Border have just finished my new rifle and I would like to top it off with a good scope!

We were culling fallow just before Christmas with Jon1 and he was shooting about 10-15 mins before I was, Jon had a S&B and I had Leupold.

Is the Niteforce better in low light than say the S&B, Swaro, Zeiss, bearing in mind that I need a scope with dial-up..

regards
griff

No.

My experience is that S & B give better light transmission than Niteforce.

Rgds Ian

Hi Griff

I have had excellent results with my Ziess 3-12x56. You cant go wrong with any out of the Swarovski/S+B/ziess family apart from financially
I presume by dial-up you dont mean it needs internet access. The simple single point red-dot on the ziess seems best for stalking and the larger circle with red cross for driven shooting.

Mark

You might also consider any 30mm tube/56mm lens Kahles scope. I've used them for years and I couldn't be happier.

Hi Griff,

As I know you like your weight lifting,( going on previously owned rifles you have had),the added bulk of the Nightforce will not put you off.
You can bank on adding about 2 to 3 LB's of extra weight if you fit any of the XS range to you rifle.

A very good friend of mine, Dougie, bought two NXS 5.5-22x50 Mil. Dot scopes for his heavy barrelled .243, and his moded .223.

When fitted, you noticed the difference in weight straight away !

On the plus side

[*[LIST]]
The clarity of the optic. It is superb,crisp and bright in daylight and when lamping.

The fact that the cross hairs do not grow when you zoom in. ( something about the reticle being in the 1st plain ) .

The illuminated picture you get. It is Fantastic....

The build. You can see why they can be put on top of a .50 cal., and you don't have to worry about losing you POI .

On the negative.

The weight.

The temptation to zoom in and, due to the clarity, think you can take that really long shot. Many of you will say that this would not happen as you are too disciplined. That may be the case, but Dougie is a rock steady professional, and even he said that the temptation :due to the fact that the whole world seemed very much closer, was overpowering.

The weight.

The fact that , even with the best (built) scope on the market in your hands, the light gathering quality was not a patch on a S&B or Swarovski. These are sniper/target scopes, and as good as they are, are not sporting scopes.

Oh ,did I mention the weight..........

Stick to a 30mm S&B or a Swarovski. You know it makes sense >

By the way, the Nightforce scopes are for sale.

Tank commander out !!

In one of the shooting rags a few years back they ran a test on this subject and the scope that came out best was the Leupold VXIII 3.5-10x50 they had a zeiss swaro etc wasnt hands down win but better non the less and if you or sombody you know is going to the states about 1/4 the price!.
The other thing to consider is the higher the magnification you have it on, then the lower the light transmition.I use all the BIG three all fixed 6`s but have been after a Leupold VXIII 2.5-8x36 with a premmier reticules conversion.I finely got hold of one and have to say that it is on my go to rifle and it will never come of, it is alot lower on the rifle,lighter optically and weight wise and if in dark stuff i can have it on 4x with the extra field of view.I personally have no use for high mag scopes and everybody i shoot with who has them always has them set at between 4+6 power anyway.

the above is my opinion only

Swarovski.Buy the best and buy it once.I think thats Swarovski transmit about 99% available light, if they get any better they become image intensifiers.
All mine are Swarovskis, and high mounted,for two reasons,
1. I not a little bloke so high mounts suit me,
2. Make perfect carrying handles.
Just had my Binos back from Swarovski,They had been in a vehicle fire, outer casing was melted,lost gas, were bit of a mess realy, so after 4 yrs using them like that thought I better get them repaired.back up to their perfect quality now, they were better than some when they were in burnt state.
I am waiting to see what the new range finder binos are going to be like, Swarovski won`t say it, but they are developing them now.(thats from an insider)

Griff,

What do you mean by "dial up"???

As far as brightness goes, I would stick with something like an 8x56 S&B or the same from Swarovski...If you want something thats a bit more practical on a stalking rifle, but still very bright, try the Swarovski 3-12x50mm...I have one of those and I'm very pleased. Swarovski are bringing out a new line of scopes in the next couple of months, so it may well pay to wait to see whats on offer...It might also mean the older models being discounted a bit too..

