I find that even on the lowest settings the illuminated reticles wll actually make it harder to see the target as well.
That definitely used to be the case but no longer is. Also keep in mind that in the scopes I am referring to, ONLY a small dot lights up -- not the entire reticle. Those in which the entire reticle lights up are rather useless to me as they negatively affect my vision in extremely low light.
I can assure you that scopes such as the Leica ERi, Kahles CSX, Schmidt Bender Polar and the Duralyt, Conquest DL, Victory VariPoint and Victory HT from Zeiss (all with #60) will adjust to rather dim levels and not negatively impact your shot opportunity. The Zeiss dots at the lowest settings are the brightest of the bunch, and I wouldn't mind them being just a tad dimmer. But they can get by with it due to their smaller size (app. .33 MOA/10x/100 yds).
The Leica and Kahles are the best in that regard as they adjust more dimly than the others. Most of my opportunities are moonlight shots on very dark targets (hogs), so I am extremely picky when it comes to optical performance. I used to use FFP #4s with good results, but the illuminated reticles make things much easier under the poorest of lighting conditions.
I should point out, though, that most of my nighttime shots are longer and in the 150-170 yard range, another factor that makes the lighted dots more useful. If I still had mobility and could stalk closer, then a non-illuminated FFP #4 would still be in the mix.
I will admit that I originally had a hard time convincing myself to give the newer technology a try because I knew how some of the earlier illuminated system looked and did not care for them. But distinct improvements have been made in this regard. And now, I don't think I could go back.
