Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics best low light scope???????

About to buy a scope and would love to get some advice on the best low light scope for around $500. Was thinking about a zeiss. But would appreciate some input. Thanks

I would say the Zeiss then Meopta in the price range.

meopta meopro

I have a Minox that beats my Zeiss conquest, to my eyes. The Zeiss is a better scope, overall, but the Minox has good glass. I really feel my Sightron big sky 6x42 is at least as bright, if not brighter. I'd take a truck load of those big sky scopes. I've hunted a Meopta on a borrowed rig, and thought it was as bright as the others. It may have been 'brighter', but after a certain point, it's splitting hairs to me. Any of those will get more light/shooting time than your eyes can probably use.

I thought about a meopta but have no experience with one or do I know anyone who has.

meopta has an excellent german #4 reticle. perfect for lowlight

you can rest easy with the meopta, you'll be hard pressed to find much negative about the meopro line.

Dave

So would you choose meopta over zeiss conquest?

coach11569,

Do you think a Swarovski z5 5-25X52 would be a good low light scope? I do. I have one on my ultralight hunting rifle. Here's the kicker. Both my Bushnell 4200 4-16X40's match it in low light. I purchased both from this website for $275 each.

Therefore I suggest a Bushnell 4200 4-16X40.

You need to try some scopes, and figure out what you prefer/fit your needs/wants. Ringman loves the elites. I think the eye relief/eye box stinks, and I prefer other stuff, that others don't like. They're just like rifles, 5-6 types will be plenty bright, but you'll like some better than others for other reasons.

I have a 3-9x40 conuest and a 4-12x50 meopta meopro and I pefer the meopta. I like the conquest but for low light the meopta with the 4 reticle is just a shade better. I think it is just the reticle that I prefer. either way will get you way will get you well beyond legal times. I also like the 12x power on the meopta better. my 2cents

For pure/maximum low light performance; I have a Swarovski PH8x56 that is UNBELIEVABLE. I have 1" and 30mm Swaro 50mm objectives, Diavari, VX-3's, S&B Summit and 50mm objective Conquest and it beats them all,easily.

My leupold vx-3L 3.5-10x56 will pretty much let u hunt thru the night by moonlight...

Leupold FX-3 6X42 HEAVY DUPLEX for around $300 used on here.
stick the left over $200 back toward some binos.
AMRA

Or...

Look for a MeoPro demo from Doug and if binos are on the menu, get demo Meopro binos as well. I think his demo prices on the Meopro binos are around 3 bills. Scopes are about the same, IIRC. Gets some good glass in action for not a ton of cash.

Just checked...8x42 binos are 299, but no meopro scopes are in as demo's. Bummer.

coach11569, hi- I see you have not posted much so, if I may let me, offer basic premises of many here. I think most will agree with the gist of it - and oh yeah, welcome!!

Traditionally, fixed powered scopes tended to be brighter as (I believe) they had fewer lenses- so less light was lost to reflection off that glass. Fewer parts also added to reliability. A 6x42 (straight 6x magnification with a 42mm objective) was long thought to sort of be 'it' as far as light gathering ability without going to some monstrous huge thing.

Leupold has a current FX 3 model 6x42 that would surely be a yard stick to compare against other scopes. Though some will quickly argue some Euro or personal favorite trumps it while others prefer the slightly smaller 6x36 saying they see no difference, most will agree it is a prototypical benchmark for comparing brightness.


$500 will buy a lot of scope these days and brightness comes with it. We can help find deals too. The brightest scope will have great glass and the best lens coatings- but that alone may not exactly make it the best scope for your purpose.

A few questions:
Are you sold on it being a variable or is a fixed powered (6x ) ok for you? If variable - that is ok, new ones can be brighter than fixed of only a few years ago.
Does the objective size matter? - are you ok with a 50mm or bigger objective or prefer to stick to the more traditional 40 -42mm range? A fair crowd touts 36's.

Are turret types a factor and do you have a reticle preference?

Lastly is weight a factor? It can affect balance and matter if you plan on carrying it around.

What rifle, and action size, is this going on?? That too can matter.

Feel free to PM me- and I imagine anyone else- would be happy to bore you equally well with minutiae of optics. Will warn you this is probably the most contentious of all forums on the fire at times. Sorry if I told you a bunch of what you already know but I have no idea of your experience. Please take it as intended.

Today's 6x42 Leupolds are indeed really bright.

It's not nearly as important as to what brand as to the size of the scope. The bigger the objective, the more magnification you can use. More magnification will allow you to see further.
Things like full multicoating, having a large ocular, super fast euro style focusing, and minimum eye relief also help.
So pick a top brand with a 50-56mm objective which is fully multicoated.
You need to keep in mind that if you have lost much of your night vision, even the best scopes to you won't work much better than the smaller stuff. E

I've a hard time thinking a bushnell beats an S, with a big end, set on 5-6 x..... I"ve yet to see a clear B, at the end of the day or after sunset that would impress me.

But we all know, YMMV.