Has anyone used a Leupold with an illuminated reticle, especially the VX-3's?

I would like to know also. I am about to purchase one for my new rifle.

My big field rifle last season had a 3.5x1x50 illum ret. scope on it. It was great for late evening shooting. At a minimum it will give 15 minutes more hunting in the afternoon. Keep the power as low as you can, I set mine at 3 to start & as it gets darker go up in power.

Tom,
Does the scope have a regular rectilce or crosshair when the illumination is off? All the pics I have seen were with the illumination on.

Biggest problem I have is remembering to turn off the power, or it getting turned on by accident. Be sure and pick up a couple of extra batteries to put in your possibles bag.
GWB

I've got one in a 6.5-20 Mk 4. Reticle is a normal mil dot with it turned off, and it's a red one with it turned on.

Whilst I've found it useful as it gets into the evening, I'd really prefer it to be on a smaller scope for that use. It does come in handy at the range though, as it makes it much easier to see the crosshairs on some of the targets.

the cross hairs on mine are simular to duplex but the center part is much thinner then the regular dupexs when they are cut off. They work fine in normal light situations, I carry several spare batteries in my fanny pack but did not use them last year..I plan to use the same scope next year but since I'm a truner it will be on a custom m70 next year rather than a custom m700 last year..you know always looking for perfection.

I do not have the Leupold. I do have an illluminated ATN. I purchased it for a bear hunt over bait. In the end, I didn't need it.

A couple of observations. The larger the reticle, the more resolution in low light (all other things being equal). Put another way, if the reticle is illuminated, then you want a scope that is at least 50mm.

The illuminated reticle is not going help resolution. However, I can remember too many past up shots over the years while hunting deer, when I lost the reticle. In those cases, the illuminated scope would have resulted in more deer in the freezer.

During my bear hunt, one evening, I did have a large bear come to the bait. I could not see the bear with my naked eye, it was that dark. I gently turned the illuminated reticle on. It would have been an easy shot. Because now, I could see the bear and the cross hairs. That bear was too good at the game, though. He never presented a decent shot. Finally, I simply ran out of time for a legal shot.

It really depends on what you will be hunting, the style and location of the hunt. Just be sure when you pull the trigger that you are shooting during legal hours.

Would I buy the ATN again? NO! I would take a long look at the Leupold instead.

There is a fundamental conflict with an illuminated reticle and low-light shooting: If the reticle is illuminated to allow you to better see it, then your eye pupil will necessarily retract somewhat in response to the extra light, thus impairing your ability to see the target. In other words, which do you prefer to be able to see: The target or the reticle?

Simply using a heavier reticle for low-light situations is likely a more effective soloution. It allows you to see both the target and the reticle.

I have used both heavy crosshairs & illuminated for low light, if you use the illuminated feature at the lowest setting for the conditions works better to me.. I cull does out of out food plots in late afternoon light & have tried every upper end scope with both heavy duplex & 4a german in hunting conditions I think that I get 10-15 minutes more hunting time with a leupold 3.5x10x50ill than with a zeiss 3x9x36 or 6x42 scope the scopes I mainly used before.

quote:

Originally posted by tom ga hunter:
if you use the illuminated feature at the lowest setting for the conditions works better to me.. .

You may be correct that if the illumination of the crosshair is very faint you may not suffer any pupil reduction. Still, I think that most people will find seeing the target more challenging than locating the crosshair. After all, the crosshair is right smack dab in the middle of the field of view, and the target is "somewhere" out there in the murkiness.

In the next few weeks I'll have my hunting partner over & we'll do the can you see it test off my back deck with a deer archery target at 200 yds test.. I'll use 1. leupold 3.5x10x50ill, 2. Leupold 4.5x14x50 heavy duplex, 3. Zeiss 6x42 German 4a, 4. Zeiss conquest 3.5x10x42 duplex, 5.Zeiss 3x9x36 german duplex..I have a bunch of other scopes but think these are the best for low light. I will post our hopfully non conflicting results.

All scopes will be set at 6x & I'll use a varixiii 2.5x8 with duplex as a control. any other suggestions? I only have 1" scopes.

tried the test last night at the farm but did not realize that the back light from the kitches would screw up the test, will try again next week.. we are going to change the control to a burris fullview ii 3x9 bali cross hair that I bought for $150.00 on sale.. this is probably a better test for a low vs medium priced scope.

I will also conduct a test. I have a two vxIII's ( 1.5-5) One is Ill, one is not. I will evaluate both and get back to you with my findings.