Rifle Scopes Not happy with Leupold VX5HD, now what?

[19dsniper]

I have been working on getting a light weight hunting rifle set up for 2020 deer and elk. Years ago, I lost faith in Leupold scopes and after reading some reviews on the 5 figured I would give them another shot. I ordered and mounted a leupold VX5HD 3-15 on my Tikka T3 light in 6.5 creedmoor.

The good:
This optic is a respectable size that is not too large or bulky. The glass looks really good to my eye. It's very bright. Crisp, very little CA, and very good in low light. I do like the elevation turret and lock.

The bad:
The windage knob has alot of wobble and sloppy play in the dial. It doesn't instil confidence in use. The side focus makes a popping sound when dialed. I'm not as confident in dialing this scope for distance as I am with my NF or some others, and for the price, I really expected better quality than this.

For a light weight hunting optic, what is the recommendation? I prefer to dial elevation and hold for wind. So a useable reticle is a must. Doesn't have to be anything crazy, but I need wind holds of some sort. I would prefer to stay in the 3-15x range, but have really considered the NF 2.5-10x42. I know it's an older design, but at least with that scope I know I could dial all over the place and I would still be good. I have done a little reading on the NF 2-20, but it seems that everyone was really excited to pre-order and get them in hand, but I've not seen alot about them since about July when everyone should have gotten their hands on them. The higher mag range has my attention, but low light performance with excellent tracking is more important to me.
I would like to keep the size small and the weight down. I have plenty (do we really ever have enough) of higher end optics, but they dont check all my boxes. My other scopes are too heavy. Too long, FFP instead of SFP (which I prefer on a hunting scope) not enough magnification, etc. If this optic was the same quality mechanically as my NF, it would be perfect for my needs.

What say you?

 

[Black max]

Take a look at the new Burris XTR3 in 3.3-18x50. Its 29ozs, 13" in length, locking diopter, capped or uncapped windage, 34mm tube, HD glass, made in Colorado.

The SCR is a very good reticle for hunting, I've used it for years. They sell new for around $1700, but @wjm308 has one in the optics for sale section for $1425.

There are some great reviews out there on it.

Any idea when the illuminated version going to be released?

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Is that all you don't like about the scope? The windage knob and the parallax?

The issue with the windage knob not feeling super solid is how it's held down and designed to be used. It's a set it and put the cap back on knob, it's designed to be easy to use and set but good enough to see how many clicks you've moved. It may feel less than desirable on the outside, but the guts inside are the same as the elevation and are strong.

With parallax should not be making a popping sounds as you turn it. How bad is it? There's a chance something just wasn't put together right, call their CS and send it in.

VX5HD's are excellent scopes. IMO the only thing that would make them better for the $$ would to be mil/mil and FFP too.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

I dont. And I dont think a person will need it with the SCR.

I actually played around with this scope at 22 minutes before sunrise the other day. I could see the thinner SCR2, it was usable.

I've been saying for years the whole low light scenario is overblown. You hear about it in nearly every hunting scope discussion. But I've never seen low light conditions ever be an issue with seeing your reticle. I've been hunting been game fanatically since 1978.

If it's so dark that you cant see the reticle etched into a lense 5 inches from your face, how on earth are you able to identify what your shooting at.

Guessing you don't do a whole lot of low light hunting with FFP's then. That 3-18 FFP of yours would dissapear on low power in the last 10-15 mins of legal hunting light. Outside of LPVO's and red dots, low light hunting scopes are the only reason the reticle illumination makes sense and is really desired.

More nonsense spewed from you just to try to push your product.

 

[PFG]

LRTS 3-12 from Doug or hunt down a used LRHS

They are way, way ahead of Leupold.

I had a similar experience with a VX6. Great view, but the mechanics and quality were suspect. Little rubber washers that wouldn’t stay under the caps, etc.

I sold that 6 and haven’t/won’t buy from them again.

