Low light scope expectations. How much better are they than the Leica I might return?

[Spoobs]

After 3 years of whitetail hunting with my father's rifle setup in dense misty forest, I realized It's finally time I get a nice setup of my own. What I greatly desired is a scope that performed well in low light, often foggy dense forest, providing wide FOV and exceptional clarity+contrast at low to mid magnification.

Discount season is upon us and after moderate research I picked up a Leica Amplus 6 2.5-15x56i being as it was at a price I was comfortable spending and I figured it was gonna be miles better than my fathers 50mm vortex hr/ls. I must say, it's for sure the best scope ive ever looked through. It's absolutely beautiful, however the one area I was really hoping to see a huge improvement on was low light performance. It's better for sure than what I'm used to, but my $300 porro prism 8x32 binoculars offer better low light imaging than the Amplus.

I'm somewhat torn on whether or not I should return the Leica while I can. If I do I could either try a Meostar R1 for a few hundred more or pony up for a T96 Polar 2-10x50 which will add on another $700 onto what I already thought was a splurg purchase. Being as I've not looked through a true "low light" scope, I wonder if I have unrealistic expectations on what a low light scope experience is really like and cost myself a hefty amount for extremely diminished returns that still won't give me what I want.

The past few years I often had to return from a hunt 30-45 minutes before legal shooting hours end as I can no longer make out difining features that make a deer legal. I'd like to change that if it's possible. Do I have unrealistic expectations?

 

[hereinaz]

There's no free lunch, and if there isn't enough light, there just isn't enough light. You've got to spend more money to get better light transmission, and stick with the 56mm objective scopes.

There is so much debate and personal bias as to what is good/better, its hard for me to sift through purchases too. If it were me, I would return it and take time to test some other scopes before next season. Watch classifieds to make your money go further. And, you can buy and sell and not feel like you are losing as much money as buying new.

 

[Southern Lights]

Binos will always outperform scopes, even if the objectives are smaller. This is because your brain works better using two eyes vs. one.

I've looked through a good number of 56mm scopes and honestly once over a certain price they are all about the same. Light gathering is basically aperture size and there is just a limit to what size you can mount on a rifle. 56mm is about it. A 50mm scope is not going to outperform a 56mm scope if in the same price class. Coatings can't outperform aperture.

The best tip for using a scope at night is to keep the mag set on the lowest setting. I also never turn on the illumination. Even with the red light which is regarded as preserving night vision, many reticles are far too bright and will hurt your light adaption still. Other factors also are how much moonlight is there, etc. There is no magic bullet.

At some point you just have to put on the IR/thermal but probably not legal to use in deer season I suspect for most people. But good on you also for knowing your limits and not trying to shoot at targets you can't ID 100% in bad light.

 

[ropeup79]

Also, poro binos have fewer and simpler lense set ups than a variable power scope.

 

[RockAndSage]

These guys are out of Europe and sell optics - their evaluation on low-light performance seems pretty solid. They speak highly of the Polar, but the video in general seems worth watching:

 

[Macintosh]

Several years ago I worked with some Norwegian guys who liked to hunt at night. They said they all used fixed power scopes with a 56mm objective. But they all said they looked for brighter conditions too, it’s not a thermal. I dont hunt at night, but for my own use sky conditions and tree cover has a lot to do with it, as does the reticle. I think you’d really need to do a side by side comparison to be able to tell in a meaningful way.

Also, maybe someone can chime in on this. Somewhere I had read that any scope has a magnification setting that maximizes the amount of light coming in, which was not always lowest magnification. Does anyone know for sure how this works and maybe even how to figure? Im not sure my eyes are objective enough to tell.

 

[RockAndSage]

Several years ago I worked with some Norwegian guys who liked to hunt at night. They said they all used fixed power scopes with a 56mm objective. But they all said they looked for brighter conditions too, it’s not a thermal. I dont hunt at night, but for my own use sky conditions and tree cover has a lot to do with it, as does the reticle. I think you’d really need to do a side by side comparison to be able to tell in a meaningful way.

Also, maybe someone can chime in on this. Somewhere I had read that any scope has a magnification setting that maximizes the amount of light coming in, which was not always lowest magnification. Does anyone know for sure how this works and maybe even how to figure? Im not sure my eyes are objective enough to tell.

The magnification setting relates to exit pupil. The human eye's pupil dilates to about 8mm, IIRC, at maximum with healthy, young eyes. With an optic, the diameter of the beam of light coming back to the eye is the exit pupil, essentially. Anything less than 8mm means you're getting less light than is optimal, into your eye. Anything more is just not picked up. You calculate exit pupil by taking the front, objective lens' diameter, and dividing it by the magnification. So, an 8x scope with a 56mm objective would have an exit pupil of 7mm. Fixed power scopes may have more opportunity for clearer/better light transmission by having fewer lenses (not really sure about this), but with a variable power scope, you just dial the magnification up or down until you get the brightest clarity.

