My main hunting rifle, Winchester EW .300 WSM, wears a Leupold VX-3 3.5-10x40 CDS. Last year during deer season in Alabama, I had several bucks come into a field at not quite last light but at a time when the field was dark because the sun was behind the treeline, which put more shadow on the field.

I got to thinking I needed a better low light scope and started researching and everything points to high end German 56mm objective scopes as the best in low light. Now it is not worth that much to me for the extra minutes of low light capability.

But my question would be has anyone noticed if a more reasonably priced scope for example a VX-2 with a 50mm objective would be better than the VX-3 with a 40mm objective in low light? Or do the better coatings in a higher tier scope, of any brand really I just happen to like Leupold, trump the objective size?

I'm asking because I saw a Weaver K 8x56 for sale and with a reasonable price was wondering if a scope in that class and price range would do better with the larger objective than a VX-3 or Zeiss Conquest type scope with the 40mm objective in low light situations.

Bob.

Heres the crash course: there is no such thing as "light gathering", there is only light transmission.
Divide objective size in mm by power=exit pupil...basically the amount of light that is transmitted.

Your pupil, if you are over 40 yrs. old can only dilate to 5mm....an exit pupil considered optimum for you would be 7mm as it allows for some wiggle room and margin of error. A 40mm obj. scope on 6 power will give you an exit pupil of just under 7mm Great!

Quick thinking shows you at 4X you will have an exit pupil of 10mm...more than you can actually use.


Power is then a determining factor in light transmission....those little straight tube 20mm dangerous game scopes at 4x transmit a 5mm exit pupil...all you can physically use.

If you need more power, you need a bigger objective...

Marketing hints: 50mm objectives on one inch tubes are pretty much a marketing gimmick, they work better on 30mm tubes....56mm obj beg for a 30mm tube, and usually have it.


Im sure others will be along shortly to poo poo what I've said, after all, this is the optics forum!

What's your basis for this?

I've come to the conclusion that if a VX-3 or Conquest level scope with a 40mm front end and 6x magnification doesn't handle it, it's too dark and/or too far away for my taste.

Sometimes a good light is what is really needed!

But my conscience just won't let me.

I have shot deer at last light with that VX-3 and scopes of lesser quality. Just wondering if I'm leaving anything on the table in low light dept is all.

Bob.

My S&B 3-12X42 Klassic is one of the best at dark but it still has some flare after about 7 1/2 power because my eyes can't handle the extra x's. Even though it is the best in my opinion, there is no use in getting a 50mm scope if it's not coupled w/excellent glass...just throwing money away. powdr

This is the optics forum. You can say anything you want, with minimum actual knowledge, and zero actual usage.


But basically I based it on who I saw buying them, and what they were buying.....3x9s predominantly...cranked up to 9x it gave you a whole 4mm exit pupil, really 'gathering' light there! Same thing your old 3x9x40 would give them at 8X.
But John Q. Public lined up to buy them, and the craze eventually died down....

However there is no place better to sell the " Bigger is Better" concept than in America!

As for the 30mm tubes,looking at exit pupils on them it was easily apparent they transmitted more light, though I never bought or used one personally. ( Since the garden variety 3x9x40 will allow you to shoot anything during legal hours...)

Now, Im gonna go ice down some bourbon, and attempt to wash my sins away!

If you saw any additional brightness from a 30mm tube scope over a 1" one, given the same magnification and objective (40,50, or 56) it's almost a certainty it wasn't from the 30mm tube per se.

Nope, it was at the higher magnifications. As I said, old eyes can only dilate to 5mm, so on the lower powers if it is transmitting a 15mm exit pupil or a 7mm exit pupil, in practical use, it will make no difference whatsoever, you are only using 5mm of it. You can see it at arms length, but you don't mount your scope at arms length.

Wait a minute...I don't think I worded that right to give you a proper answer...given the question...


Im off my game!

I have been down this path.

1. in the dark a day scope without NV capability can see nothing, why I carry a pistol with a laser on it when walking out of the stand.
2. 50 mm objective with a poor coatings will not match 24 mm objective and excellent glass and coatings when the light is waning....so the VX6 24 will see as good as the VX2 50 (probably)
3. a Thick reticle is best for lower light shooting, some IR are OK as well depending on how much you want to spend.
5. a red dot sight in low light is a trick, to keep the thing turned down as the light fades.
6. Shooting pigs at night with a good green or red light, it don't matter what scope you use as long as you have a good light and shoot reasonable distances.

