There may not be such a scope that is light in weight and have good low light optics. I hunt Roe deer in Romania and mostly use my Blaser K95 in 270 Win in the mountains for this. During some times, like early season in May, the bucks come out real late. This rifle now has a Ziess 3x9x40 Conquest and it is very nice to carry, I would rather not mount a very heavy (over 20 ounces) scope on it and destroy the fine handling qualities that this rifle was made for. In low light I tested a Leupold VX-2 and a Meopta Meopro 6x42 against the Conquest. Through these 70 year old eyes the Conquest barely beat out the VX-2 and the Meopta barely bettered the Conquest. By barely, I had to look through them 10 times to try to discern a difference. I have the #4 reticle in the Meopta and the fine center cross hairs of it disappear when you can still see the Duplex type cross hairs of the Leupold and Ziess.
What do you guys think about the Leupold VXR 3x9x50? The weight would be about the same as the Conquest, "should" be better in low light and it has an illuminated reticle. I would like to hear from those that have had experience with this scope and I would like other suggestions that might work for me. Thanks, RJ

Swarovski Z3 4-12x50 #4a reticle . VXR dot is almost too bright in lowlight conditions for me

My Leupold VX-5 3-15X56 beat my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 by six minutes on deer antlers 131 yards away in the woods. The Swarovski z8i 2.7-18X56 beat that by another fourteen minutes!

Take a look at the Trijicon Accupoint line of scopes.

The 8x56mm is the classic European low light scope. I think Schmidt & Bender has one model with a one inch diameter but the weight is not listed. A fixed scope has less elements so usually is clearer and brighter than a comparable variable and lighter. The Trijicon scopes looked good to me but have not used them in the field. Some of the Kahles were excellent in low light but were heavier due to the steel tubes. This can be said of most of the European Scopes.

The Leupold certainly wouldn't be a bad choice. Test them personally if you can as vision varies. In my comparisons the Conquest was closer to the Leupold VX-3 (older version) not the VX-2 as an example. Actually better in normal light but had a very slight blue cast that may have affected very low light clarity.

Check out the Vortex razor hd lh I got one here and it is very nice glass is better than my swarovski av and the dot in the center of the g4 reticle might work perfect for your needs.

If you can find a Swarovski 6x42 PF the are amazing. Great in low light and about 12 oz

You need to look for the posts by BobbyTomek. He's put a lot of time and money into low light field trials of different scopes.

I think I saw that Leopold had a VX II 2 to 8 power that only weighs11 ounces. I would take a look at that! Those small single shot rifles look at out of scale with a big oil can scope on them! I hope to get a Merkel k3 this year and I’m looking at scopes that are small and lightweight.

Mackey

Gentlemen, thanks for your opinions and info. With a fixed, I'd rather not go over 6 or 7 power, for possibilities of a close shot. I may look a bit for the Swaro 6x42 PF. If a variable, I certainly do not need over 10x as 300 yds. is long range to me. I have a couple of extra scope mounts for my K95 so I could put a oversize scope in one of them and just use it on the rifle for hunts that have a good possibility of action late in the evening. These mounts take you right back to zero when you swap them. RJ

So light weight really doesn't have to be considered?

I would look for one of the 3-12X50 Leica ERi scopes. They are still a few around at close out prices.

Bludog, Yes weight is a consideration. I will not put a scope on the K95 that weighs over 20 oz., 16 would be better.

I have a question to those that know. I think I understand the technical aspects of "Exit Pupil" pertaining to a rifle scope. I have "read" that for someone over 50 years old, the pupils of their eyes will not dilate enough to take advantage of the light of a scope with a 5mm exit pupil. I am almost 70 years old so I would probably not benefit from a scope offering more than a 5mm exit pupil. Correct? Now, here is the question.

If I have 2 3x9 scopes, exactly the same size, brand and glass quality, the only thing being different is one has a 40mm objective lens and one has a 50mm objective lens and the scopes are set on 8x, the image brightness would be no better (with my 69+ eyes) on the 50mm scope than on the 40mm scope. Is my thinking correct about this or flawed?

Also, I understand, that in a low light situation, when you increase the power magnification setting, the image does not actually get brighter but appears to because the increased magnification allows you to see detail somewhat better. Is this also true? Thanks, RJ

Correct.

