Just curious, what are your opinions about the best low light scopes available. Would most of you opt for something with a large objective from Zeiss, S&B or Swarovski?

In my night-time tests on a black-and-white chart, which I've been making for at least a decade now, several scopes have tied for the highest brightness rating of 8. The test is set up to remove objective size from the factors.

The 8's used to be limited to S&B, Leica, Swarovski and Zeiss, but in recent years Leupold VX-6's also qualified. I should also point out that not every Leica, Swarovski or Zeiss has rated an 8, just the top-end scopes. All S&B's have rated 8.

Might also mention that a scope's optical brightness is far from the only factor in the ability to aim in dim light. The reticle's perhaps more important.

Don't forget how important headlights are in the equation...

How do you eliminate objective size from the factors affecting brightness? I can see equalizing the objective size where possible, but removal? Some of those Zeiss monsters are for all intents and purposes a spotting scope with an included reticle.

I have or have owned most alpha glass scopes; but I have a fixed Swarovski PF8x56 that is the best low light scope I have looked through.

Slidellkid,

My favorite two low light scopes are a Swarovski z5 5-25X52 BT; which is for sale. The other is a VX-6 5-24X52; which is not for sale.

I can't speak for MILES58; but, I speculate, to be fair, one has to equalize the criteria by utilization of identical exit pupils. Thus a 50mm objective at 10 power (exit pupil of 5) could be fairly evaluated agains a 40mm objective at 8 power (exit pupil of 5). This is just my speculation as to what is meant by removal of objective size from the factors. I may be wrong. If you don't believe me, just ask the homunculus from Alaska.

Miles,

I set them all on 6x, and since it's rare to find a variable that doesn't include 6x with less than 36mm objective. Setting the scopes on 6x results in an exit pupil of at least 6mm, and usually larger. Supposedly the "average" human eye's pupil expands to 7mm in darkness, but I've found 6mm more like it in any sort of hunting light, so a 6mm exit pupil provides all the light our eye can use.

Magnification also affects perceived brightness, essentially due to placing the object closer to the shooter, but I designed the test to be as close as possible to a pure comparison of optical quality.

The black and white chart also eliminates color from the equation, making the test just for brightness and sharpness. Individual perception of color varies, often considerably, and can make a specific scope appear brighter to one person than another.

JB,

Can you post up any prior threads about your scope testing and which scopes recieved an "8".

How do the Meopta's compare to the Alpha scopes?

Amen from the back row.

I agree with that as well. Most of my shooting is about 15 minutes before pitch black and almost always in brush on a black target (pig). I'm still trying to decide if I like the heavy duplex on my 1.5-5 VX3, but I will say that an illuminated dot on its lowest setting seems to work very, very well.

As do headlights, as Shrapnel says.

I shot many a hog well after legal shooting light for native game animals using a Trijicon 2.5x10x56 w/ the amber dot. It worked better than anything tried by myself or the guys I hunted with except for night vision. Heavy and clunky, forced a higher mounting height.

David

VX6 w/firedot duplex.

I have a VXR 3-9 with Firedot 4 on a MRC 7x57. On the lowest setting, that little red dot is the ticket. I haven't looked through a VX6...I'm afraid if I did I'd have to have one.

Hi JB

What actual parameters are you testing? "Sharpness" I'm guessing is resolving lines, or something similar, is that right? What about "brightness"? How do you measure that?

Have you done any ranking of scopes measured at the maximum magnification they can reach? Or the maximum at which they still have at least 6mm exit pupil? It'd be interesting to have some objective data showing not only how how various scopes compare with each other at 6x, but also how they compare with, say 4x scopes, 8x and variables.

Friendly suggestion MD.

Try placing a rack of antlers under a tree in the shadows and then check them as the sun goes down. Brown antlers in the shadows are the issue that really matters, at least where and what I hunt, and is a slightly different issue of perception than black and white resolution. Would be interesting to see if there is any difference between that and the B&W chart.

Also, your Gack book is very enjoyable. Lots of interesting tidbits. Well named, and well done.

I have a S&B Klassic 3-12x42. It is truly a good low light scope. Have never owned a high $ Zeiss or Swarovski. I'm not a scope snob but would like to challenge every one to save and buy at least 1 alpha glass in their lifetime. The younger you do it...the better. powdr

John,

It makes sense to objectify the tests i that manner. But... it leaves out so much.

