about the most an eye will take in.

Same for 6x42. Or a 7x50 since I don't know of a 7x49.

Basically choose the magnification that will give you a 7mm exit pupil with the size/weight format you're willing to accept.

I've been a 6x42 fan for a good while now.

Clark, I could see the reticle but not the deer. It very well could be my eyes more than anything.

I researched a lot and bought the 6x42 for the 7mm exit pupil and the simplicity of it. I'm going to have the doc measure my pupil when its dilated to see where I stand there. Has anyone compared the 44mm z5 with a Summit in low light?

Sage advice here.

What your own eye will do definitely has an effect, so my post was in general terms.

If your eye won't go past 5mm then 8x on a 40mm scope will work that way.

While 7mm is the most that young eyes generally will take in on average, if you are not that young anymore and say your eye's pupil only dilates to 5mm, it is effectively stopping down the optic to 5. (didn't see your last post).

In that case turning up the power will improve low light performance. There is a difference betwixt low light performance and brightness as you can see by monkeying with the calculation link posted above.

I took the time to put the results for scopes and binos on hand with above online calculator on a spreadsheet. The outcome 30 minutes plus past sunset for actual comparisons of low light performance and brightness generally line up with the spreadsheet.

Sometimes the view can be brighter and yet not show you as much or potentially as much, as a higher powered optic. For example, when I had a 6x42 Swaro it was certainly brighter then a 50mm Swaro FFP set at 10x, but it did not show me as much as much detail at 200 yards.

A 10x50 binocular will show even more. YMMV

Just a warning about the Lasik surgery. I had it done 4 years ago. I love it and would do it again in a heartbeat, but one of the first things I noticed afterwards was my night and low-light vision was not as good as it was prior to the surgery. It wasn't a huge difference, but it was enough that I noticed it.

I don't know if this is common or not, but it was my experience.

I think what you need to be doing is finding out what percentage of light is getting transmitted through the scope. Most manufactures have it listed somewhere in the specs. This is usually a function of lens coatings. If your Leupold is an older model, It may only transmit 95% of the available light where as a brand new model may transmit 98-99%. I am only guessing at the transmission rate as it is not listed in the 2017 catalog. Leupold is listing 2 low light lens systems, Twilight Max and Extended Twilight lens in their catalog. They claim to transmit the desirable colors for late light shooting. One thing no one has mentioned is how are the lenses in your eyes. If you are developing cataracts, it would definitely make a difference in low light shooting.

Light test from Bushnell
http://www.bushnell.com/elitetest

A discussion from Optics Talk about light transmission rates (2004)
http://www.opticstalk.com/light-transmission-question_topic847.html

He does a 123 yard deer antler test that is as scientific as it gets.

I don't think the scope is an older model. I'll have to look at the serial number when I get home. The very first thing is going to get my eyes checked. I hope that having the surgery doesn't make my night vision worse. I'm 36 and have had contacts since 12. I don't think I am going to keep the scope anyway. I want to put a better quality more versatile scope on it.

Ive done the side by side tests with a vx2 and vx3 vs Z5, in low light the z5 is heads and shoulders better than the leupold.

Thank you WRO. I have been leaning toward the Z5. Did you have a reticle preference? I know I can send it in and have a 4 (not 4a) installed. I'm going to look at one this weekend with the plex. I'm not sure which others they have in stock. How do you think the Z5 would compare to the Summit or Z6?

Beware of skinny reticles in the Z5. Just ask Dirtfarmer who has much experience with them.

Illuminated reticles may be able to help you.

^^^^^^ this . I might add Thank God Alabama finally has fixed starting and ending shooting times. I was getting skeered in the dark all by my lonesome in the past.

I looked thru a Z5 3-18x44 , Leupold vx-6 2-12, Conquest HD 3-15x42 and a Swarovski Z3 4-12x50 and the Leupold Zeiss and Swaro Z3 were brighter IMHO

Don't thank goodness. I preferred the old way. Too bad idiots thought it meant they could hunt all night. The way it is now,some days it is dark at 30 minuets after and some days early in the season you could go 20 minuets longer by older standards.

It's not just a stand rifle. I'm putting in for an elk tag this year in Colorado. And it's also my my stalking / man drive rifle. It's my only hunting rifle now. I have given the others to my sons. Right now it is 5lbs 10oz with scope, mounts, and 4 in the magazine. So that puts me at a max of 17oz for a different scope to keep it under 6. I just want an Alpha scope that will do it all.

Here's you a good review of that Kahles I gave the link to.
http://opticsthoughts.com/?page_id=1415

I don't know on the Summit, the z5 I use has a 4w in it.

The z6 is a bit brighter and the illuminated reticle has a night setting,

Those are only going to be available on close out now, when SONA took over Kahles distribution in the us, all that will now be sold is the tactical models.