Exactly. Tube size is irrelevant. Me, I'll take a scope with a 40-42mm objective lens and high quality coatings over some Walmart special sporting a 50+ mm scope anyday of the week.

fishybobtrout,

I didn't read through this thread so it may have already been stated. I have a few scopes. I have purchased four Swarovski z5 5-25X52 and a couple Bushnell 4200 4-16X40 and others. None of the others will stay with these two for low light. I have not been able to see the z5 as any better than the 4200 in low light until I turn the magnification ring above 16X in the z5.

I have compared lots of scopes side by side on my deer antlers 131 yards away in the woods. The idea of exit pupil is a good internet conversation topic, but in the real world it does not pan out.

If you can afford a Nightforce, there is no comparison between them and everything else I have looked through in a side by side comparison. That goes for low light or good day light. But I have never looked through a S&B; except a 1-6X at the range. For me it was next to useless. I like a scope to be a 4-16X at least.

Lense quality is far more important than objective size. Some better high end scopes transmit 95%+ of the light that comes through to the eye. Most decent mid-level scopes are in the 90-95% range. I'd say most Leupolds are in the mid-level. Some budget scopes are in the mid 80's.

The size of the objective, along with the magnification determine the diameter of the beam of light that comes through, not the brightness. Assuming equal quality glass a 50mm objective set on 10X, a 40mm objective set on 8X and a 20mm objective set on 4X all let exactly the same diameter beam of light through. Which is brighter will be determined by the lense quality

Long story short, if comparing equal quality scopes in 40 vs 50mm you'll never notice any difference below about 7X or above 9X. The 50mm lense offers a slight advantage only at around 8X or 9X. If you need a scope with more than 10X magnification then bigger objectives start making sense.

I will amend my earlier posts by saying I simply can't be objective about objectives....

A full moon is the best thing for shooting at last legal light!

Not necessarily. In your example, the "brighter" scope will be the one that has the higher magnification setting with the given (static) exit pupil diameter. Also, even though you might have equal exit pupil sizes and one scope achieves this using say 4x with a 28mm objective lense and another scope has say 8x with a 56mm obj lense the 56mm will be brighter even with all else equal because the 56mm has ALOT more light energy falling on it's obj lense to transmit. Only pointing this out because the old standards such as twilight factor and relative brightness don't take into account other factors besides magnification and objective lense size. I do completely agree with you with regards to lense and coating qualities.

just performed a sivetky goulet sliding boxcar analysis of your post and find it to be factoidal and relevance to the 9th power.

All this talk about "bright" riflescopes, exit pupil, glass and coatings and no one has even mentioned " the world's brightest rifle "( ) . Well according to Bushnell, these are "the world's brightest riflescopes " and I own a few of these too Rich. I own the traditional (BG) hunting sizes such as the 2.5-10 x 40 along with this new 3-9 x 40 Firefly as opposed to the varmint hunting sizes you speak of that top out at 25-30X.

Yup !

In a test of "tactical scopes", in Sweden. They had a good array of scopes, 4-16x50 Hensholdt, 5-25x56 S&B, 6-24x72 Hensholdt and a few others.

The 6-24x72 could keep on shooting at targets hundred of yards away, after the light was gone, and long after the others could not see a thing. I belive they stopped after 45 min, just becuase it was getting to cold for the other shooters to just lay there.

Objectice size matters.. it pulls in more light

post a link that seems to be an interesting factoid.

Higher magnification is what matters in poor light...some say resolving power? You just need a large objective to make use of it. Take a VX3, Conquest, etc, set it on 10x (assuming 40mm objective, and then set any high quality 80mm spotter next to it and set it on 20x and tell me which one you can see more detail through.

Ingwe is correct. The human eye only opens to 7mm exit pupil if your a youngster. As one gets older 5 mm is more realistic.

Ones eyes are part of the optics that are being used and if you don't believe me then close them while looking through a scope and tell me how well you see.

A leupold 6X42 offers as good of light transmission as the human eyeball is capable of.

42÷6= 7 mm exit pupil






Shod

Shodd,



Do yourself a favor. Lay out your 6X42 and any good variable with 10X or more on the top end. Put them on sand bags. Aim them at some visible deer antlers in some bushes or trees about 100 yards away as the sun sets. Mark the time when you can not longer discern the points with the 6X and then look thought the other with it set on 10X or more. You will make the same discovery everyone who has tried this made.