The B/W only can make a large difference in what sense your brain makes of what your eyes provide. Alone, that would be of necessity quite subjective just due to eye differences in people.

John,
My presumption is that this fixed power scope performs well in low light is the fact that; in addition to it being a quality product, it has fewer elements than a variable. Would this be a valid observation?
Thanks

powdr



Would you consider the VX-6 or the Nightforce NXS as alpha glass?

jeffbird,

I have done dozens of tests like you describe with antlers, or other "practical" objects. But the problem I eventually ran into is that unless have a bunch of scopes lined up to test at the same time, then there's no way to correlate results from one scope in, say, 2012 with another scope in 2015. Then there's the problem of light conditions changing from test to test.

Which is exactly why I came with this test, which not only uses a standardized chart at the same range every time, but the same minimal amount of artificial light. I can assure you that it does carry over to aiming at game.

Best scope (optically) I've ever seen and now own is my Leica ER. Having crosshairs in it to guide bullets is almost like cheating.

Miles,

As I just assured jeffbird, while the B&W chart isn't the only criteria for optical performance, it definitely carries over into overall optical quality in a scope, especially low light performance. I confirmed this many times after developing the night-time chart test, by performing the same test I used before: lining up a bunch of scopes in front of a picture window and having several people (not just me) rate them in brightness as the sun went down. The results from both tests correlated very strongly, so no, it's not "quite subjective."

And it's only ONE of the tests I make when evaluating any scope.

Cruiser1,

Yes, fixed power scopes do tend to perform better in low light than variables of equal quality, because they have fewer lenses, so fewer air/glass surfaces to scatter light.

So you did get a VX-R and it sounds like you like it. Good for you - my second VX-R arrived yesterday.

S&B. The finest scopes made, sadly also some of the most expensive.

I'll never sell the few I have... Swarovski Z6 is not far behind.

John,

As I'm sure you know, I own a Hensoldt 6-24x72. The glass is near flawless except for one thing: chromatic aberration. I have another Hensoldt and it shows the same chromatic aberration. As you noted above, magnification does play a role in low light hunting. I can magnify the image higher than a 56mm objective and still have a maximum exit pupil, thus, I'm theoretically able to make out more details of the target/game. Never having sat down and done a side by side test with my other Hensoldt, which has a 56mm objective, I can only presume the increased magnification would help.

'Whoop:

Not exactly. I've had the VXR 3-9 (Firedot 4) on a 7x57 Montana Rifle Company ASR for a couple of years. And yes, I do like it, and it seems to fit the profile of the ASR just fine (sorry for the fuzzy iPhone pic).



I haven't put one one the Featherweight (yet) since, as I mentioned before, the 30mm tubes just seem to be a tad bulky for the profile of the gun. But that may just be to my eye and, as you or someone else mentioned, I'd get used to it. Here's one of the Featherweights with a VX3 1.5-5 with heavy duty duplex. This is the rifle on which the scope might get swapped. The other Featherweight is carrying a VX3 2.5-8 and I'll leave it alone. In my mind it's about the perfect setup. By the way, both of the Featherweights are 7x57 as well.

Ringman, Nightforce does have good glass but still not in S&B's class...but almost. They do not have a good hunting reticle in my opinion so I lost interest years ago. The VX6, for those that just refuse to own the best, is probably the most bang for the buck for under $1000 but still not in S&B's class (close though). They have however figured out the best duplex reticle, there's is the perfect size. The best advantage I can think of w/the S&B is w/the FFP one can make the reticle any size and thickness you want. And when you think about it, if you're going to spend that much money why not put $500 with it and buy a S&B. One can find better than MAP pricing if they just shop a little bit. Mine is 20 years old and just like the Klassic's they make today. I've killed all manner of game w/it and it has never let me down. powdr

powdr,

You mentioned Swarovski in your alpha glass comment. Do you include the z5 and z6 as having alpha glass? Maybe a better question is what do you consider having alpha glass?

