Like you, I have no ties to Leupold or any other manufacturer. I post this as a strong reference for the Leupold VXR illuminated scopes.

For a very long time I had 20/10 vision…went to 20/15…am now at 20/20 and pleased with that being 70 yo. I say that because I believe the mid and upper level Zeiss scopes I’ve happily owned are a bit sharper in defining detail than the Leupold VX3’s I’ve looked thru and shot. Same for the Leica’s I currently own. Out of 10, for my eyes, I’d put the Zeiss and Leicas at 9.5…and the VXR at 9.0. As my vision is not as sharp anymore and especially in rapidly fading light, that’s when the VXR scopes really earn their keep.

Over decades of hunting, compared to my Leupolds, my Zeiss and Leica scopes have given me noticeably more time to shoot when the light went down hard. Not so anymore when the red fire-dot comes on. Now…if I have to choose a scope in those very, very last few minutes, I’ll take that fire dot on low. The very slight difference in scope clarity under these conditions, IMO, does not surpass the superiority of that tiny fire dot to place your bullet with precision under very trying conditions. My opinion comes directly from the field and game on the ground, not keyboard experience.

There are many, many good references on these scopes all over the net so I won’t repeat them here. I will say this…if you’ve never looked at a fire dot on low in low light conditions…you owe it to yourself to do so. If my VXR’s turn out to be as durable as I think they will, they will be replacing some of my other “top end” scopes. Not kidding, the VXR fire dot truly is a wonderful thing for the hunter at very early and very last light. The clarity of your animal in the higher end scope at near dark may be fractionally better but never again will the center of your cross hairs disappear. Me? I’ll gladly trade the very slight clarity difference for being able to put that red dot exactly where I want it.

And for those who say it can be too bright in low light conditions…turn the brightness down!!! I keep mine on a low setting and it’s absolutely wonderful when my crosshairs start to fade into the background.

OK…back to our regular programming. Just thought you’d like to know.

Good to see it is working for you. As an unmitigated Luddite, however, I have to warn you not to get addicted to that light, because one night it may not work and, without some inner fortitude, the shock may cause you to fluff the shot of a lifetime.

Also, don't expect the scope to last too long on any heavy-recoil rifle. Atkinson put the longevity at less than 100 rounds on a 458 Lott.

Good to know.

I intend to use it frugally...fully understand the limitations.

Have put it on my Whelen...not pushing max loads.

I always figured that if the lighted reticle was bright enough to see that it was also bright enough to cause your pupil to restrict, thus negating its efficacy since you might be able to see the reticle, but perhaps no longer able to see the target.

I'll admit that I haven't tried one of the lighted reticles (and at 66 still don't feel the need to), but I can't quite see (no pun intended) how this apparent paradox can be avoided.

Stonecreek-

That used to be the case with many lighted reticles and to an extent still is today, but there are a few that work extremely well and do not adversely affect my vision under moonlight or otherwise low lighting.

Many nights I can't sleep due to pain, other maladies or my meds, so I have spent countless hours assessing scopes with illuminated reticles. For the most part, those that light up with more than just a dot offer -- as a rule -- too much surface area and thus negatively impact your view, just as you have referred to. There are some exceptions, but for the most part, you want nothing more than a dot to illuminate for best results.

The truly good ones adjust so dimly that all you really detect is a subtle hint of color which allows you to precisely place your shot.

The Kahles CSX 3-12x56/4-Dot and Leica Eri 3-12x50/4-a are by far the best I have ever tried, and the Zeiss #60 -- in the Duralyt, Conquest DL, Varippoint and Victory series --runs a close second. The flashdot in the Schmidt Bender Zenith 2.5-10x56 works well, but the dot is a bit larger and I'd prefer it adjusted slightly dimmer, though dialing the FFP scope down to 8x achieves the desired results by reducing the apparent size of the dot to one's eye while still giving ample magnification for moonlight shots in the 150-175 yard range.

The Meopta R1 series offers excellent glass, but the dot was too bright for my liking. When I heard the R2 would have an improved illumination system, I was excited as these are reasonably priced compared to some of the others and gives up precious little to the bigger names in terms of overall optical performance. But the "improvement" to the illumination meant adding an extra setting to the bright end of the spectrum and thus did not help those seeking better low-light performance. (The glass, though, is indeed better than the R1, which is very nice in its own right.)

I have tried a couple of the Leupold VX-R scopes and was impressed. While they are supposed to fall between the VX-2 and VX-3i in terms of optical performance, mine actually equaled (and in one case bettered) the resolving power and edge-to-edge sharpness of a VX-3i. The dot could stand to be a touch dimmer, but it is small, unobtrusive and blends perfectly with the somewhat bolder duplex reticle utilized by the VX-R and VX-6 series. It is likely the best bargain out there in terms of getting a good lighted-reticle scope.