 

[jwhjwh54]

I’m sitting in the stand right now with an nx8. I use my rifle for hunting and target shooting in the off season. If I didn’t target shoot With this rifle I’d go with the vx5 i used to have. I sold it because didn’t want to risk it after a bunch of dialing at the range and f up a shot on an animal during hunting season. The extra weight is a trade off but worth it to me for piece of mind. I’ll just nut up an carry the couple extra ounces

I’m not seeing any issues in low light. If I did it’s way past legal light

Got a bergara ridge with 18” barrel and a cb7. Coming in about 10.5 pounds or maybe a tad less.

 

[19dsniper]

I do ALOT of low light/ no light hunting. For me, I can not personally use a non illuminated FFP reticle any less than 8x at night. The reticle is just too small in the FFP scopes I've used in the past. Everything from Razor gen 2, ATACR, etc. We have a scientific research permit that allows us to spotlight deer from a vehicle. So what we end up doing is driving around and spotlighting for their eyes. Most of our "spotlights" are actually smaller lights with around 200-250 lumens in a diffused beam. Then we hold the light off to the side, (they run off if your light is too bright, and/or your light is directly in their eyes) and are actually using the peripheral light to take the shot. This is about as low light as you can get without going to NV or thermal. We are set up with thermal and NV, but even though we are legally allowed to use it at night according to our permit, we may not be allowed to use it according to the contract.

So, that has nothing to do with my original post, but I would agree that FFP and low light do not mix well in most situations.

 

[MarinePMI]

Despite Birddog's devout loyalty to Burris, I have to side with him on this one. (And for the record, I'm not a real big Burris fan.)

If it's so dark you can't see the reticle...well, it's likely past (or not yet) legal shooting time. IDK, are you guys that say you need it, hunting in heavy timber or some type of terrain that blocks light?

The light gathering capabilities of high end scopes these days is phenomenal...

 

[wade2big]

Damn dude.. are you taking this personal?

All the hunting I've ever done my entire life has been crack of dawn. I've hunted everything that runs, jumps, or swims. I used to load up my horses with family and hunt Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana over a 3 week stint for elk and mulies. We did that for years. I never touched store bought beef for a dozen years.

I've never needed illumination. Ever. I have it now and I havent used it.

And just as an FYI, I got out and tested it yesterday morning, as I clearly wrote. It was a subject on another thread, and rather than spew nonsense in an effort to push my product, I figured I better make sure I knew what I was talking about in order to avoid offending the more fragile personalities amongst us. I can now, without any hesitation whatsoever, tell you that at least within 22 minutes of sunrise, I could use my reticle to shoot any animal i could clearly identify. Period.

I agree with the other guys. A FFP used for hunting requires an illuminated reticle. I have been burned before. Turn the mag down enough to let in enough light and the reticle disappears. SfP doesn't meed illumination.

where is the reticle in my picture. Razor gen ii

 

[spife7980]

I had to use illumination for the first time this past hunting trip. It was dark enough when I got in the stand that I couldnt tell there if was a deer out there or not... but I could tell that the black blob was a hog at the feeder. Had to turn the illumination on to tell where the g3 reticle was at when held over his body. Im sure a larger than 44mm objective would have given me a brighter picture and I could have made it out without... but the illumination was nice to have in this situation for the first time ever. Never had the issue with the large second focal duplexes though.

So I say it really depends

 

[wade2big]

I had to use illumination for the first time this past hunting trip. It was dark enough when I got in the stand that I couldnt tell there if was a deer out there or not... but I could tell that the black blob was a hog at the feeder. Had to turn the illumination on to tell where the g3 reticle was at when held over his body. Im sure a larger than 44mm objective would have given me a brighter picture and I could have made it out without... but the illumination was nice to have in this situation for the first time ever. Never had the issue with the large second focal duplexes though.

So I say it really depends

Remember that your G3 reticle is .05 or .06 mil thick. Almost twice as thick as most FFP scopes. Imagine how that reticle would look with the more common .03 and .035 reticle. I’ll answer. It wouldn't look like anything. Illumination makes it work. There is always tradeoffs.

 

[wade2big]

Despite Birddog's devout loyalty to Burris, I have to side with him on this one. (And for the record, I'm not a real big Burris fan.)

If it's so dark you can't see the reticle...well, it's likely past (or not yet) legal shooting time. IDK, are you guys that say you need it, hunting in heavy timber or some type of terrain that blocks light?