You understand the basic issue well. But it is not cut and dried. My 63+ year old eyes are an example. When I compared several Leupold 6x scopes, 6x36 and 6x42, side by side at dusk, I can see a small difference in brightness, enough that in very low light situations I can use the larger objective to good effect. For me, it’s just that the difference is not dramatic. I suspect most folks 55+ years old would see little difference in a side by side comparison of the scopes you mention.

When I was getting cataracts, before the operation, a 50mm scope aided me tremendously. miles

You could be seeing a difference due to a slight upgrade in glass in the 6x42 vs the 36.

And to rj's question, if a Meopta 6x and a Zeiss Conquest 3-9 aren't giving you adequate low light performance, I'd expect you're going to have to spend a significant amount more to really see an improvement. My wife and I had an impromptu scope test while we were sitting on our front deck a couple of nights ago and saw a big doe about 300 yards away. She was not visible to the naked eye by the time we finished comparing scopes. We tested a 2-12 VX-6, a 3-9 Conquest and a 3-9 Trijicon Accupoint. The Accupoint came in last, the Zeiss and the VX-6 were about even with the final nod going to the Leupie due to the lit reticle. So, having no experience with any higher end glass than this, I'd suggest an illuminated reticle scope, maybe a VX-5 or 6. Good luck in your efforts.

My Hawke 30mm 8x56 weighs 22 ounces, quite a beast. Mounted on a Ruger 1V that's already an anvil, it's staying at the bench. The extra-high rings add a bit too. I also have a VX3i 3.5-10x40 setup in rings for when I want to go light(!).

OP,

If you can see the deer, just not the reticle, an illuminated one may help a good bit, if it can be adjusted so as to be visible, but not blinding. The Leupold Mark AR Mod1 I had was easy to set just right for whatever conditions I was dealing with. I kept it lit even in the daylight because it drew my eye to the center of the somewhat busy reticle. Not sure, but the VX-R looks to have the same setup, but with a red light instead of green.

Positively. Repeatable.

You are correct on both points. However the 50mm will have a larger "sweet spot" and may prove to be more forgiving as to gun/eye position and could be faster for target acquisition. All of these are very subjective.

As someone else pointed out you might have to spend a considerable amount more to gain a small increase in performance. Another option might be to go to a red dot or holographic scope. These look too Star Wars to me on a classic rifle but they are good in low light and excellent for driven boar. They are very light weight and If I were hunting boar at night I would consider them.

The Swarovsky 6x42 would be the front runner for me. Light weight and low light performance are often contradictory but the 6x would be a great compromise choice. Then look into a honking big scope or lighted type for low light back up. The usual enabler response get two or three different scopes.

Thanks for your responses. I will not be hunting driven boar with the K95, as I have dedicated rifles for that. I use the K95 for Roe deer and an occasional fox. I believe I will go with an illuminated reticle and a larger than 40mm objective and try to keep the weight under 20 oz. RJ

Optics are so much better than they were just 20 years ago. Wal Mart special scope names, in particular Bushnell, now have some really great scopes - easy to zero, maintains zero, returns to zero, adjustments are accurate and repeatable and the glass on almost all scopes offered looks great in the daylight. Small differences, costing us thousands of dollars more to obtain, may not amount to anything more than 5 to 10 minutes of extra shooting time at dawn and dusk.

308 -
You owe it to yourself to look through a 6 x 42 Schmidt Bender. Doug has a sweet deal on a custom batch coming in from Germany. If you do enough searching S&Bs Hungary factory made are lower cost but I prefer the German made.

Have you looked at a 8x56 Docter? With a illuminated reticle, it weighs 550 grams.

DryPowder, yes I did. On their own website and most websites that sell them, the eye relief spec. I finally found a site that gave the eye relief and now I know why it is not listed on most sites. For the 8x56 and many other Docter scopes, the eye relief is 3". That's a no-go. All else is very good but the 3" eye relief just doesn't cut it for me. That scope was on my short list until I found that out. RJ

My Leupold VX-6 2-12 fire dot is a vast improvement in low light from the VX-3's and VX-III's I had been using. So much that I picked up two more! I agree the fire dot is a handy feature.

I have a 1-6 VX6 mounted on 3 hunting rifles. They are pretty amazing in low light. They are the brightest scopes I own. They are a huge difference over a VX3 to my eyes.

Some are 80mm, which is not surprising for a european scope. I believe the V6's are 95mm.

With 40mm objective scopes, you should really give a close look to Vortex Razor HD LH 2-10x40. It is a really nice design.