My 6500 4 1/2-30 has a 50mm objective. My Minox 13X56 has TWO 56mm objectives and yet it looses out two minutes before the 6500 when it is set on 13X. Switch to the 4200 4-16X40 and put it on 13X and gain an additional couple minutes over the Minox 13X56. Magnification of good enough glass trumps exit pupil EVERY time.

Yep and that is a polite way of saying it is past legal\ethical deer hunting time. How many times do you see guys sight in their rifle at max power and a week later march off into the woods that way? There is a learning curve. A straight 6 power scope eliminates that curve. Newer, brighter, variables are even brighter than the 6x of just a few years ago but may require an experience or two before using them correctly.

Some of the heineholdt scopes are $11,000. It's what I need for a 24 yard deer in Georgia! Has the added benefit of weighting 3/4 of a metric ton.

Kenjs1,
I hunted with a guy who has eyes like an eagle and owl. I on the other hand suffer from night blindness. I have proven to myself and others who have a similar problem higher magnification works.

I get what you are saying. I just think inexperience causes people to blame perfectly good scopes. I can't help but feel for the vast majority of deer hunters if 6 or 7 x is not sufficient because the light is too low I probably don't want them taking the shot. If higher magnification is needed I would hope they are experienced - in which case they would likely know how to use the scope in the first place and not have trouble at 100 yds.

Off hand, my best guess would be that under classic low light conditions, a good, or even the highest quality, 8X56 rifle scopes won't do anything for you that a good 40mm variable won't do. That's because at worst, you are dealing with a situation that can handled by a good scope with a 5mm exit pupil. In fact, I've seen lots of "low light" and "last of the legal shooting time" conditions where a 40mm scope set at 10X will work. If that's the case, you'll be able to see further than an 8X56 scope can. On the other hand, a decent 8X56 scope can see quite well under true night time conditions where a 7mm exti pupil is required.
Low light conditions mean different things to different people. That's because some of us have lost some of our night vision. While the usual rule is a 5mm exit pupil, some can't even use that. When it gets dark enough, nothing works for such people. Only people with eyes still able to use a scope with a 7mm exit pupil can use such scopes, or scopes set to produce such exit pupils.
I might add that I've used binoculars and rifles scopes under unusually bright night time conditions where they worked with as little as a 4mm exit pupil.
I'm not of the opinion that scopes with 50-56mm objectives are useful to me. But I have no doubt that they can useful to some who hunt in bad light. Besides being useful in full darkness, they allow one to use more magnification and still have enough exit pupil to be useful. Such scopes will allow one to see further because they use more magnification.
Then we also have the type of reticle used under low light conditions. I've found that one really doesn't need to see the target all that well under many low light conditions. But, unless the target is pretty close to the shooter, say 50 yds. or less, one must be able to see the reticle. Especially if the target is on the order of 150-300 yds. out. E

Oheremicus,

I read enough of your post to believe you can see about as well as my eagle eyed friend. That puts you at one end of the ability spectrum and me, and guys like me, at the other end.

Here's an off topic question for you. My friend was Mr. Oregon three times. Were you Mr. Whatever State you live in?

Gosh, I've learned a bunch about optics in the last few minutes of reading this thread!

Theres lots to be learnt on this hole site!!!!

LOL!!!!

Thanks for the replies,

I suppose I'll just keep my 40mm scopes as I like the way they look on a rifle better and when it's too dark for me to see deer I'll just have to call it quits for the day.

Thanks.

Bob.

Well from a fellow alabamaian who has OLD EYES and night blindness
to boot that has hunted our states nocturnal deer for over 40 years
and not much luck to show for it!
What has helped me recently is a
LEUPOLD FX-3 6x42 with a HEAVY DUPLEX Reticle! at least for
my poor eyesight!
2nd a couple of used Trijicon Accupoint 3-9x40 scopes with
Green Dot Reticles I bought here used that really help with my Night Blindness !
Just a take from a OLD REDNECK from the Hollow.

How much one can see at "last legal" light depends on a lot of things. I have been at places where I was well ready to pack up before the clock said I had to and places where I could have hunted half the night away. The amount of illumination, tree cover, animal color (those dam black bears seem to just suck in light) background cover all matter as does the viewers eyes.