Regards,

Pete

For night shooting/vermin shooting and head shooting park deer, my personal choice is the 6-24x50 swarovski with target turrets and plex reticle. Zooming up and down zero has never changed, I have never had any bother in finding the cross in low light conditions (never felt the need for illuminated reticle or missed out on not having it!) The field of view from a swaro is bigger than the NF which means alot when shooting live targets and for target aqusition.
Only concern is that a friend had one on a moderated 308 and he broke the reticle (I didn't have first hand experience of this or know if something else happened?)
I have now bought a 3-10x42 swaro for the 7-08, again cannot fault it.
In my opinion buy the best.
Not knocking NF but is it just me or does the mil dot take on an oval shape at high magnification???

Pete,
I think he means Mil Dot for dial up.
As in dial in the adjustment.

ATB

Griff

I have leupold and S&B and between the two ~I would chose the S&B every time. Infact I would chose them over any other make on their reputation and build quality.

Along with the light gathering they achieve they are fantastic and win every time.

just my tuppence worth

The question as put is "best lowlight scope?"

Well, pilgrim there is no doubt in my mind!



US Optics SN-9 10-42x80 shown here above in front, with optional lit reticle. It is an external adjustment scope that mounts to special long picatinni rail.



Oh yes, let's see now:

quote:

On the plus side

The clarity of the optic. It is superb,crisp and bright in daylight and when lamping.

SN-9: Yes, not a problem.

The fact that the cross hairs do not grow when you zoom in. ( something about the reticle being in the 1st plain ) .

SN-9: Yes, also true.

The illuminated picture you get. It is Fantastic....

The build. You can see why they can be put on top of a .50 cal., and you don't have to worry about losing you POI .

SN-9:Correct on both!

On the negative.

The weight.

SN-9: Yes, but for long range low light scope, so what!

The temptation to zoom in and, due to the clarity, think you can take that really long shot. Many of you will say that this would not happen as you are too disciplined. That may be the case, but Dougie is a rock steady professional, and even he said that the temptation :due to the fact that the whole world seemed very much closer, was overpowering.

SN-9: That's what its for!

The weight.

The fact that , even with the best (built) scope on the market in your hands, the light gathering quality was not a patch on a S&B or Swarovski. These are sniper/target scopes, and as good as they are, are not sporting scopes.

Oh ,did I mention the weight..........

Stick to a 30mm S&B or a Swarovski. You know it makes sense >

SN-9: Not necessarily, pudding breath. There are others that are better.

By the way, the Nightforce scopes are for sale.

Tank commander out !!

Hi DMCI

What an amazing scope.
To use it do we have to substitute our Harris bipod and 308 for a Hummer and 50 cal.
In fact I'm sure its longer than my rifle.

Mark

I had 2 Meopta 7x50"s, 1 on each of my fullbores. I bought a Leupold Varmint Hunter 1" tube last summer, and what a dissapointment that was! Fantastic reticle, and good magnification, but the light gathering ability is total rubbish. Fortunately I hate stalking in the evening anyway, which is just as well as I can"t see through that thing once it starts to get dark at all. For the money, Meopta"s are great, with good light gathering. I had a Hungarian schmit, which was good in low light, but at 6x42 it was lacking in power for longer range.
Like anything in life, you get what you pay for(unless you buy a Leupold!)
good shooting

"Best" lowlight scope, with dial up, in MHO is a S&B PM11 4-16x50 with an iluminated P4 fine reticule. Sold my 4-16x50 swaro to get one, defenitly a brighter, better scope!!!

quote:

Originally posted by bumscratcher:
In one of the shooting rags a few years back they ran a test on this subject and the scope that came out best was the Leupold VXIII 3.5-10x50 they had a zeiss swaro etc wasnt hands down win but better non the less and if you or sombody you know is going to the states about 1/4 the price!.
The other thing to consider is the higher the magnification you have it on, then the lower the light transmition.I use all the BIG three all fixed 6`s but have been after a Leupold VXIII 2.5-8x36 with a premmier reticules conversion.I finely got hold of one and have to say that it is on my go to rifle and it will never come of, it is alot lower on the rifle,lighter optically and weight wise and if in dark stuff i can have it on 4x with the extra field of view.I personally have no use for high mag scopes and everybody i shoot with who has them always has them set at between 4+6 power anyway.

the above is my opinion only

The "shooting rag" you read, dose it have a full page add from the importers by any chance?