Of scopes I have actually used significantly and compared, here is my list starting with what has been the best: a PV 2.5-10x56. There is no such thing as perfection, though I seem to be chasing it and forever swapping scopes. Some have better contrast. Some resolve fine detail better. Some are sharper to the edges. Some are more forgiving with their sweet spots. And some have better reticles. But none seem to have hit on the ultimate combination just yet. And with dumb marketing moves -- like Zeiss ditching its wonderful #4 reticle -- I don't see that ever happening.

Swarovski PV 2.5-10x56
Zeiss Diavari Victory 2.5-10x50
Zeiss Diavari Victory 3-12x56
Meopta MeoStar 3-12x56
Kahles Helia CL 3-10x50
Kahles Helia CL 4-12x52
Zeiss Diavari Victory 2.5-10x42
Meopta Meostar 3-10x50
Zeiss Diavari Victory 1.5-6x42
Kahles Helia C 8x56
Zeiss Conquest DL 3-12x50
Zeiss Classic Diatal 6x42
Meopta MeoStar 4-12x40
Zeiss Diavari V 3-9x42
Swarovski PH 2.5-10x42

There are probably a couple I have forgotten about. My memory isn't what it used to be. Below that list, lots of scopes clutter the candidates and can certainly take you to the edge of darkness, including the Conquest 3.5-10x50 and similar models, the MeoPro series, the AV/Z3/Z5 series, the VX6 and VX3s, upper-end Burris, upper-end Nikon and the Kahles AH among others.

Ringman-You didn't ask me but I will give you my take on "Z5/Z6 as alpha glass" question.

I doubt anyone considers the Z5 as truly alpha optics. It has the exact same glass and coatings as the Z3. Only the internals differ. They are VERY nice but certainly not in the same league as the Diavari Victory series, the Z6, etc.

BobbyTomek,

I think you answered the question I was thinking.

if you want to shoot something at 100 yards in the dark here is your huckleberry...other than that you need a NV scope.

Low light scopes....I guess I been there and done that...

Ringman, I agree whole heartily w/ Bobby's list even though there is more than one on the list I haven't owned. Bobby and JG are good to go when it comes to glass comparison and quality. While Bobby does not list the S&B on his list and I don't know how they do it...the S&B is still the best to me when everything is considered. They have a lot of scopes w/too short tubes that I wouldn't own but their Klassic series especially their 3-12x42 w/#4 is to me the best there is. I do not own scopes w/over a 44mm objective, their not needed. I've always felt if the market really does drive sales and the S&B was too expensive then they would go broke. Go figure. powdr

P.S. Oh, and I almost forgot...Bobby is so right about Zeiss dropping the #4 reticle. I can't see it doing anything but hurting sales.

powdr-Thanks for the kind words. I am sure the S&B scopes rank with the very best, but I only listed those I had ample experience with. I've looked through a few S&Bs but never owned one to run through the paces. But from my brief time looking through and handling them, the only negative thing I could come up with would be the center wire of the reticle seeming quite thin, much as in the Meoptas. Then again, with top-notch resolution and image contrast, even the thinner reticles can often be rather useful under the worst of lighting conditions and against dark targets like hogs. But since I haven't spent significant time behind them, I won't speculate.

powdr-Also, I wanted to say your assessment of the VX-6 and its duplex reticle is dead-on. I REALLY like that reticle, and the fact that it's incorporated into the VX-R line as well makes it even more appealing.

Interesting thread.

I haven't owned as many low light scopes as people like Bobby,but have owned and used a fair number of scopes over the years,and make a steady habit of peeping through them under various light and terrain conditions,including night time.This includes hunting with them and lots of time counting coup on local deer at our 600 yard range.

Some qualifiers: First, what is "low light"? I call it any conditions encountered in normal hunting, meaning up to,and slightly after legal shooting light. In Saskatchewan this ran you to sundown last I knew.In most other jurisdictions I've hunted from Alberta to New Brunswick and New England, many states in the American west,this is a half hour after sunset and a half hour before sunrise.

Anything later, or earlier, than that, I'd call "night time";not low light.

The gloomiest places I have hunted have been SE Alaska(which can have lousy light almost all day sometimes), New England in fall/winter,and Alberta/Central Canada in November.

IME the west does not offer the low light challenges the other areas do.Just seems the light and terrain conditions in places like Colorado,New Mexico, and Wyoming are just not as gloomy as those in the other places. But I have not hunted everywhere out there either.

