Print Page | Close Window

Better Low Light Scope Meopta 3-12x56 Meostar

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Rifle Scopes
Forum Description: Centerfire long gun scopes
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=40808
Printed Date: March/28/2024 at 06:48
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Better Low Light Scope Meopta 3-12x56 Meostar
Posted By: 153
Subject: Better Low Light Scope Meopta 3-12x56 Meostar
Date 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.



Replies:
Posted By: dw0229
Date Posted: November/29/2014 at 01:02
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.


Posted By: coyote95
Date Posted: November/29/2014 at 09:19
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


Posted By: Roy Finn
Date Posted: November/29/2014 at 09:43
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.


Posted By: ccoker
Date Posted: November/29/2014 at 18:36
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



Posted By: malinoisrock
Date Posted: December/02/2014 at 22:36
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... BanditoActually 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.


Posted By: dw0229
Date Posted: December/04/2014 at 13:35
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.


Posted By: oldelkhunter
Date Posted: December/11/2014 at 10:09
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


Posted By: NTX940
Date Posted: March/10/2021 at 13:00
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. 


Posted By: Scrumbag
Date Posted: March/10/2021 at 13:23
Originally posted by ccoker ccoker wrote:

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..



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...



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net