But there is no perfect scope out there for moonlight/low-light shots. Each is different and has its own strengths and weaknesses.

Stone,

I'm not qualified to comment on that...what you say could very well be true? What I can say is: the dot is quite small...very easy to see...and when turned down low can be easily placed on your target...precisely.

If the dot is turned up too brightly, then yes, all kinds of wierd things happen. On low...in low light...for my eyes...it is simply a superb aiming device.

While not a cheap scope at $500, it wasn't a $2K investment either. I'm hoping the durability of the whole system will be there. Web reports that I've found on durability and battery life over the last few years have, so far, all been positive. During daylight...fire dot off...the scope is extremely useable, clear and bright.

These were taken over the past few months, and illumination is what made the shots possible as they were all either in moonlight or near-dark conditions. I used to believe that a heavy FFP reticle like a Zeiss #4 is what worked best but have changed my views thanks to major improvements in reticle illumination.

TASK1-

While I did not get to shoot anything using the VX-Rs, they would have definitely done the job. For me, scopes like that make a huge difference in those waning moments of light.

Bobby,

Begrudgingly...well more like belligerently...I am getting older and that dot in low light helps...A LOT. It's meant the difference between taking the shot or not as I'm not one to risk shooting carelessly. Steady the dot, pull the trigger, get the knife...that's been my field experience, much like yours it seems.

The lite never goes on until the time comes, and only on a LOW setting, # 2 or 3 I think. High settings are for daylight use and I don't see the need. I too was dubious of the IL scopes and now realize I should have done this sooner.

BTW, game taken to date with the VX-R has been on my Ruger # 1, 7x57. The new one today went on my Whelen. I typically hunt on 3x or 4x for the useful FOV.

Be well.

Task 1

Great images BTW.

Thanks. My requirements are a bit different due to a lack of mobility, so I lean more towards the higher magnifications. I am generally restricted to a couple shooting rests near the house, but we are fortunate to live in a game-rich environment.

And I am of the same thinking as you: I won't take a risky shot, so the type of performance discussed here becomes even more valuable.

Take care...

The VX6 fire dot is outstanding as well. It goes from very dim to very bright, auto shut off, auto turn back on....great stuff.

I began using illuminated Leupold scopes circa 2000 - the 1.5-5X w/circle-dot reticle. Liked it so much I bought a second one and put them on large bore 416Rem and 458Lott rifles for Africa. They were marvelous. They are much quicker on target - like my frontal brained Ele at 15 yards at dusk in Zim.

My eyesight has declined and I will be 70 in 2 months. I purchased a Leupold VX-6 1-6x illuminated for my 458B&M and have used it in Africa. It is a wonderful scope.

There is no question that illuminated reticle scopes will greatly enhance the capability of hunters, especially those whose eyesight has become challenging.

LH...good to hear of your experiences with IL.

And thank you for your service.

Im anti gadget, and hate to change batterys while my Leopard is licking his chops on my bait or worse yet when things get intense.Just another opinnon, and speaking for myself only.

Ray -

Why in the world would you have to change a battery when your "Leopard...is on my bait"???

Unless one is a complete incompetent, the fact that the battery life in todays illuminated scopes and red-dots can be as long as 600 hours and cost about $1.00 each at the size of a nickel. Wouldn't you put in a new battery prior to departing on an African hunt? And wouldn't you take along a couple spares in your gun case?

Tell the U.S. military that illuminated scopes and red-dots are "gadgets" and see what kind of response you get They have been using them in combat since 2001 (or earlier).

In over 16 years of using various illuminated scopes and red-dots, primarily on large bore DG rifles and handguns, all over the world, I have never, ever had a dead battery or device failure when I needed to make the shot, including Elephant at last light from 15 yards, frontal brain DRT.

I seem to have a sense of deja vu here but in for a penny ...

As you know I tend to agree with with Atkinson on this. Give me up-to-date spectacles and an old Zeiss/Hensoldt or Nickel scope with a fair objective and a No.1 German reticle. If I can't see that I probably can't see the target either.

Hi Sam,

I almost included you along with Ray in my reply, but thought to give you a break. I should have known better. Oh well, have a great day down under.

Thanks Lion, may the Light of the World be with you.

Lion Hunter,
You may be correct in that it is your Leopard, but its my battery!! , but the less complicated a DG rifle is the more faith I have in avoiding failure..