Can a scope help.. sure one only needs to have used one that was a hindrance to know there are better or worse choices. Whether the cost for best low light performance is worth it depends on the user. When I say costs, its not all just dollars, your likely pay in terms of scope price, size and weight as well.

To the OP who was wondering how the weaver 8x56 would work as compared to other scopes in the same price range. I would see if I could buy one from a place with good return policy and run some evening tests, next to your current rig. No need to mount it, and if its no improvement, back it goes with out a mark on it.

noKnees,

Very good post.

All things being equal (quality of glass and coatings) a 10X50 binocular will show you more detail in low light than an 8X40 binocular even though they both have a 5mm exit pupil of light for your eyes to use. You need more magnification and a larger objective to make resolution gains in low light.

The 10x50 has a higher twilight factor than the 8X40.

Wow--most people don't really understand how the eye perceives light! Nor how optics transmit light.

Tape an empty toilet paper tube to the ocular end of your scope to eliminate all stray light coming in from the sides, and most people could see to shoot until after dark with a current Wally World Tasco.

Just use the pythagurous theoretical, Naught plus Naught equals Naught, carry your Naught and you have Naught.

I like Ingwe's example the best, just like flowing water a 30mm tube lets in more light than a 25 mm tube. Then based on the widely referenced and annotated Swedish study of looking a partially clad women in the total darkness I find I need a 72 mm objective with a 34 mm tube which lets many out of the running.

In some parts (not here in Cajun Louisiana), how well you see game at night depends more on how much candle power you're burning than objective size...

Size does matter...

DF

as does making sure the window is down before pulling the trigger.

Also you have to make sure to tell the guy there is a radio antenna to watch out for.

also to the OP, this will work...

http://www.eurooptic.com/meopta-meopro-4-12x50-4-riflescope.aspx

or this

http://www.eurooptic.com/meopro-45-14x44-zplex-598380.aspx

and hold his beer...but that's a given.

The number of lens surfaces the light has to pass through should also have an effect, I would think. If a lens passes a certain percentage of the light, more lenses should reduce the total light that actually reaches your eye. A simple fixed power, using fewer elements, would be seem to be the best choice for shots at either edge of darkness. In practice, "normal" scopes seem to work fine for shooting during legal hours in most cases.

As a practical matter, I tend to hunt the early and mid parts of the day, as tracking, field dressing, and dragging deer in the dark ain't no fun for an old fat man.

For your purposes, I'd try and find a Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10x50 with a #4 reticle. This model will even suffice for hog hunting when there is decent moonlight and won't break the bank, either. But they are not being made anymore, and Zeiss doesn't even offer the #4 as an option for some odd reason -- not even on a custom basis.

The two keys for a scope like this -- aside from the obvious of good glass and coatings -- are magnification and the ability to resolve detail under poor lighting conditions. This will take you where you need to go as far as deer are concerned.

It's another ballgame entirely for hunting by moonlight, though. You can have a "bright" 50mm Tasco, but I can assure you that under minimal moonlight, you are not going to be able to differentiate between head or tail of a dark-colored hog at 150 yards.

And while it may be no "brighter" than that Tasco, a Zeiss Diavari Victory 2.5-10x50/#4 will allow you to make that same shot with relative ease. Up until recently, I had two of those (one is finding a new home with a 24HR member in Louisiana!). They are the best I have ever tried, and while I certainly have not tried all of the high-dollar offerings, I know that this model works as intended and under the worst of lighting conditions.

Coming close to that performance is a Swarovski PV 2.5-10x56L/#4. The Z3s and Z5s (same glass, different internals) work OK for good moonlight but not when the conditions are tough.

For strong moonlight, a Zeiss Conquest, Swaro AV & Z3/Z5, Nikon Monarch, B&L 3000/Bushnell 3200 (and 4000/4200), Burris Signature & Euro and newer Leupolds from the VX2 on up along with others (given proper reticle) in that same class will do fine -- and 40mm works OK as long as the range is reasonable. But a larger objective will allow a higher power setting, which in turn allows you to see more detail for those longer shots.

But when the lighting is compromised by cloud cover or other factors, a MeoStar 4-12x40, MeoStar 3-10x50, MeoPro 4-12x50, Kahles Helia CL 3-10x50, the Diavari Victory and Swarovski PV 2.5-10x56 -- all with their respective #4s (4-a in Kahles) -- are what have worked for me. The MeoPro 4-12x50 makes the cut but doesn't quite resolve the detail as well as the others. But it WILL allow you to make shots where lesser scopes will fail you.