 

[Long Cut]

8x56mm S&B with the thick German A7 reticle seems to be the “best”…

I’d stick with Schmidt & Bender with the German 4 reticle or the P4 reticle. Polar 3-12x54; Zenith or Kassic 2-10x56 would be the offerings I’d gravitate towards.

Trijicon Accupoint 2.5-10x56 would be another one that I would consider if the S&B’s are out of your price range.

Binos will always outperform rifelscopes in low light. Just is what it is unfortunately

 

[ghostrider272]

There's always the older Swarovski PH 2.5-10x56 if you can find one...

 

[Spoobs]

Took some time to really digest the info and suggestions before making a hasty response. I do appreciate your input.

You've got to spend more money to get better light transmission, and stick with the 56mm objective scopes.

There is so much debate and personal bias as to what is good/better, its hard for me to sift through purchases too. If it were me, I would return it and take time to test some other scopes before next season. Watch classifieds to make your money go further. And, you can buy and sell and not feel like you are losing as much money as buying new.

First post best post, I think this is likely what best way forward for my situation, I just don't have personal experience of what "quality low light specific glass" really is. Reading other users reports and comparisons is difficult without any experience of my own to relate to.

Binos will always outperform scopes, even if the objectives are smaller. This is because your brain works better using two eyes vs. one.

I've looked through a good number of 56mm scopes and honestly once over a certain price they are all about the same. Light gathering is basically aperture size and there is just a limit to what size you can mount on a rifle. 56mm is about it. A 50mm scope is not going to outperform a 56mm scope if in the same price class. Coatings can't outperform aperture.

The best tip for using a scope at night is to keep the mag set on the lowest setting. I also never turn on the illumination. Even with the red light which is regarded as preserving night vision, many reticles are far too bright and will hurt your light adaption still. Other factors also are how much moonlight is there, etc. There is no magic bullet.

Also, poro binos have fewer and simpler lense set ups than a variable power scope.

Well if this is truly the case, I don't know if I can really do much better than the Amplus. If another $700 splits the difference between the amplus and my porros then it doesn't sound like it's worth the investment. I'd still like to see a T96 or Leica Magnus in person however.

The magnification setting relates to exit pupil. The human eye's pupil dilates to about 8mm, IIRC, at maximum with healthy, young eyes. With an optic, the diameter of the beam of light coming back to the eye is the exit pupil, essentially. Anything less than 8mm means you're getting less light than is optimal, into your eye. Anything more is just not picked up. You calculate exit pupil by taking the front, objective lens' diameter, and dividing it by the magnification. So, an 8x scope with a 56mm objective would have an exit pupil of 7mm. Fixed power scopes may have more opportunity for clearer/better light transmission by having fewer lenses (not really sure about this), but with a variable power scope, you just dial the magnification up or down until you get the brightest clarity.

This is more or less the consistent information I've been getting through research. Glad to see it reaffirmed.
-Objective lens size
-Less overall glass and lenses for the light to pass through
-Lens Coating Properties (more light transmission in blue/green frequencies)
-Large exit pupil

8x56mm S&B with the thick German A7 reticle seems to be the “best”…

I’d stick with Schmidt & Bender with the German 4 reticle or the P4 reticle. Polar 3-12x54; Zenith or Kassic 2-10x56 would be the offerings I’d gravitate towards.

Trijicon Accupoint 2.5-10x56 would be another one that I would consider if the S&B’s are out of your price range.

Binos will always outperform rifelscopes in low light. Just is what it is unfortunately

I've seen a few zenith's for sale on second hand sites/classifieds that are close to my comfortable price point. I'd still pony up for the T96 or Leica Magnus if I ever got to look through one and could see the differences/quality in person.

There's always the older Swarovski PH 2.5-10x56 if you can find one...

This is one model I didn't come across before your suggestion. I haven't been able to see any for sale but I've been keeping an eye out.


Currently the T96 and Leica Magnus are my most interested in optics.

 

[Mtank79]

A couple weeks ago europtic had some of the t96 marked way down. I’m not sure how the glass in the Leica er5 compares to the amplus but, I have a er5 4x20x50 & a leupold vx5hd 3x15x56. The vx5hd is the better low light & through the magnification range.

 

[Spoobs]

A couple weeks ago europtic had some of the t96 marked way down. I’m not sure how the glass in the Leica er5 compares to the amplus but, I have a er5 4x20x50 & a leupold vx5hd 3x15x56. The vx5hd is the better low light & through the magnification range.

They are currently still on sale. I've been heavily looking for weeks, even before I bought the Amplus. The cheapest option is $1750 for the 2.5-10x50, and $1850 for the 3-12x54. Lookin around 2 grand for a god-tier scope. What's interesting is that schmidtundbender removed those two scope SKU's from their website. Either they are having issues with their site or it was deliberately removed. If deliberate, I wonder if they are discontinuing it.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

This thread might give you some ideas:

Low light comparison of 17 scopes

There are always constant threads of discussions about “glass”, low light use, etc of scopes here. The last couple of week I have gotten many more questions about it (due I believe to SWFA being back in stock), so while working with a couple of scopes on other things, I brought out 10 different...

rokslide.com