Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Better Low Light Scope Meopta 3-12x56 Meostar |
Post Reply |
Author | |
153
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/02/2010 Location: NC Status: Offline Points: 15 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: November/27/2014 at 09:15 |
Which is better low light scope, Meopta 3-12x56 R1 or a Swarovski Z3/Z5. My work allows me to hunt the last hour of daylight every day. Looking for the best low light 1k or less. Have a Swarovski 3-12x50 PH now and it is much better low light than the Zeiss Conquest or VXIII that I have. I hunt mainly box blinds so the bulk would not be a factor. Have a 06 BAR with VXIII 1.5-6x32 for woods/fast handling.
|
|
dw0229
Optics Apprentice Joined: December/21/2010 Location: boaz,alabama Status: Offline Points: 121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You would be hard pressed to find a better low light scope than theMeopta R1 3-12x56 with illuminated #4 or a Trijicon2.5-10x56 in your price range. Your Swarovski PH, however is a fine instrument. The advantage of the Meopta or Trijicon would be illumination of the reticle.
|
|
coyote95
Optics Master Joined: January/24/2009 Location: michigan Status: Offline Points: 1196 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I would have to choose the r1 for the fact it has illuminated reticle and will work better in low light. Also when you get into the larger objective in the z5 line it is considerable more money. I have the r1 56 with the sfp 4k that I use for night time dog hunting and it works great.
|
|
"Life is like riding a bicycle . To keep balance you must keep moving" Albert Einstein
|
|
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Why not just get one of the new R2 line scopes that just came out. I believe the new R2's also have Rainguard type coatings as well which is a nice feature IMO.
|
|
ccoker
Optics Master Joined: February/13/2008 Location: Austin, TX Status: Offline Points: 2041 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
unless you are "losing the reticle" and truly "need" a small illuminated dot to place the shot you aren't going to truly gain anything..
|
|
www.TacticalGunReview.com
Pro Staff - Silencer Shop http://tacticalgunreview.com |
|
malinoisrock
Optics GrassHopper Joined: December/01/2014 Location: Colorado Status: Offline Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ive got a weaver 800378 3x9x56. Its not in the same class as the optics you mention but is half the $ of the trijicon mentioned. Like all the 800 series optics it has very good day glass by my standards. The illumination is better than a unlit reticle for the last ten minutes on the 800378 but there is some glare on the lenses. The glare detracts from the sense that you have a very nice tool. The only other illuminated reticles I have are the nightforce and they do a better job of piping light in Oh wait I have a old beeman 2x7 skylight too... Actually that old beeman does a decent job of light piping with both the orange cover and the light source removed and just using ambient- sometimes . The reticle has just enough light using ambient to make it out clearly but not create glare or over contrast the image coming in from the objective-sometimes. I have never owned a trijicon meopta or swaro with illuminated reticle. Id also be curious to learn the opinion of someone who has looked at all these 56 objective euro style illuminated optics, that are pretty much designed for low light and to hear their thoughts about how they compare in low light transmission/ reticle shape effectiveness/light piping/ reticle image contrast/engineering. Its a interesting and difficult problem. If you are using a LED these are very small differences in current but you get to meter the light into the pipe for appropriate contrast. The nature of the LED light just seems inherantly to have contrast issues. Ambient can work great for a light source-sometimes. Tritrium is a nice source that would seem to be better from a contrast perspective than LED but if metered it would seem that it would require a mechanical method. Has anybody done that? Everyone is always talking about how bright a illuminated reticle is in the day- I want to know how dim it is at night! Ive seen that big skylight on the trijicon 2.5x10x56 and cant help wondering if that would be the cats meow. Inquiring minds want to know.
|
|
dw0229
Optics Apprentice Joined: December/21/2010 Location: boaz,alabama Status: Offline Points: 121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
In the case of the Trijicon2.5-10x56, the lighted portion of the reticle can be dialed down as low as you like. If you want only the faint speck of light then dial it down to that.
|
|
oldelkhunter
Optics GrassHopper Joined: November/21/2008 Location: NC Status: Offline Points: 15 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
It would be tough to beat the Rheostat on the Meopta and the 4K reticle is awesome. I have one and it is a thing of beauty
|
|
NTX940
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/30/2020 Location: tx Status: Offline Points: 17 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
For low light situations, it's Meopta MeoStar hands down. You can go with the 50/56mm obj. and you will not be disappointed. You can do an internet search and read the rave reviews for the MeoStar in low light situations. I wouldn't give mine up any new scope choice. If I ever go to Africa hunting it'll sit on my .375 H&H.
|
|
Scrumbag
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: October/22/2013 Location: London, UK Status: Offline Points: 4205 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
As someone who shoots late and even pigs under the moon, that little dot is lovely ;)
|
|
Was sure I had a point when I started this post...
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |