Low light comparison of 10 scopes

[prm]

Thanks for taking the time, however it would have been nice if a few Leupolds were in the line-up as most know their glass is quite good. Most think Leupold could do better in the reliability segment, but perhaps the others could also learn a few things about superior optical quality and reticle design from Leupold. You have to see it to be able to hit it. Maybe next time be a bit fairer in that line-up for everyone's benefit, including those that like Leupold. I'm betting a dollar to a donut Leupold would have shined quite well in comparison....but RS could never give any credit to a manufacturer they absolutely hate. They wouldn't want to have to send a note along to SWFA to up their game in optical quality. It might raise the price of a SWFA to over 300 bucks...LOL.

FWIW, I have done a number of low light comparisons that included some basic Leupolds (FX-II 6x, 2.5-8x36, 3-9) where the other scopes were Burris FFII, SWFA 6x and 3-9, a few different Vortex and a few others. The Leupolds were no better or worse than the others. Smaller obj lenses did a little worse, ~40mm did just fine. They tend to have forgiving eyeboxes. Like every other brand, their thin reticles disappear earlier than bolder variants against dark backgrounds or amongst dark branches in heavy timber. I certainly don’t hate Leupold. I’ve bought a number of them. When compared across a number of metrics they simply have not stood out.

 

[KenLee]

Heavy duplex reticles were available in several VX models until about 5 years ago. Gave you an additional 10-15 minutes early and late in a 50mm.
I don't know if leupold will swap out to those heavy duplex reticles for a fee now.

 

[Fatcamp]

Heavy duplex reticles were available in several VX models until about 5 years ago. Gave you an additional 10-15 minutes early and late in a 50mm.
I don't know if leupold will swap out to those heavy duplex reticles for a fee now.

I don't think the custom shop even exists any more.