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

[Tl15]

I never bought a Polar because I demand illuminated reticles for hunting black pigs in dark brush and the ridiculously stupid seperate illumination control that S&B uses confounds mounting the scope easily and looks incredibly impractical. When they fix that, I would consider buying one just to see what the fuss is about.

As to the Magnus, if you go by the product literature, the Fortis actually surpasses the Magnus line now in theoretical performance. That tracks considering how old the Magnus design is.

 

[KenLee]

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.

ER5 3-15x56 is just as good with light as the same VX5 HD, and more dependable. Amplus is a little better and has illumination.

 

[stevevan]

ER5 3-15x56 is just as good with light as the same VX5 HD, and more dependable. Amplus is a little better and has illumination.

Guess my experience is different. I have 3 of the 3.5-15x50 Leica Amplus6 scopes and they work real well past legal shooting light.

 

[KenLee]

Guess my experience is different. I have 3 of the 3.5-15x50 Leica Amplus6 scopes and they work real well past legal shooting light.

What did I say that was different than your experience?

 

[ChrisAU]

I used a 50mm Amplus 6 some last season and looked through a 56mm on a friends rifle. I can't fathom anything being noticeably better to the point that a no-shot scenario becomes a dead animal.