But on the real side, Im aware that battery life is long term in such a valuble scope, but corrosion, heat, cold,snow, rain, humidity, forgetfulness in my older gray matter, or whatever is possible in any battery operated camera today and Ive seen many cameras fail in the field, thus probably so with scopes, but Im sure your mind is made up and I appear incompetent, and have been called worse! but actually its my age and hours spent in the bush that's made me incompetent, as I may well be, but I think with your permission I will remain true to my lowly 3X Leupolds that have never let me down, and proof of that is my age, if nothing else. Im still on this side of the dirt and no claw marks in my hide.

Seriously I'm glad your satisfied, just not my cup of tea.

Ray's mention of cameras bears some thought. I've got an old manual Pentax SLR that went for years with one aspirin battery running the light meter. But then it stopped. I went to the shops and tried to buy another. But no, they didn't make that type any more. I finally found one that functions with a bit of silver foil on top.

Aussies, Africans, Alaskans, and cowboys have a lot in common, making do with whatcha got..

However, that dot is sounding better all the time as the curmudgeions explain its bright side, only problem is the good advise is very close to too late.

In Idaho I got this permit for a $1.50 that allows me to shoot from the Pickup and use the rear view mirrors for a rest or sit a bean bag over the window and shoot..Works great in the Idaho winters with the heater on! Don't scold me, its more humane in that I can place my bullets with precision accuracy even with irons, and make one shot kills everytime!!mostly head shots. Besides Ive walked 10 million miles, froze to death a dozen or so times, been bit by a boone and crocket tetsi fly more than a few times in Tanzania, knocked over by a dead croc, scratched by a black bear,pissed on by a Lion in Houston, run over by a cape buffalo and some of dads cows, but now life is good, wimmen pamper me, tough guys don't bother, and the game dept takes care of drunks and fools, it just don't get any better than that!

Big tsetse in Tanzania? At least you might see them coming. The worst place to find them, to my memory, was in your car - but I hear the ones to watch out for are in Zambia.

Carry a .410 and load it with no. 12 shot, perfect for Tetsis in the pickup, warn the passenger first. Don't use a red dot, the dot covers the vitals of a tetsi at window to window length. That's what I was trying to tell Lion hunter doncha see!! oh well...

Are they covered in Rowland Ward?

Sambarman: I look forward to your book on optics. May I assume there will be a chapter devoted to the classic scopes? I just turned 75 this week and greatly miss the classics. I truly enjoyed the non centered reticle, the inadequate eye relief, the tendency to fog if humidity approached 50% or more , the inability to use them in a rain with some even cautioning you not to remove the adjustment caps in the rain and my favorite the broken reticle wire. Those were the days!

LJS,
I too remember those days, and miss them greatly, everything is so damn tech crammed these days, now my wifes hounding me to toss my old flip phone, sez nobodys uses them, they been discontinued, but hey so has my mod. 94, 30-30s and 25-35s, but they still work, and I still know how to make them work, I can't do that with a a new phone and windows 8 is a bitch..

The book is almost all about the classic scopes, LJS, and I'm sorry to hear the ones you had let you down. Which brands did you have most trouble with?

I agree that O-rings and reticle technology have improved. Variable eye reliefs may be longer at higher powers and more constant but some lack the flexibility of their predecessors - and I have some old fixed powers with good long eye relief.

But let's not confuse normal improvements - in eye relief, waterproofness, etched graticules instead of reticles - with the decadence of illumination. My objections to illumination may begin with need and reliability but they end with ethics. I believe electrics is one place we should draw the line when technology and sportsmanship meet.

My big technical objection to modern scopes, as you know, is image-movement.

Mounting a scope to boresight without twisting the knobs is not rocket science. So why sacrifice the ruggedness of the old systems for a sleight of hand that makes you think it is straight - at the cost of a four-inch, brass-and-glass tube rocking around inside?

Successive band-aids make constantly centred scopes more reliable but the basic problem is never admitted. Like 1950s sex-aid ads, they try not to spell out why you actually need them. Makers crow about their improvements (Weaver's Micro-Trac carbide balls, Swarovski's helical springs, Leupold's beryllium-alloy springs, Vortex's hardened pads and erector-tube ring) but the problems will go on. Vortex's hardened ring sounds good, for instance, but it possibly adds even more weight to bring parallax sooner as the erector tube is driven lengthwise by recoil inertia. (Swarovski admits that inertia can increase the force applied by the erector tube by up to 800 times and, since these things must weigh at least two or three ounces, that is no small concern - B&L would not even add cushioning to their lenses in 1954 for fear of it compressing under recoil, causing parallax.)