And I have never hunted hogs in Texas where it seems shooting late is pretty common.

Next qualifier is reticles. My standard has always been.."Can I see the reticle against the animal,well enough to aim at the distance I am willing to shoot under deteriorating conditions,at the edge of darkness?"

Again, if i can see the reticle against the animal, I can shoot. That's all I need to know.

To me this is a judgement call and I am pretty conservative. The animal would have to be closer the darker it gets,and far as possible from heavy cover,so that if it runs at the shot, hopefully it will expire away from cover. The reason (obviously) is that in places like Alberta, an animal left over night will get eaten by wolves or coyotes and that sucks, far as I am concerned. I will hold off rather than risk anything uncertain.

To me, this is a lot different criteria than the question of ..."What is the BEST lowlight reticle"?

I explain tis because I sometimes think in these discussions we aren't always talking about the same situations of "low light". Anyway those are my criteria and YMMV depending on how late you shoot under what conditions.

With all the BS out of the way here's my comments based on what my eyes tell me:

2.5X Kahles- First Euro scope I ever owned before many knew of Kahles over here,and it was a revelation for the short distance black bear hunting we were doing those days in the Northeast.

3-9 Zeiss Conquest and Diavari with Zeiss Duplex: Both very good up to and slightly past legal shooting light. If it gets too dark, the optics let you see but the reticle fades in bad light.

3.5-10X50 Kahles- This one performed better than the two Zeiss scopes up to and past shooting light. Better than any VX3 Leupold in every way.

2.5-10 Swaro PH with their duplex reticle. Maybe the best combination of optics and non illuminated reticle I've personally used. The optics drag you way past legal light,and the reticle will not wash out,even aiming from open into background cover. I have been WAY past legal light with this one and could still kill with it.

Leupold FX3 6x42- Very good and edges out the 36mm model in the last minutes of daylight.

3.5-10X Leupold- Not in the class with the Kahles IMHO but better than I really have expected,and a lot better than the 2.5-8X Leupold,which really sucks IMHO.Optics are flat as light fades, little contrast and not terribly bright to my eyes.I used a 2.5-8X on my longest low light shot at 300 yards. Only goes to show you can make some things work sometimes.I have owned my last one.

Swaro Z6 1.5-10- Very good. Under my criteria and counting coup on many deer,have never lost the reticle.

Schmidt Bender Summit- Optics as good or better than anything listed above as late as I care to go. Aiming at hundreds of deer never lost the reticle up to and slightly past legal shooting light. Never. It takes a black background way past legal light before it fades out completely,despite being thin. I could say the same things about the Z6 and its reticle..

Schmidt Bender Zenith 1.5-6X- Top of the heap for optics and reticle. It's past legal light before you lose the center of the reticle; but hit the switch on the lighted reticle and if you can see it, you can aim and hit.But by then....it's night time. The light varies in intensity which allows use in full daylight if wanted, but dims so there is little to no glare in bad light. I really like this scope.

Never owned a 56mm scope so can't say anything about them.I've used lots of other scopes that do not stand out in the low light department,so don't mention them. For example the 4X Conquest beats the snot out of any Leupold 4x optically.Any scope is better than iron sites though.

Anyway this is what I have owned,shot,and hunted with and feel comfortable commenting on. YMMV

Bobby, my scope buying days are over but if I ever run across $800 I can blow I'm going to buy a VX6. I bought my S&B when I was young and single...couldn't do it now but I'm thankful I did it when I did. powdr

Bob, Good points - but hey - out here in the wayyy West, it gets dark as anywhere, just depends on what side of the time zone you're in and whether it's morning or evening. LOL Of course its whether in the open or in the brush. A famous gunwriter once wrote something to the extent of, dark timber, whatever that is. Well it's dark ass timber! Low light, it's relative like what folks mean by open country, long range, hard work or great rack. What it takes is seeing the target and the reticle well enough to get it done per one's need.

Not toward anyone but I don't consider alpha glass a viable otion nor, thankfully, a needed piece of kit. Not that it wouldn't be welcome, just not necessary. For me the Firedot Duplex is a low light killer. I have a lowly seconhand VX-R 3-9x40 and recommend it strongly to the frugal cheap. Day, night, early, late, Pacific or Mountain it'll get it done.