You may not have a use for "high mag" scopes, but try shooting at a crow past 200 yards with a 4 or 6 power scope and a thick retical!

A Leupold VXIII 2.5-8x36 may be a nice light scope, but its not on the same level of optical clarity or light gathering capeabilitys as top end glass,

1. S&B/USO (S&B has the edge)

2. Nightforce/Sworovski/Zeiss

3.Leupold/ect/ect

James Johnson
The original post was about stalking and not vermin shooting.

I have all all the big 3 and had plenty of others also, inc Pecar,hertul&reuss,meopta etc and the leupold losses NOTHING to them, only the name. All the scope manufactureers claim +93% light transmition, you can lose alot of this if the lens i`snt cleaned properly.

Brass Thief, i have no experiance of this scope but is it top of the line (VXIII)? if not then it is unfair as you are not comparing apples with apples.

The purchase of my leupold was for a specific reason, for which it is better than the others.

I am not an equipment snob, i use what is better for me,if the "best" is the most expensive or the cheapest then that is what i use, for My reasons. To say somthing is better than something else without having any experiance is wrong.Of the big 3 i would say S&B
Once again only my opinion b

i forgot, the reticule is more important to lowlight shooting than the light gathering abilities of the scope.If you cannot see the crosshairs on the animal how can you place a killing shot!
B

quote:

Originally posted by griff:
Border have just finished my new rifle and I would like to top it off with a good scope!

We were culling fallow just before Christmas with Jon1 and he was shooting about 10-15 mins before I was, Jon had a S&B and I had Leupold.

Is the Niteforce better in low light than say the S&B, Swaro, Zeiss, bearing in mind that I need a scope with dial-up..

regards
griff

Bumscratcher, where dose it say in the original post that it's a stalking only scope?

The question was "Is the Niteforce better in low light than say the S&B, Swaro, Zeiss, bearing in mind that I need a scope with dial-up.."

Griff, in MHO S&B is the brightest followed by Sworo,Zeiss and Nightforce in that order.They are the Premier Division of scopes.

Dont know what magnification you prefer, but a lot of my deer get shot on 16x I have only ever turned the power down to 4x twice, once to finnish off a neck shot hind that was disabeld but still alive, and once to shoot a running fox at 30 yards, seen him comeing round the hill, turned the scope down, when he appered he was about 15 yards from me, he got e Texas heart shot running strait down the hill
Leupos are first division.

If you really want the best for the night, you can't go with a vari.
My vote, take a 8x56 with ill. recticle S&B is first choice.
There is also a new Zeiss 7x50, have only heart the best about this scope.

James Johnson
it doesn`t but the give away was the "culling fallow and jon1 was shooting 15mins before he was"
If you read my post it says at the bottom "only my opinion" but that is based on hands on practical experiance and owning all the scopes mentioned. what is your practical experiance with the scopes mentioned? and do you own (as i do) all the scopes.
Never shot a deer past 260y but still managed to kill it with my 6x scope (i could even see the deer i was shooting at!!!)

The commercial scope for very hiegt clared is the Zeiss Divari 6-24x72

I have owned a 56 Swarovski and it set pretty high on gun but was a great scope.Would this scope work with super high rings.

For the ring problem, you probe the new leupold

Has anyone thought about a rain cover for this scope?????

Y dont no.
Solution is you buy one normal rain cover and wit your hand make a bricolage. Cutting the exedance.

Here is a big scandinavian test from 2004
http://www.brockmichelsen.dk/upload/PDF/20_Megatest_sigtekikkerter.pdf lystransmission means lighttransmission measured at 500-550nm. As you can seee many scopes have high transmission numbers. 9 points means 90-95% 8p 86-90% and 7p 80-85%

Skumringsegenskaper means practical use in low light.As you can see only Zeiss and Swarovski gets maximum 10 points.