Two last things: One...the FFP of the Zeiss and Swaro mentioned above are definite bonuses in these conditions. And lastly: if you don't focus the reticle to your eyes, you will "lose" it in poor light as it will seem to fade away much moreso than a sharply-focused reticle.

That's the best post on this thread by far.

I see you edited out the funnel part.

Ingwe never actually said funnel, but his comment about 50mm lenses begging for 30mm tubes had me thinking about what he was thinking funnel wise.

Yeah, I noticed somebody else mentioned the "funnel effect."

The myth about 30mm tubes allowing scopes to be brighter, by comparing them to a larger funnel allowing more water to pass through, was invented by an American advertising agency used by a European scope maker in the early 1990's. But the tube isn't what controls the amount of light that makes it through a scope. Instead it's the lens system. If the tube diameter actually made a difference, the exit pupil would be larger than predicted by the formula of dividing the objective lens diameter by magnification. And it isn't.

Salesmen had a bad habicht, um, uh, I mean habit of repeating the myth.

That myth has sure sold a lot of scopes for the euro boys

Hey, if it works...

Like Hollywood, when myth veers from fact, print the myth...!

DF

Facts and actual experience can ruin a perfectly good Fire thread...

DF

I agree fully about the Meopta scopes for the worst conditions. I have a 4-12x40 MeoStar with a #4 on my 240Wby. It would be my absolute first choice out of my safe as a nighttime coyote rifle. Very bright and the reticle is impossible to miss under any light conditions. Friend of mine has the 4-12x50 MeoPro with the same reticle and I've looked across his hayfields several hours after dark. I could easily shoot anything out to at least 2-300yds.

This is really excellent information; well written,instructional, and obvious Bobby has a lot of experience with these low light scopes.

Even I understood it.

Thanks for a great post on the subject. Makes me wish I had not passed on that 50mm Zeiss.

Actually, sorta glad you did...

And, +1 for Bobby's post.

DF

OK...since I have been corrected, ridiculed and educated ( none of which I expected on the optics forum...) I have a serious question.....


Since the 30mm tubes aren't what they are made out to be, do any makers put out a 50mm objective along with a 30mm tube that is actually a good match, and make everything work as it should?


I ask because I have a friend very much enamored by these "Hubble" scopes and I can't see where its gaining him any advantage.....

Leica just came out with an American assembled line with a 5X zoom ratio that have 30mm tubes. Take a look at the 2-10 x 50. There are still a few Diavari's floating around in 2.5-10 x 50 as well. One in the classified's right now with a #4 reticle. Has the Lotutec coatings as well.

its good to have such eloquence, I am astounded it still exists on this forum. In the meantime the OP could look at the Europtic links and buy him a meopta. I also think Meopta made the Conquest at one time and their Z plex is similar if not the same as the very dark Z plex in the conquest.

30 mm tubes on the Victory HT's are not bad with a 50mm objective, at least the one I tried was not bad... However as I hunt GA I opted for a 1.5-6 x 40ish and found that was all I wanted. One of these a year is about all I can tolerate...

The thing with the 50 for me is that the Emericus "eyebox" seems bigger to me. So even a 50 on a 25 mm tube seems to be easier to catch a glimpse thru, but perhaps I am wrong as I usually am. My next scope might be the unholy Meopro 25 mm tube with 50 mm objective and the Z plex.

jimmyp,

30mm tubes are passe. My new Leupold VX-6 4-24X came with a 34mm tube and a 52mm objective. And even it is falling behind the pack. I saw one the other day with a 40mm objective lense. Talk about a Hubble....

Tom,

The only two real advantages of 30mm scope tubes is they're somewhat stronger than 1" tubes, everything else being equal, and allow for more adjustment range, which became important when turret-twisting became important.

There is even an exception to that, however. For many years Swarovski insisted on putting bigger lenses inside their 30mm scopes, resulting in no more adjustment range than comparable 1" scopes. The bigger lenses do have relatively minor optical advantages, but still don't increase exit pupil diameter because (again) that's determined by objective lens diameter and magnification.

DF I shoulda made myself clear...I know where there's ANOTHER one....but I did not say that.

Thanks as always JB, you can always cut thru the chaff to the wheat succinctly. It makes perfect sense...

I was thinking maybe I had snatched this one from under your nose, caught you napping...

But, doing something like that just wouldn't be right...

