Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 low light test

December 9, 2014

Yesterday the Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 arrived. I didn�t get a chance to look at it so took it to work this morning. When it was barely light enough to see the distant hills I took it out the back of the shop. I looked beyond the freeway and found a tree several hundred yards away in a grassy area. I turned the magnification up till I could see the first branch and then back down and back up till I was convince it was on its lowest magnification setting for me to see the first branch. Then I did the same thing with the Bushnell 6500 4 �-30X50. Finally I looked at the setting on both. Leupold:5X Bushnell :6X.


When I arrived at home this evening I grabbed the scopes and a couple sand bags and headed to the porch. Darkness was quickly setting in. I dialed the scopes on the antlers 131 yards away. The Leupold needed 10X. Believe it or not the Bushnell required 24X! I hurried to get the Bushnell 4200 4-16X40. It normally matches the Swarovski z5 5-25X52 for resolving detail in bright or low light. I adjusted it for the antlers and had to turn it to 16X. By then the VX-6 needed 13X. This Leupold certainly appears to be better than my Swarovski z5 for low light. When the z5 gets back from customer service for a checkup, I don�t know if there is anything wrong with it, I will compare it with the VX-6.

Here is something about the 4200 and the z5 from May 12, 2014:

At this time I decided to get the Swarovski z5 5-25X52. By the time I got up stairs and back down stairs and laid out the .257SLR carrying the z5 and all dialed in the time was 8:30. By then it was dark enough in the woods I was limited to the first line of the �Can you read this?� chart . Once I could read it I switched to the Bushnell. I noticed it came to the magnification stop before I could read line #1. I checked the magnification settings on them. Both were on 16X. I am constantly delighted by the cost/performance value of the Bushnell 4200.

the 4200 is the same thing as the Elite? Do they still make it? I saw a 2.5-10x40 on overstock.com for $433. Your experience is that this type of Bushnell scope optically is as good as or better than your Z5?

jimmyp,


I think the 4200 and the Elite is the same thing. I had two of the 4200s and both were the same. Everytime I included it with the 6500 4 1/2-30X50 it, just like the z5, was not as good as the 6500 during good light and always better in low light. Everytime I did a comparison and included the Bushnell 4200 4-16X40 and the Swarovski z5 5-25X52 they matched each other. The reason I used the z5 was because it went to 25X and the 4200 only went to 16X.

Ringman, hard to decipher your opinion of the VX-6 from your post. Does it get two thumbs up, one, or the middle finger? I am looking seriously at this scope for a future project.

cotis,

Often I tell my wife my communication skills are lacking. I guess this is one more time.

At the present the Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 gets at least one thumb up because it is definitely better than the 4200; which always matched the Swarovski z5 (as much as folks here don't like it). If it was lighter it would get two thumbs up. And the thick crosshairs are so bold I thought they were FFP, but they're not. And the space between the thick and thin is very close so that in low light you don't even need the thin crosshair.

While comparing them they were not mounted, but were easy to get a sight picture.

So far at the range no scope of any brand has matched my 6500 for brightness or resolving small details; except one Leupold with the odd arc cut out of the bottom of the objecive bell. But then it was a 4 1/2-14X while the 6500 is a 4 1/2-30X. I can hardly wait for a sunny day to see how this VX-6 does. It doesn't make any difference, though, even a Walmart bubble wrap works durning bright day. This VX-6 kicked butt in low light!

Why are you still messing around with low magnification scopes?? Don't you know Leupold now makes a 7-42x56 VX-6?? Only like 26 ozs. I figured you'd be the first to have one or 6.

Color me........very disappointed in you.

It breaks my heart that I disappointed you. But it has two strikes against it and that is just too many. I can't handle anything that starts above 5X and I really had to push myself to purchase a scope weighing 23 ounces. Twenty-six ounces is just out of the question for a hunting glass to me.

Haha. I'm just yankin' your chain. I happened to be checking out Leupold's new wares this morning and thought of you when I saw that.

The only real differences between the 4200 and the new Elites, are the use of Argon gas instead of nitrogen, Rainguard HD (more durable than standard Rainguard) and they claim to have further increased their "brightness". I remember JB saying that he thought that the 4200's marked Bushnell were better optically than the ones marked Bausch & Lomb. If their is a downside to the Elites (4000, 4200, Elite) it would be that they would be better (for hard kickers) with a slight increase in ER. Throw in their durability and great tracking and you have one of the very best sub $500 scopes you can buy.

so far I am happy with my copy of 1 VX-6 1-6x24. The thicker totally black reticle covers about 1.25 inch by my eyeball estimate at 100 makes it about perfect for where I hunt. Of course I have only had it a month and not broken it just yet.