In an almost identical test in 1997(?) only Zeiss and Swarovski got maximum 10 points for skumringsegenskaper.

quote:

Originally posted by 10,3x60r:
For the ring problem, you probe the new leupold

GIMMICK!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by bumscratcher:
James Johnson
it doesn`t but the give away was the "culling fallow and jon1 was shooting 15mins before he was"
If you read my post it says at the bottom "only my opinion" but that is based on hands on practical experiance and owning all the scopes mentioned. what is your practical experiance with the scopes mentioned? and do you own (as i do) all the scopes.
Never shot a deer past 260y but still managed to kill it with my 6x scope (i could even see the deer i was shooting at!!!)

That's fine for you!!! Sometimes I cant see all of a deer at even 100 yards, so-long as its a kill area i'll shoot it with a fixed 6x scope you are limiting yourself to what you can see clearly ..."hmmm, dont know if thats a clear shot, I cant see"

"...the give away was the culling fallow and jon1 was shooting 15mins before he was"

That was only an example of when he had the chance to compare the two scopes side by side. If Griff wants a fixed power scope then a 8x50 or 8x56 S&B/Swaro/zeiss wont go wrong(but will be brighter than a leupo.

The Nightforce question would lead me to think he is after a high mag with target turrets, if so Griff try a serch on;

snipershide
Or
longrngehunting

I have been out with friends and with clients and sometimes I am seeing things a long time before them or after them (am or pm) and I honestly beleive it is quality og binos.
What does make me smile is people buying binos/`scopes at game fairs and saying they can`t see the difference that ,say Swarovski, makes,what they should realise it`s not in middle of the day @ Weston Park that they will see the benefit,it`s at last light when their asking themselves, "is that a beautiful six pointer"?or " I can`t see it,give me a clue".
and the stalker is jumping up and down pointing .
I did learn along time ago, whatever rifle you have, even if it`s a 243 ,spend the money on the optics.

quote:

Originally posted by bumscratcher:
i forgot, the reticule is more important to lowlight shooting than the light gathering abilities of the scope.If you cannot see the crosshairs on the animal how can you place a killing shot!
B

This is what it really comes down to - much more so than which of the (premium) manufacturers you choose. That is why Leupold suffers in terms of low light shooting, they were born and bred in market where this type of shooting is much less common than it is in Continental Europe, and consequently their reticles are simply not up to scratch. IMHO, you need one of the premium European manufacturers (exactly who it is matters less). Then you need an objective lens of at least 50mm, and 56 mm if you don't want to compromise low light performance for size and weight. Finally you'll need a #4 or a #1 reticle - or a lighted variant, if you feel rich. But even if you get an illuminated reticle, make sure you get something you can use without illumination as well, and make sure the illumination can be turned way down. That is the way you'll want to use it.

- mike

What it all boils down to at the end of the day is your own pupils ability to see in low light.

Now here's the boring science bit as far as I can remember.

The maximum pupil size for light gathering in a human is 7mm anything bigger has no extra benefit! Fact

This you see gentlemen is where premium european scope manufactures have the edge because they've known this all along, hence the popularity of the 8x56 and the 6x42, i.e 42 / 6 = 7mm the optimum exit pupil that is of benefit to us anything beyond is of no help.

So to surmise on the above formula pick something that gives you a 7 mm exit pupil with the largest tube possible and bear in mind that illuminated reticules steal some of the space inside the tube again restricting light gathering. So 7mm exit pupil with largest tube with least obstruction. Hope this is of help.

quote:

Originally posted by James Johnston:

quote:

Originally posted by 10,3x60r:
For the ring problem, you probe the new leupold

GIMMICK!!!!

How to sell you a $400 scope for $1000 and make you feel good about it!

Nice marketing on part of Leupold!

My suggestion:
S&B
Zeiss
Kahles
Swarovski

In no particular order.

Most of my friends have sold their Nightforces, Leupold guys seem to stick with their scopes.

Vote on Leupold VXL-series is still pending but the front lense does feel like gimmick. Will the waterproofing on the front lense last in the long run? Time will tell. Also, anybody ever complained about not getting the scope low enough with proper mounts? I don't know, I am perfectly happy with my normal scopes and lowest possible mounts (they need to match the stock height). Cannot imagine what the stock cheek weld part must look like to match VXL

BTW. I do use Leupold, Kahles and S&B. All in different uses. My personal choice for low light scope was S&B 8x56.