DF

Just get a Zeiss Victory HT in the power range you want and nothing will make you happier as far as resolution, contrast and brightness. As far as cost, cry once, but enjoy the finest optics for every hunting season to come that will put a big smile on your face every time you look through it.

Does anyone know how the Zeiss Victory stacks up against
other Alpha Euros, like the Z6, etc.?

DF

From what I understand, when you take the optics of the Z6, Diavari, Victory HT, S&B, Meopta R2.......the only noticeable difference is the brand stamped on the tube.

Fosteology is pretty well versed on this super high end scope thing.....

I still like my VX-6 2-12x40. The duplex is about perfect. Glass may be a click behind the $2-3K Alpha Euros, but close enough for me.

If I was hunting at night, I'd get a dedicated night scope or burn some serious candle power.

DF

DF I have owned a few of these...at the top they vary in minor ways but most all those have what I call the POP! factor.Most of the variation seems to be in color differences.Swaro glass seems very bright and contrasts well, to my eyes.

My pal has Z6; I presently have S&B. Both have lots of POP! Ditto for Kahles and the 1" 50mm Kahles is one of the nicest 1" scopes I have peeped through. All have very sharp resolution.Z3 is a notch down.

I have never owned Meopta unless owning a Zeiss Conquest counts for that.

This thread may make me buy that Zeiss 50mm like yours since I do more stand hunting than I used to and all there is to do in stands is wait,and fiddle and peep through optics, discerning tiny (but sometimes real) differences and bitching about optics until something to shoot shows up.

I am glad I didn't have to hunt that way my whole life because I'd have gone nuts and given up hunting.

I'm with you DF. The VX6 is waaaay good enough, and can hang with anything I've seen. More to a great scope than pure optics anyway, IMO. I've never seen an easier to use scope.

Yep, sounds familiar.

I do a lot of that kinda hunting myself...

DF

I have both, the Victory with a German 4 and the Z with their standard plex (which is a bit thin for my taste) and save for the 4 reticle, there is really no difference. The Z is also a little lighter, then again it has a smaller Objective.

Absolutely!

3-12x56 Kahles or S&B

I have a million candle power spotlight that says different!!!

I have the 3-12x42 Schmidt&Bender Klassic. It's to me the best all round scope a guy could own. I've had the 50mm's but w/having to mount them high and the quality of glass not being what the S&B is I will just stick w/the 42mm. I have said earlier that my scope at dark, meaning no light, I can see images up to 100yds but only up to about 7 power. Any power more than that and I get flare...I don't know why. I can kill a deer as late as I want as long as there is a scintilla of light left. powdr

Having read through the whole eight pages of this, and understand the principals of light transmission.

Practical experience, my main pursuit is coyotes and I have no restrictions as to legal hunting times. If there is enough light to see the coyote coming into the call with my eyes I can kill him with my scoped rifle. It makes little difference if it is a 1-4x20, 1.5-6x40 or 2,5-10x40, having a reticle that doesn't get lost in the background is the biggest factor for me. A dim red dot, Heavy duplex or German #4 work best for me in the low light for me.

I would likely lose/miss more called coyotes with a 6x42 or 8x56 due to lack of FOV than from lack of transmitted light in my scopes of choice..

Anybody read the article on 24 hour campfire home page? All about scopes, and even I acould understand it.

I'll keep it simple guys, resolution is 1, most all coatings are good these days so don't get lost in the this coating that coating. More glass means better resolution most of the time, ex a 6X24 will usually resolve Brett than a 3x12 at the same magnification. On the flip side more lenses also means less light transmission but it's moot. Larger objectives lets you use power, a 56 will allow a much greater mag range and offer better resolution, usually than a 50mm and so on. Here's the biggie, the big advantage of most euro scopes have been their large angular fov, the bigger this is the better you see period. Don't worry about feet or meters look at the angular fov, in bins anything over 60 is considered wide angle. Doesn't matter how good the glass or coatings are if it has the view of a pvc pipe your not gonna see a darn thing late, or not compared to a larger angular fov with similar glass. My 6x24 hensoldt is my favorite followed by a 4x16x56 and then a 3x12x56. I have an incredible 3x9x42 Zeiss vmv that 9 outta 10 will say smokes a vx3 50mm most of the time. It's not necessarily the glass near as much as the fov. Last example is all the Zeiss scopes I named have the same angular fov. The Leupold is much smaller. Hope this helps.

