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

[sdupontjr]

While I don't have a Leica for comparison, my Polar is thr best these eyes have ever looked through. Here in Louisiana we have 30 min before and after sunrise and sunset and i can sit much much later than that and still see. It's not just the glass, the illumination is what sets the Zeiss HT and Polar apart from the rest. The illumination dot is like a pin prick and doesn't overpowered your pupil in low light. In deep timber where I hunt alot, it gets dark fast, we'll before legal light. And i could easily go to jail for hunting past. I have to keep checking my watch just to be on safe side. BUT......


Your gonna pay for it. I decided to buy once, cry once.

 

[Tl15]

Soooo have the Zeis’s been kicked to the curb? Will the Steiner be the dedicated hunting scope?

I am considering it. Just trying to talk myself into being ok with the weight. The thing is a serious chonker.

 

[Spoobs]

I took 5 scopes out with me on my hunt this weekend,

1. Steiner H6Xi 3-18x50 w/ MHR reticle
2. Zeiss V6 3-18x50 w/ zmoa-2
3. Zeiss V4 4-16x50 w/ illum zmoa-1
4. Leica Amplus 6 2.5-15x50 w/ L-ballistic
5. Trijicon Credo HX 2.5-15x42 w/ MOA center

Hunted from elevated box blinds, scope level ~11ft above the ground. First box faces 30 degrees into rising morning sun and is a real test for glare control after 8:30am. Shot opportunity to 95 yards. Second box sits over a 6 acre food plot, maximum shot opportunity ~225yds also with challenging morning sun. Second box also has a 450 yard shot down one of my roads flanked by medium/heavy cover. This lane is north facing, and very shadowy. Aside from direct comparison against each other, I used my Zeiss SF 10x42 binos as a standard reference point for all. From best to worst, I rank below.

1. Steiner H6Xi
2. Leica Amplus 6
3. Zeiss V4
4. Zeiss V6
5. Trijicon Credo HX

The Steiner was far and away optically superior to the other 4 scopes tested this weekend in EVERY category. The glass and coatings are truly impressive. Image is incredibly crisp. It's almost fake news how sharp and how much contrast this optic presents. Image is very bright, and the color rendition very neutral. I had to actively try to get even the slightest bit of glare, spotting, or coating reflection to show up in the field of view. Truly impressive. The reticle really needs to be run at 8x minimum mag to be useful though, but this is expected from a FFP optic and can be overcome easily by flipping on the illumination. Depth of field was also top of this heap. The SF’s binos are arguably the best available at this, and they showed it, but for a riflescope, the Steiner was a surprise. Lastly, the field of view is enormous. At equal magnifications, it outclasses the others handily. Aside from the fact it weighs one metric sh*t-ton, I can't find a single fault with this optic. None.

The Leica Amplus is just a great lineup. I still maintain it is the best all arounder out there right now. It will get you 85% of the optical performance of the Steiner in a lighter package with great warranty. I am also partial to its color presentation over all others, Steiner included. They are a no brainer at $1,000 or less.

Both the Amplus and the V4 only lead the V6 for 2 reasons, which may, or may not be important to you. The first, is the V6’s lack of illumination. For me, this has become a non-negotiable feature. If you don't night hunt, or shoot dark/black colored animals in very low light, throw this objection out the window. Second, Zeiss really blew it with glare control on the V6’s. Facing into any kind of sun, it's like looking into a scope filled with red Christmas lights. It's truly unacceptable performance for a scope in this price range. If you hunt in shade, or have the sun at your back, throw this issue out as well and stick with the V6. Other than that, the glass is fantastic and a joy to look through. Of note, it does have a slight green hue which is noticeable against some backgrounds while the V4 is more neutral. The V4 is a great scope, but lags behind the Leica just a little bit across the board. That said, you can get V4's all day long for $800 or less and there simply isn't a better value proposition going these days.

The Trijicon was more of a just for fun addition. It never actually had a chance against the others from an optical point of view. It really was trounced pretty bad in all categories except glare control. It performed admirably here, right there with the Steiner. Don't buy this because it looks good through the glass, buy this because you can run over it with a truck and still have it hold it's zero. It's truly a tool for anyone that is on a hunt that requires absolute reliability or runs an abusive rifle platform. That’s why I have it.

I should note, all scopes took me FAR beyond legal shooting hours out to 100 yards in shadow. That said, from a low light perspective, I would move the V6 up to second place and preserve the rankings from there.

