OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Scopes > Rifle Scopes
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Best options for lowlight
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

Best options for lowlight

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Bboy623 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: November/21/2008
Location: NC
Status: Offline
Points: 370
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bboy623 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Best options for lowlight
    Posted: August/15/2009 at 20:01
I'm trying to refresh my memory as it's been awhile since I've been on here. As I remember from my research there's not much difference between 42 and 50mm objective for low light conditions. I've been told that a 30mm tube is what I need to gather all the possible light. Is it true that if I'm concerned with low light capability and optic quality that I need a 30 mm tube?? I though I'd narrowed down my scope choice to a Nikon Monarch 2.5-10X42 BDC for my Browning .270. Now I'm second guessing my choice. Help! The Monarch Golds are about twice as much to get the 30mm tube. Is it worth it?--Bboy623
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6!
Back to Top
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 14964
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Urimaginaryfrnd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/15/2009 at 20:10
What a 30mm tube gives you is more internal adjustment. The larger 50 mm objective makes the scope brighter on 7x where the 42mm maxed out brightness at 6x so 7X would not be as bright on the 42mm.

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger
Back to Top
Obi Wan Kenobi View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/21/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 188
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Obi Wan Kenobi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/15/2009 at 21:43
Originally posted by Bboy623 Bboy623 wrote:

I'm trying to refresh my memory as it's been awhile since I've been on here. As I remember from my research there's not much difference between 42 and 50mm objective for low light conditions. I've been told that a 30mm tube is what I need to gather all the possible light. Is it true that if I'm concerned with low light capability and optic quality that I need a 30 mm tube?? I though I'd narrowed down my scope choice to a Nikon Monarch 2.5-10X42 BDC for my Browning .270. Now I'm second guessing my choice. Help! The Monarch Golds are about twice as much to get the 30mm tube. Is it worth it?--Bboy623
 
If brightness is what you are after & you are serious I'd look at a bigger lens. 50, 52 or 56mm glass.
 
I'd also opt for a  Conquest scope if you are going to spend 400-600 on a Nikon. Nikon is a good scope but the Conquest glass is clearer & brighter in my book. Meoptas are another good choice.
Back to Top
Bboy623 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: November/21/2008
Location: NC
Status: Offline
Points: 370
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bboy623 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/15/2009 at 22:04
yea...I looked through a Meopta today and it was WOW!!! To be honest though, I can't tell the difference between a Monarch and a Conquest. Both are really impressive...I just don't know i can tell the $200+ dollar difference for the Conquest. I was looking on SWFA and saw a Meopta 3-12X50 Artemis 2100 that has a illuminated reticle.....pricey...but I feel if its a lot better scope than Monarchs, Leupolds, etc at that price. Would the Illuminated reticle help in low light or hurt?
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6!
Back to Top
bugsNbows View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
bowsNbugs

Joined: March/10/2008
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 11200
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bugsNbows Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/16/2009 at 11:05
In my humble opinion I'd rely on a Trijicon Accu-point for low light use (rather than a battery powered illuminated reticle).  Smile
If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat?
               Anomymous
Back to Top
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9318
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rancid Coolaid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/16/2009 at 12:05
Originally posted by bugsNbows bugsNbows wrote:

In my humble opinion I'd rely on a Trijicon Accu-point for low light use (rather than a battery powered illuminated reticle).  Smile


I am a fan of Conquest and Meopta (Nikon, not so much - and Meopta needs a bit more eye relief before I put it on a kicker), but I am very, very impressed with the Trjicon Accupoint scopes for low light.
I shoot illuminated reticles, I hunt at night, I have very good low light scopes, and Accupoint deserves a place at this discussion.

For my purposes (hog hunting, shots as close as 50 yards, as far as 300 yards) I went with Accupoint for my last setup.  The prior setup was a Conquest and it was great, but having an illuminated reticle that draws your eye to the point of aim is all but priceless for a good low light rig.

Jut my opinion.  And the 3-9x40 has worked in the dark for me - literally.

Edited for terrible spelling


Edited by Rancid Coolaid - August/17/2009 at 09:43
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.
Back to Top
tjtjwdad View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: December/11/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tjtjwdad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/16/2009 at 22:26
To truly test the Nikon and Conquest (or any scopes for that matter) side by side you have to be outdoors with the opportunity to spend some time with each one.  My eyes have found the Conquest (6.5-20x50/4.5-14x50) far superior to the Nikon Monarch (6.5-20x44/6-24x50) in clarity/sharpness and light gathering capability in low light.  In broad daylight they brightness id pretty much the same.  The Zeiss reticles are very "black" and contrast very well in low light situations.
 
For the money though, Nikons are a good buy.  I'm not familiar with the Meopta brand but they get high reviews here.
 
HTH
 
 
Back to Top
Obi Wan Kenobi View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/21/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 188
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Obi Wan Kenobi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2009 at 16:16
Originally posted by Bboy623 Bboy623 wrote:

yea...I looked through a Meopta today and it was WOW!!! To be honest though, I can't tell the difference between a Monarch and a Conquest. Both are really impressive...I just don't know i can tell the $200+ dollar difference for the Conquest. I was looking on SWFA and saw a Meopta 3-12X50 Artemis 2100 that has a illuminated reticle.....pricey...but I feel if its a lot better scope than Monarchs, Leupolds, etc at that price. Would the Illuminated reticle help in low light or hurt?
 
Here is what I suggest. Go to your scope dealer at the latest time possible and ask them to let you look at these scopes outside. I'm not knocking the Nikons, I'm just saying that in that critical low light in the last 15 minutes of your hunt thats where you will see the difference.
 
I also forgot to thow Kahles in there also. They make one heck of a scope.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.147 seconds.