Mtn Boomer: Sure I get that.

Maybe what I was trying to say is the quality of the light seems better there as the sun starts dipping,bright skies and lighter vegetation at least where I have been in mostly October.

Up in Alberta in November, the dawn/dusk periods last longer with that low sun and it seems to stay gloomy during that period a bit longer.

But no doubt dark is dark.

That buck I killed with the 2.5-8 was a mule deer on a mountainside at last light,that was dead at the shot but kicked himself off the bench into heavy brush below,and rolled 30-40 yards. By the time we got up there you needed a flashlight and we could not find him. My pal was convinced I missed but I knew I had not.

We did not find him until the next morning,and he was OK,but the incident made me a bit conservative about shooting at the edge of night.



Powdr: I would like to have a scope like yours.

I have had excellent results night hunting coyotes in Maine using the Weaver "Classic Extreme" 2.5-18x56 with a German #4 reticle and illuminated dot. The illuminated dot can be adjusted down to a dull glow so it does not blow out your night vision or cause any internal reflections in the scope ( which seems to be a problem in a lot of optics that offer illumination ) also very reasonably priced if you search the net.

Bob, I think I have the same 3.5-10 x 50 Kahles, I had the idea a couple of years ago to send it back into them to put a #4 in it, while I like the #4, for some reason it does not seem as bright as it did before, maybe just my imagination.

but as you say "dark is dark"

a VRL-1 with a green diode is a great light, I also have the more expensive Wicked Light with a red diode but don't like it as much.

in my finally learned my lesson at a late stage in life; unless your going to buy a NV scope a good reticle in a 25 mm objective with reasonable coatings will get you as far or further than a target reticle in a 50 mm objective.

To your point regards your Z6, my Victory HT 1.5-6 x 42 with #60 IR is not too shabby the illumination is done well I think at this level.

MtnBoomer-You are definitely right about the VX-R scopes. I had a 3-9x50 FD duplex for a while until $$ got tight (always does ha ha) and sold it here on the board recently. I plan on having another some day, maybe this time in the 40mm version. There was nothing to not like about it.

BobinNH-Your story with the 2.5-8x definitely shows that we can make things work. For a number of years, I had a 3200 3-9x on my little 7mm Bullberry. It was a good, solid and reliable scope but not something that excelled in moonlight with its duplex reticle. But as long as the range was reasonable and you worked at it, that scope could get it done. It wasn't perfect for the situation -- and none are -- but got the job done on a number of hogs. And in the end, that's all that really matters.

20 years ago I bought this unusual scope at a Sportsman Show. It has a rotating ring with multi-colored windows that allow natural light into the reticle, which then illuminate to whatever color window the scope is turned to.

Added to that, there's one removable plastic bubble that adds considerably to the light transfer to the reticle. I generally keep it on red when coyote hunting, and can see to shoot into the dark a bit. It works perfectly on moonlit nights for night calling.

I won't say it's alpha glass, but it is the only scope and rifle combination I have never swapped scopes on in 20 years. It always works, has never moved, has never fogged, has never failed, always allows me to shoot till dark. If I had known then what I know now, I might have bought a few of them. I enjoy the scope and the red reticle with it's natural glow.

Hakko on a Sako Vixen .221 Fireball

Rest assured, Leupold scopes are rugged and dependable. The VX3 line of scopes are affordable, and offer a great compromise to higher end scopes. The problem with S&Bs and top end glass is the weight, most aren't made for mountain hunting unless you have a gun bearer.

Bobby: If "brown" is "down", you won't hear me squawk too loud!

Like most of us I excruciate over this stuff at the range,during off season,or for something to do on stand.

Out hunting.....not so much.

One more comment: Even the cheapest night-vision scope will outperform the most expensive conventional scope in really dim light, the sort most hunters would call night. But of course NV scopes are illegal for most hunting, and even where they are legal (such as Texas) they’re not for all game.

John I bet that's true. ya know...I have never even looked through a night vision scope!

I had one of the lower-end (ATN MK410 Spartan) night vision set-ups for a short time. While it no doubt worked, it was large, heavy and clunky -- not to mention crude in both mounting and adjustments.