If you are having problems with reticle visibility, your best bet is an illuminated reticle design. There are not that many of these that are light weight, with Leupold doing some good things there, particularly in the VX-5HD line-up. 2-10x42 is very nice with a good reticle illumination in FIreDot guise. In terms of optics overall, I think I like Razor HD LH a litle more though.

Another interesting option Is Delta Titanium 1.5-9x45. The reticle is very visible and illumination is done well. I have not spent too much time with it yet, but I like what I am seeing so far. It may be a touch heavy for you, but it is a nice scope.

ILya

I don’t have that exact scope, but I do have a Leupold VX-R 3-9x40 with the Ballistic Firedot reticle (their item number 111236). I got it because I wanted an illuminated reticles for hunting in western Washington after I went on the hunt described here: https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11623852/First_Elk,_First_Roosevelt

This scope has a 30mm tube, actual magnification is 3.3x-8.6x, and the optical quality, smoothness of operation, and precision are typical for Leupold.

Reticle dimensions are about right for a hunting scope designed for use in low light. The dot is 1 MOA at 8.6x and 2.5 MOA at 3.3x. It appears as a short red vertical line, not as a circle or square. It’s bright enough to see in daylight on low settings. I wear glasses and I have astigmatism so the dot flares on the brighter settings. This is not a flaw in the scope; reducing the brightness fixes it. It’s hard to find truly dark situations around here since I’m in a major West Coast city, but the dimmest settings would probably be fine in very low light.
• The horizontal crosswire tapers from a fairly heavy base to the same thickness as the dot, which could pose a challenge for hitting very small targets past about 100 yards.
• The circle’s interior diameter is 4.4 MOA at 9x.
• The circle’s line width is 0.4 MOA at 9x.
• The distance from the dot to the top of the circle is 2.19 MOA at 9x.
• The distance from the dot to the bottom of the circle is 2.19 MOA at 9x.
• The distance from the dot to the middle hash mark is 4.8 MOA at 9x.
• The distance from the dot to the lowest hash mark is 7.82 MOA at 9x.

I tested this scope on a couple of rifles including a Tikka 30-06. The only ammo I had in bulk was Greek DCM ammo loaded for the M-1 Garand, but it averages 1.3 MOA in this rifle and shot better than I expected all the way out to 400m (437 yards). With this load, the bottom of the circle worked as a POA at 300m (328 yards), and POI was just barely below the middle hash mark at 400m. It was easy to get hits on 6” steel targets at both ranges, even when the barrel got hot—I even had no trouble hitting a gong partially concealed in the grass—but I couldn’t hit anything beyond that. This is not the fault of the scope or the ammo, but of the shooter. I need to firm up my zero and shoot some paper between 400 and 500m to figure out the drops.

Conclusions
• The Leupold VX-R 3-9x40 is a good scope. I wanted an illuminated reticle and some ranging ability, which I got just not in the manner that Leupold implied or advertised. That said, I respect the Ballistic Firedot’s ranging properties. I still haven’t figured out the 500m holdover, but I’ll get there.
• I’ll hunt with the power ring at the low end. If I have time to assume a solid position for a long shot, then I’ll push it to the high end. I’ve hunted with 4x scopes for nearly 40 years, including a lot of close fast shots in the dripping forests of western Washington and very long shots in open country on the Edwards Plateau in Texas. I just don’t see using the middle of the range much.
• The Ballistic Firedot is a decent general-purpose reticle once you figure it out and get the right zero. Most experienced shooters would choose something more versatile (like the Leupold TMOA) for regular use in very open country or anywhere that the wind is a problem.

The 3-9x50 might be better for really low light, but I can't say from experience.

Hope this helps. Let me know if you have questions.


Okie John

Hi Ron,

Horia has that older Zeiss 6x42 with a German 1 that came on that .243. The glass was still was nice to my eyes and that reticle might not disappear on you ... How does that look to your eyes?

When I lived in Sweden a lot of our boar hunting from stand was done at night with a Zeiss Diavari(?) 1.5-6x42 illuminated. It was a nice fit on the K95 in 6.5x55 and Heym SR30 in 30-06. We took many pigs in the pitch black of early winter before the snows came. Many a roebucks also fell in those last few minutes where lesser scopes or non-illuminated models would have not performed as well.

For the money I think the mentioned VXR might be a safe bet but I would personally look for second hand - higher end illuminated Euro glass.