Considering the Steiner is on sale right now for $1,100 at Eurooptic, assuming the weight isn't an issue for you, buying anything else right now is frankly...dumb.

What an absolute gentleman. Goes out and tests optics for our benefit. The Steiner wasn't on my radar at all, I made an assumption based off the mag ranges and exit pupil that it wasn't optimized for low light at close to mid range. At an equivalent price point to the Amplus coupled with your shared experience and on paper stats, I am highly interested. One thing I cannot find on this scope however is the dimensions. I've realized in my fascination over optic quality I've overlooked that I need to greatly consider mounting position and eye relief. I'm dealing with a long action r700 base on a rifle with a long length of pull, cz 600 in 30-06 to be exact.

 

[Mtank79]

I am considering it. Just trying to talk myself into being ok with the weight. The thing is a serious chonker.

I’m ok with the Steiner weight because I was looking at the swaro x5i @ 30.7 oz

 

[Mtank79]

What an absolute gentleman. Goes out and tests optics for our benefit. The Steiner wasn't on my radar at all, I made an assumption based off the mag ranges and exit pupil that it wasn't optimized for low light at close to mid range. At an equivalent price point to the Amplus coupled with your shared experience and on paper stats, I am highly interested. One thing I cannot find on this scope however is the dimensions. I've realized in my fascination over optic quality I've overlooked that I need to greatly consider mounting position and eye relief. I'm dealing with a long action r700 base on a rifle with a long length of pull, cz 600 in 30-06 to be exact.

The 3x18x50 is listed @ 13.3” on eurooptics.

 

[Tl15]

What an absolute gentleman. Goes out and tests optics for our benefit. The Steiner wasn't on my radar at all, I made an assumption based off the mag ranges and exit pupil that it wasn't optimized for low light at close to mid range. At an equivalent price point to the Amplus coupled with your shared experience and on paper stats, I am highly interested. One thing I cannot find on this scope however is the dimensions. I've realized in my fascination over optic quality I've overlooked that I need to greatly consider mounting position and eye relief. I'm dealing with a long action r700 base on a rifle with a long length of pull, cz 600 in 30-06 to be exact.

I’ve got it mounted on a Christensen Ridgeline FFT right now. They use a 700 clone action and this one is chambered in 6mm Creedmoor. For my body and comfortable cheek weld, this puts me bang on perfect at 18x mag. Still a little bit of space on the tube before you run out of room for mounting before you’d be forced into a rail. The scope ships with Tenebrex caps and the objective will not close on this rig using Talley mediums because of the carbon barrel. A standard sporter profile should be fine.

 

[Mtank79]

I am considering it. Just trying to talk myself into being ok with the weight. The thing is a serious chonker.

My setup ready to hunt is 9lbs on the nose. Ca ridgeline 7 prc 24” factory installed rail, vortex pro rings, ca side baffle brake , vx5hd 3x15x56.

I’ve got it mounted on a Christensen Ridgeline FFT right now. They use a 700 clone action and this one is chambered in 6mm Creedmoor. For my body and comfortable cheek weld, this puts me bang on perfect at 18x mag. Still a little bit of space on the tube before you run out of room for mounting before you’d be forced into a rail. The scope ships with Tenebrex caps and the objective will not close on this rig using Talley mediums because of the carbon barrel. A standard sporter profile should be fine.View attachment 811022

So I have a regular ridgeline 7 prc 24” with vortex pro rings. I had planned to switch to the Hawkins lightweight low rings for if I switch to a scope with 50mm bell.

 

[Spoobs]

I’ve got it mounted on a Christensen Ridgeline FFT right now. They use a 700 clone action and this one is chambered in 6mm Creedmoor. For my body and comfortable cheek weld, this puts me bang on perfect at 18x mag. Still a little bit of space on the tube before you run out of room for mounting before you’d be forced into a rail. The scope ships with Tenebrex caps and the objective will not close on this rig using Talley mediums because of the carbon barrel. A standard sporter profile should be fine.View attachment 811022

Are those talley rings the "extended" version, and can they be installed backwards(ring towards stock, flat foot towards barrel) from your configuration?

My rifle's LOP is 1" longer than yours, and unless im mistaken the scope mount thread spacing difference between the r700 short action and long action is 0.854"/21.7mm.

Assuming my head position is similar to yours (probably an unsafe assumption but the best i got) then if the scope can be shifted back 1" and also accommodate the 0.854 width difference between the short and long action im good.

Otherwise I just use a picatinni rail. Not my preference but I can live with it.