I recently bought a Leupold VXII 2.5-8 riflescope, then today I bought a Burris Fullfield II 3-9X40 riflescope.

This evening, I tested these as well as 2 Denver Redfields, a no-name 3-9X40 (that came on a Marlin X7 .243) and two scopes made in Belarus - an 8x with a post and crosshair and a 10X42 with plex type retical. I also had a 1.5-4.5x Bushnell Turkey scope.

I sat outside and waited for darkness to fall to see which scope would be usable with the least light.

The Bushnell Turkey scope was the first to go, then the 10x Belarus scope, then the 8X Belarus and 2-7x Redfield Widefield. The 4X Redfield and the no-name scope went next

This left only the Leupold and the Burris. The Burris lasted about a minute longer than the Leupold, because of the thicker crosshairs. There was only about 9 minutes from the time that the Bushnell lost it's effectiveness util I could no longer use the Burris.

An interesting experiment. At what stage would you have been unable to distinguish a dunn target animal safely?

My guess is the safe identification of a target is likely to be lost before the bars of a German #1 reticle disappear.

I don't think there's such a think as a VXII in 2.5x8. Are you sure it's not a VX III? VXII's in that power range were either 2x7 or 3x9.

Labman,
You are correct. the 2.5-8x Leupold is a VXIII, (I just failed to type enough "I"s.)

I did a low light test on a couple of scopes on an antelope hunt last year. I had a Leupold VX-3 4.5-14x40 and my dad had a Swarovski Z6 1.7-10x42. As it was just starting to get a little bit light on opening morning we looked through both of them at 10X and the difference between the 2 was incredible. The Swarovski was by far way brighter than the Leupold. I had figured I would notice some difference but nothing like that. I was impressed enough that now my main hunting rifle has a Z6 1.7-10 on it and I order a Z3 3-10x42 for another rifle. I recently did another test between the Z3 and Z6 in low light and couldn't really tell any discernable difference between the two.

I've used the Redfield 2-7 since 1980, and it always lost the ability to see when legal shooting time ended. I always figured it kept me legal.

Now, however, I thought a brighter scope would help me. I was surprised that the Leupold VXIII and the Burris didn't outperform the old Redfield any more than they did. They only gave 3-4 minutes more of shooting light than the Redfield 2-7. The 4X Redfield (bought in about 1982) was only 2-3 minutes behind the Leupold and Burris.

Testing Leupold VXII, Burris and Redfield for low light performance is like testing toilet paper for water resistance.

Too true dat!

The new Leupold VX-6 HD would be an interesting comparison to the EuroTrash.

Acording to my barb wire fence at the end of my pasture, about 500 yards, I check scopes to see the barbs..None will early morn or late evening but the Leupold "fixed powers" are best up to 200 yards. Im not going to shoot past 100 in any low light situation.. I have tested most American scopes..

Never shoot an animal in the evening under near dark conditions, I don't know of a better way to lose an animal..

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Im not going to shoot past 100 in any low light situation.. I have tested most American scopes..

Never shoot an animal in the evening under near dark conditions, I don't know of a better way to lose an animal..

This logic works for me. It is probably possible for someone shooting down from a European High seat to make a surgical shot at a nearby animal, in poor light, but this does not apply where I live.