Cheers.

In your examples are you saying the glass is 6X and the lens is 24mm?

My bad man it's a 6x24x56, a 4x16x56 and a 3x12x56. Outta all mine ziess are still my favorite for low light hunting, just haven't had anything that outperforms one, this is far past legal shooting times btw. Schmidt is awesome and as consistent a glass as I've ever used but has more glare than I like for a 2000 scope. Meaning at dusk looking into the west they have glare that others do not. It's only at power above 8x or so though .Someone mentioned the vx6 and it's an awsome scope. Been running one and love it. Great glass but they've had the glass part down a while, they finally opened the angular fov to match many of the German scopes with the new eyepiece, that's why so many like it. It's hard to beat imo short of the absolute top scopes made, think sb, German Zeiss-hensoldt and Swarovski top end stuff. Forget the ads like coating and sells pitches, only thing that matters to me is I can or cannot see my target while hunting and a big Zeiss can't be beat. This Has been my experience the last 15 years anyway. Good thing is there's lots of great scopes out there without having to spend a small fortune.

I agree on all points except the purpose of a 30mm tube. A 30mm tube gives you added windage and elevation movement in the errector system over a 1 inch tube.

That is the heart of your post. The quality of glass is the key. I do not think you would percieve any quantifiable difference between the VX-2/50 and the VX-3/40.

This was settled for me many years ago. I have a farmer friend whose motto for deer hunting is, "they only come out 15 min. before dark." Base on that, he went out and bought a "low-light" scope...a 3-9 X 50mm Tasco.

He asked me to sight it in for him, as he does every year. What a waste of metal. Worst scope I ever looked through. For years I hunted with a Leu. 1.5-5 X 20. Best low-light scope I ever used for my type of hunting. Putting the rifles side-by-side, my little 20mm scope shed a lot of light on the subject.

Short answer. First is good glass. Stay with what you have. To your question about the K-series Weaver. The glass in your Leu is better.

Having owned and run about every mid to high end optic out there except for USO extensively I will add :

As mentioned the tube diameter increase from 1" to 30mm has nothing to do with light gathering and every thing to do with both windage and elevation travel.

There is a formula for exit pupil but it doesn't fit every bill due to the variables in scopes due to the difference in glass quality, coating quality and the actual status of of the particular eye viewing through the scope. Since everyone of us has a different eye including different numbers of rods, cones and lense qualities this formula simply can't apply to all situations.

In general the best combo is to have great glass + great coatings + lower magnification + large objective.

For my eye great glass with 3x and 40 mm front objective doesn't come close to a great glass 3x with 56mm objective in low light, clarity or any other realm except for the weight savings.

Also someone brought up the point of the toilet paper roll.. the Europeans have known for years that if you block out the ambient light from entering your eye around the rear ocular that you will get a much better and brighter sight picture in low light situations. It will blow your mind if you have not tried it.. Web search "Rifle scope eye cups for something better than toilet paper rolls".

Until I find something better I will continue to run Kahles 3x12x56 on rigs where long shots are not the norm. On rigs that may see long range that need to retain the ability to shoot close in low light then the NXS 56mm in both 3.5x15 and 5.5x22 come into play. The Kahles beats the NF in Clarity and weight savings but doesn't dial.

The newer Tactical Kahles line loose against the NXS in weight and pricing.

I have found no better combinations out there and I truly am happy but bored with the optics that I currently run..

As I understand it the formula for determining exit pupil applies to all scopes regardless of glass quality or coatings. Divide the objective lens diameter by the magnification for exit pupil diameter.

If you have a variable with larger objective you can use a higher magnification to get the same width exit pupil. As mentioned, everyone's eyes are different and one person might be able to see better with a 50 MM objective at 8X while another may do better at 6X or 7X.

If I'm hunting late in the afternoon, I'll play with the power setting to see what magnification lets ME see best regardless of what theory says about how big a 65 year old's pupil will get in low light.

It does apply but only to exit pupil not to actual light transmission of different glass which is what actually matters and totally different.

Take two scopes with same exit pupil now decrease the light transmission of one glass or add a coating that works for one eyes wavelengths and not anothers and you have a different story.. As mentioned the eye can only use so much light as can enter the pupil.

I know that per the formula and the transmission of glass that I have unusable light coming in from my scopes which is far better than not enough.

I agree with adjusting your scopes power setting to give you the best light performance at that exact time of day or daylight available.