Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Deer Hunting Southeast guys--Illuminated scope or not?

I am debating a new scope in the spring and have an idea of what I am going with...but I can't make my mind up on whether I want illumination or not. This would be my first illuminated scope.

This is going on a dedicated green field rifle. No pigs in the area, so no night hunting...just deer during legal shooting hours but looking to squeeze out every potential minute possible.

So, what is the consensus on illuminated reticles? Love em? No need for em? Don't care?

Let's hear your thoughts, opinions and experiences.

I can see it helping when hunting hardwoods or pines where it gets dark before 30 min after sunset. But not on a field.

Admittedly, I find my best use for the Leupold Firedot Reticle in Texas, when hunting hogs. They are often black and shots come around first and last light. The red dot at the junction of the crosshairs, shows me exactly where the bullet will impact. If I read your post correctly, you are hunting whitetails only and not really concerned with first and last light. All that said, I still think you will find the fire dot feature to come in handy.

My issue at dark isn’t seeing the reticle. I can see that fine. I give up when i cant see the Animal well enough, particularly when we are picky about the bucks we shoot and don’t want to shoot buttons when killing does

Let me clarify just a bit on the food plots...these are not the huge sprawling fields you see on the hunting show. These are maybe one acre plots carved out of pine / timber company land. Most are less than 100yds long but a few might be pushing 125.

Yes, whitetails only, but I AM concerned with first and last light.

On my vx3's I feel like I lose the reticle before i lose neccessary light in the scope.... meaning i can see the deer in the scope bit have trouble seeing the reticle. I think the answer is to get a scope with a good low light reticle that stays visible. I've toying with the same notion you are. But I just dont think a lit dot is neccessary but would certainly be useful. My next scope will probably not be illuminated. Possibly a heavier duplex of some sort or maybe a #4

I find the Nikon bdc works well at dark but there no longer made try a leupold heavy duplex that’s perfect

I never felt like I needed one.

I'd rather have very sharp and clear optics as a first. Lit reticle comes second. Even with a lit reticle, to your point, you need to know exactly what your shooting at. Clear optics with great light gathering will provide that.

I'm a southeast guy and I like illumination at first and last light if it's done right. It needs to be extremely dim/low so that it's barely visible in the low light. If it's to bright it can wash out the view a bit and makes it harder to see the target. The less of the reticle that's illuminated the better.....if it can be set really low you can get by with more of it being illuminated but I still prefer it to be a very small section illuminated.

Of course the better the glass, the larger the exit pupil (to a certain point), and the higher the power (at a use-able level) the better the view of the target will be. If a reticle is bold enough it can be used to subtend, especially at shorter ranges and in open fields.

I often play around with scopes sitting at last light viewing livestock through them as it gets dark in front of our house. 20 acre fenced area we run cattle and goats on. ~10 is pasture, ~10 is wooded. There's a huge difference in how well you can target something in low light between the open pasture with a solid background and the wooded area with a broken background. Illumination helps in both but more so on the wooded side as it gets hard to subtend with the cluttered background.

Pretty much how I see it too. If your background and overhead canopy make things difficult, illumination can help. I've needed it and used it a few times. I certainly want it on a gun that also gets used for pig hunting, as I'll hang out a bit past legal deer shooting hours if pigs are evident. It's sometimes just a black silhouette when they do show.

Wet pine needles , in the shade on a dark overcast day first/last light you aren't going to be able to see a regular crosshair - period .

I've used a Leupold 4x12-50 VXR and knew when aiming at a deer/hog that without the illuminated reticle - no way I could make the shot .

I can see during legal shooting hours just fine to shoot deer. It be nice on a dedicated pig rifle. You can shoot them as long as you can see them

I can highly recommend Trijicon Accupoint.
No batteries.

Illumination where you have single dot or small portion of the center reticle illuminated can be very useful, and if there’s the option snd my budget allows, I’d opt for it.

Illlimination where a monster reticle lights up like a Christmas tree is not great for hunting.

I think there’s also a trade off if budget is limited. Generally, at modest price points, I think getting an IR jeans a tease off somewhere else.

Agreed, I am not interested in a design that lights up the full reticle. If I went illuminated, it would be a small dot or center cross section of a #4 or similar heavy post / fine cross wire design.

Sounds like a VX5HD 3x15x56 Leupold with the fire dot would be about perfect. It's very easy to use once you figure out how you want the brightness set.

You have some solid answers here. I like illum but it has to be adjustable period. Saying that, I have only shot maybe 3 deer with illum out of no telling how many. If its only a 100 dollar upgrade might as well have it in my opine.

I'm not a fan. I've not been in a field position where I couldn't make a shot 30 minutes after. I'm sure much of my bias coming from not wanting to shoot stuff I want to eat at zero dark thirty.

I do agree that I want one as dim as possible.