If there is not enough moonlight for a conventional scope, then I'd rather do this:




...instead of this:

Bob, I know I sound like a fickled high school girl that's dating the high school stud football player but there it is. I can't help it! powdr

Bobby,

Yeah, it's easy to recognize right away how much more attractive and less clumsy the Zeiss/light setups are.

John-They're not exactly streamlined, but the hogs just don't get the message that I'd prefer they step out with some decent daylight remaining...

If memory serves, that Spartan unit weighed just shy of 4 pounds. I am disabled and don't spot and stalk anymore, so weight -- within reason -- is not an issue. But it almost seemed like that unit was heavy enough to rip the base off my little Contender barrel should I accidentally tilt it sideways... So off it went to a new home where it could be appreciated.

Honestly, I do hate the look of the little mounted light on the scope, but it does not change the POI, adds only a few ounces and -- best of all -- can be removed in a matter of seconds.

Two new to me scopes I'm using this year have impressed me in low light performance.

Meopta 6x with their #4- amazing clairity, brightness and reticle combination.

Trijicon 1-4 with the green post reticle.

powdr you're doing fine!

Bob, congratulations on a hell of a buck. I love those big necked bruisers yall have up north. I killed a big 9 point in Kansas in '93 that weighed 247 lbs. You can't put 3 of those in the back of a truck like you can here in Texas. powdr

powdr I always had a soft spot for those Maine bruisers. I'm really happy when I get one like that. Maybe I will get lucky in Kansas next week and kill one like yours!

The head on this deer was huge. He wasn't but 17in wide but had very heavy horns, mass wise. Brother, I don't know where you're going but there are some true monsters living in Kansas. I would put it in the top 3 along w/Illinois and Ohio as far as real antler producing states in the lower 48. Good luck and don't be scared to pass on one early. powdr

fwiw...

Been thru a few scopes for a few years, always looking for one a little better in low light...

Magnification is an asset, it shows you more. The top end 56mm objectives with an appropriate reticle are going to be brighter. Just spent a week with an 8x56 S&B #4, and that is about as good as I have used--though about 1x shy for that 56mm objective... Compared to a Zeiss HT 10x54 bino, the scope was a bit brighter--but of course, the bino showed more detail easily.

Not petite...

Best case low light, to save a little weight, would opt for an 8x50 with Zeiss/S&B #4 subtensions in a wire reticle...if such existed.

Bobby's list will save you some time & moolah...:)

By far the scope I have used for extreme low light has been the Zeiss Victory 1.5-6x42 with an illuminated #60 reticle.

I have hunted boar in Europe at night without the aid of artificial light very successfully with the above glass.

This boar was taken legally in the middle of the night as was the monster in my avatar.

Tomk, I bet that 8x56 S&B is like looking at a full moon at dark. I would call it a very specialized scope but a good one. powdr

Hi powdr, hope you are doing well.

Hey, this is an "extreme" thread...:)

Actually it has a little more utility than that...for me. Decided to quit flirting with it and wring it out--so hunted with it seven days, all day. I put it on a light rifle, so it looked worse than it was to carry. My pard was amused...:) I wasn't really hampered still-hunting by the 8x, eyeballing does as if they were bucks--it was kinda grim buck-wise in our hunting area of the UP this year...but the yotes were down and hopefully the wolves take a hit, too.

On the 56mm I wouldn't have an issue with 9 or 10x for sitting. The 6 EP works well for me, too, as MD covered. Most of this stuff he's been over...multiple times. And on another covered point, prefer fixed w/wire due to fewer lenses.

The FFP non-illuminated variables that are the cat's ass mid-range up have miniscule looking reticles at the low end. I do better with a bold reticle on the low setting for jumpers and runners.

Thus, happening to have more than one rifle, I use another scoped more appropriately for still-hunting and for tracking if there is snow. But for sitting set-ups, the 8x56 was excellent. fwiw...

my meostar 3-12x56 RGD sure is bright in low light

I have half a dozen scopes like that but not illuminated, and I just put a 2-8x42 Duralyt on a crossbow until next summer when it gets swapped for one of the 1.5-6x42s. It doesn't take much light for them to be fully useful all night long. They are by far my favorite scopes for deer hunting here in Minnesota.