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.

 

[Skydog]

What's your scope budget?

Would like to keep it around $600 or less. Currently, at Optics Planet, the Credo is $597 and the Huron is $489. The more I think about it, the more I am leaning toward the Huron. I'm just not sure if I really want/need the illumination.

 

[Skydog]

Have you thought about an accupoint with illumination and no need for a battery. It uses self adjusting tritium.

The Accupoint is more than what I want to pay and I'm still undecided if I even need/want illumination.

 

[KenLee]

The Accupoint is more than what I want to pay and I'm still undecided if I even need/want illumination.

Gonna kick yourself

 

[Skydog]

Gonna kick yourself

Why? Do you mean...for not going with illumination in general?...or for not considering the Accupoint over the Credo?

 

[KenLee]

The Accupoint is more than what I want to pay and I'm still undecided if I even need/want illumination.

Trijicon AccuPoint 3-9x40 Amber Dot Crosshair Riflescope TR20-1

Trijicon AccuPoint 3-9x40 Amber Dot Crosshair Riflescope TR20-1 | Only at EuroOptic.com!

www.eurooptic.com

 

[KenLee]

Why? Do you mean...for not going with illumination in general?...or for not considering the Accupoint over the Credo?

Both, but I prefer the accupoint. Self adjusting illumination and simple lighted dot vs cross

 

[TxxAgg]

I had a few Accupoints. Sold them and tried the Huron. The Accupoint with green dot is much better in low light than the Huron.

 

[Skydog]

Both, but I prefer the accupoint. Self adjusting illumination and simple lighted dot vs cross

I had a few Accupoints. Sold them and tried the Huron. The Accupoint with green dot is much better in low light than the Huron.

How are the Accupoints/tritium in normal light? How long does the tritium usually last, and what do you do when it eventually does goes dim?

 

[bigsky_hunter]

How are the Accupoints/tritium in normal light? How long does the tritium usually last, and what do you do when it eventually does goes dim?

Just an FYI. The Accupoint 3-9 standard plex has a thickness of 0.5 MOA and the MIL dot reticle has a thickness of about 0.17 MOA. The dot is the same for both at 0.4 MOA. I had the standard duplex accupoint and it was too thick for my liking.

I now have a Huron 3-12x40 and the plex thickness is 0.2 MOA. I used it all season and would have no reservations about making a shot 1/2 hour after sunset. I could see the reticle clearly on deer at 100 yds. For daylight shooting and shooting paper it was thin enough to be precise. If I wanted weight savings and the need for illumination I would get the 3-9 accupoint with MIL reticle.

In daylight the tritium is dimmer and is a non issue. There is also a cover that can be used to control the amount of light let in.

Just checked and the Huron 3-9 with German #4 has duplex at 0.25 MOA and thick bars at 2 MOA. This would be my choice in your budget with what you are looking for it to do.

 

[5811]

Just an FYI. The Accupoint 3-9 standard plex has a thickness of 0.5 MOA and the MIL dot reticle has a thickness of about 0.17 MOA. The dot is the same for both at 0.4 MOA. I had the standard duplex accupoint and it was too thick for my liking.

I now have a Huron 3-12x40 and the plex thickness is 0.2 MOA. I used it all season and would have no reservations about making a shot 1/2 hour after sunset. I could see the reticle clearly on deer at 100 yds. For daylight shooting and shooting paper it was thin enough to be precise. If I wanted weight savings and the need for illumination I would get the 3-9 accupoint with MIL reticle.

In daylight the tritium is dimmer and is a non issue. There is also a cover that can be used to control the amount of light let in.

Just checked and the Huron 3-9 with German #4 has duplex at 0.25 MOA and thick bars at 2 MOA. This would be my choice in your budget with what you are looking for it to do.

The accupoint reticle is definitely thicker. It's not going to stop you from shooting sub-moa groups on paper, but it feels less precise. For a set and forget dark/woodland scope, I think it would be tough to beat. Especially having adjustable illumination and no batteries or extra weight.

 

[omicron1792]

I have had my eye on the Steiner H6xi 2-12x42. I think that reticle is an attempt to do what the OP is pushing for. Those thick lines would most likely direct your eye toward center on low light at low power. My only issue with it is that the top of the vertical post should be more like 2or 3 moa from center not 1 moa. I hunted with a Trijicon that had a triangle on top of a post and hated how it distracted field of view. And the MIL version is a complete joke with those .1 mil hash marks. Other than that it is really well built and relatively light @ 23-24 oz. Don’t know if it will hold zero.

Edit: I got my reticle mixed up. I was thinking of the Burris veracity ph2 scope reticle when I stated the above. The Steiner mhr moa looks better to me. I would say maybe though that it is much too thin on the outer stadia though for low light.

I love mine. About to pick up a second one.

 

[Skydog]

Just checked and the Huron 3-9 with German #4 has duplex at 0.25 MOA and thick bars at 2 MOA. This would be my choice in your budget with what you are looking for it to do.

For the Huron, why would you prefer the German #4 over the Standard Duplex?

FYI...I'm not interested in the BDC Hunter Hold, MOA/MIL-Dot, Triangle Post, etc.

 

[bigsky_hunter]

The accupoint reticle is definitely thicker. It's not going to stop you from shooting sub-moa groups on paper, but it feels less precise. For a set and forget dark/woodland scope, I think it would be tough to beat. Especially having adjustable illumination and no batteries or extra weight.

Your right, it didn't hinder me from killing a deer, antelope and coyote that fall. For me though it was too thick especially with other options available. I would still have it if it had the same dimensions as the MIL version. For a more budget friendly alternative, the Huron would be my pick. Under lighting you should be shooting in both the accupoint and Huron will get the job done.

 

[bigsky_hunter]

For the Huron, why would you prefer the German #4 over the Standard Duplex?

FYI...I'm not interested in the BDC Hunter Hold, MOA/MIL-Dot, Triangle Post, etc.

Only reason I recommended MIL was thinner duplex measurements, nothing to do with holdover.

German #4 has thicker outer lines and draws the eye to the middle if last light shooting is a concern. To be honest though, I doubt there is enough difference between standard duplex and #4 to make you miss a shot. It would depend more on your own preference.

 

[Macintosh]

For a scope to be used in busy background and low light I strongly prefer the accupoint duplex over the thinner credo duplex. But again, for me thats more a function of vegetation and busyness within the field of view than it is strictly low light. If I hunted in open country more I would likely have a different preference. Earlier when I said I used to own a credo, the replacement is an accupoint with the thicker duplex reticle. Imo its an improvement if a bold reticle is a priority.
I think trijicon says the tritium will last 15 years—I may be wrong but thats my recollection. Thats in addition to the fiber optic function. Its not even clear to me that for my use the tritium is all that important.

 

[Skydog]

Only reason I recommended MIL was thinner duplex measurements, nothing to do with holdover.

German #4 has thicker outer lines and draws the eye to the middle if last light shooting is a concern. To be honest though, I doubt there is enough difference between standard duplex and #4 to make you miss a shot. It would depend more on your own preference.

Thank you for the clarification.