Just my 2€ cents

Thanks all,

I am currently away on Arran co-ordinating the Basc stalking scheme, so have just popped into a internet shop to read all the replies.

there are two reasons in the original thread for the question,
1. got to beat that Jon1 for shooting the deer before me
2. I need a dial up scope for distance shooting, I don't really need a graduated reticule if I have dial up..

The opinion seems to favour the Smidt, I have had a Kahles which was a superb scope but I don't know if they do them with dial up turrets?

regards
griff

Griff,

Kahles have some rather weird turrets on their new models that I couldn't understand but might be dials by another name.

The best way to get back at John1 would be to take a tasco 4x32, secretly use a lamp and ask why he has to use such poncy kit

What range are you planning on shooting out to? If it's no more than 400yards then I wonder if you really need dials with a hot loaded long barelled 264WM - 0.48BC at 3,200fps is flaaat, 250yard zero is only 2.5" high at it's highest, at 350 you aim top line (8" drop)and at 400 a tad above (13" drop) I wouldn't mind betting this would kill more deer than dials and the associated scope (ha ha) for cock ups.

How wet and windy has it been!?

Seriously!?

A loupie as the best lowlight/night scope!

Thats a joke.

The standards set in Germany some 100 years ago is a 8x56 tube with a nr 1 reticle.

However for a zoom version all S&B, Swawowski and Ziess in all from their 1,5-6x42 and up series to the x56 will work.

Here in Sweden the 3-12x52 Ziess and Swarowskis are doing good.

There is nothing wrong with Nightforce other then the general weight and awkvardness.

Well those were my two cents.

/C

My personal outfit for lowlight is claw mounted 8x56 nr 11 reticle.

quote:

Originally posted by bumscratcher:
In one of the shooting rags a few years back they ran a test on this subject and the scope that came out best was the Leupold VXIII 3.5-10x50 they had a zeiss swaro etc wasnt hands down win but better non the less and if you or sombody you know is going to the states about 1/4 the price!.
The other thing to consider is the higher the magnification you have it on, then the lower the light transmition.I use all the BIG three all fixed 6`s but have been after a Leupold VXIII 2.5-8x36 with a premmier reticules conversion.I finely got hold of one and have to say that it is on my go to rifle and it will never come of, it is alot lower on the rifle,lighter optically and weight wise and if in dark stuff i can have it on 4x with the extra field of view.I personally have no use for high mag scopes and everybody i shoot with who has them always has them set at between 4+6 power anyway.

the above is my opinion only

M98 its no joke
Germany 100years ago about right (and your thinking) 100years out of date.
The Germans used to build the best cars (100years ago)!!! not any longer roll on the Japs!!!.
My original post about my leupie and more importantly my Premier reticules conversion was picked up by NOBODY, so there is alot of people missing half of what i commented on, and there is only one person (mho) who i believe understands the requirements of a lowlight scope. Gerry Merry has the biology correct, though as you grow older the pupil gathers less light etc.
What most of you all have missed is that the lens and inside the tubes have special coatings to optimze light transmition and this is were the light gathering actually happens. Leapold to name one, have changed their coatings in the last year or so, when did the BIG 3 change theirs? Could (heaven forbid) the scopes be going the same way as their cars and been resting on their laurels for to long?
ONCE AGAIN i have all of the BIG 3 and IMO in the configuration i have it in the Leupold is the brighter scope and suites my needs better.
over and out
P.S my views above are actual experiance NOT arm chair experiance.
B

Just had a quick look on the Alaskan forum under "Good alround scope", if you think Leupold are Crap you better not go have a look.
The chat is only about general scopes tho.
B

Griff, I would go with a Swarovski 3-12x50 with a TDS reticule. I personally wouldn't entertain dial-ups on a hunting rifle, but you know your needs better than we do.

If you must have dial-ups S&B PMII are fantastic but seriously expensive.

The new Swarovski ill Ret's are out of this world. My S&B 3-12x50 L7 will be traded for one of these some time later this year.