The light gathering capabilities of high end scopes these days is phenomenal...

Its not the light gathering. Its the reticle thickness. All FFP scopes have tiny reticles when the power is turned down. Its the weakness of the design.

 

[MarinePMI]

Its not the light gathering. Its the reticle thickness. All FFP scopes have tiny reticles when the power is turned down. Its the weakness of the design.

Really? I didn't realize that.... (sarcasm).

If the scope is gathering light well enough, the reticle is visible in my experience. Like I said, if it's that dark, you're either hunting in a cave, or it probably isn't legal shooting time IME.

 

[dzander]

I have the 3x15 HD , hunted with it in Montana this year , thought it was great.
If the knobs aren't right I'd call Leupold ask them about it, I'll bet the make it right for you.
I had a 6.5x20 of there's that all the sudden groups opened up, % at 100yds off a bench.
They had me send it in, said the erector went bad and they replaced it , no issues since.
Any scope can go south for anything, I had a Zeiss that would track, it was very erratic, called them they replaced it with a better model at no charge. Give Leupold a chance.

 

[Heretoimproveforhunting]

4-16x42 atacr - pretty small footprint
5-20 ultrashort

 

[SD Carpenter]

The design is sound for it's intended purpose of having accurate subtensions at all magnification levels. If it's too thin and you are way zoomed out, then you have the wrong scope.

 

[Black max]

Damn dude.. are you taking this personal?

All the hunting I've ever done my entire life has been crack of dawn. I've hunted everything that runs, jumps, or swims. I used to load up my horses with family and hunt Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana over a 3 week stint for elk and mulies. We did that for years. I never touched store bought beef for a dozen years.

I've never needed illumination. Ever. I have it now and I havent used it.

And just as an FYI, I got out and tested it yesterday morning, as I clearly wrote. It was a subject on another thread, and rather than spew nonsense in an effort to push my product, I figured I better make sure I knew what I was talking about in order to avoid offending the more fragile personalities amongst us. I can now, without any hesitation whatsoever, tell you that at least within 22 minutes of sunrise, I could use my reticle to shoot any animal i could clearly identify. Period.

Legal shooting light in most states I hunt is usually 30 minutes before sunrise and 30 minutes after sunset. So theres not much point in getting wrapped around the axle here in my neck of the woods over the very slim potential that in the very first or last 5 to 10 minutes of worst case scenario lighting that you will be unable to see your reticle. Because that's really what it boils down to. Because 10 to 15 minutes before the sun breaks the horizon is pretty light out.

So I stick by what I said. A big deal gets made over low light, but it rarely plays out in real life.

Coyote hunting in Ohio hardwoods at night, dusk or dawn without an illuminated reticle is tough/impossible. Maybe your right about hunting out west in the wide open at legal shooting time but that's not what I do. You clearly work for Burris, can you ask your boss about illumination on the XTR3?

 

[wade2big]

That's not a good argument. I see your crosshair and could use it to hit my target. I'm sure I could see it even better with my naked eye.

Is it bright? Does it pop? No. But I see it well enough to use it. Which is my point.

Its a valid argument. That picture was taken on 10X. If it were darker yet and I would need to turn it down to 4-5 it would be gone.

Really? I didn't realize that.... (sarcasm).

If the scope is gathering light well enough, the reticle is visible in my experience. Like I said, if it's that dark, you're either hunting in a cave, or it probably isn't legal shooting time IME.

Opinions differ obviously. Many guys do hunt timber. Many guys do hunt on cloudy dreary days which make it get darker earlier or get lighter later. All of which FFP scope suffer with. Illumination takes care of the issues though.

 

[Downtown]

What's the advantage of not having illumination? Weight? I've used it just on a really cloudy day. Absolutely necessary? No. Handy? Sure. So I guess my question would be, why not?

 

[SRPowah]

I have never NEEDED illumination, but I still keep batteries in my optics. Nice to have it and not need, than need and not have.

OP, sacrifice some ounces and get an optic you are confident and comfortable behind. 10x is more than enough for an ethical kill, and a good pair of binos will likely give you more detail than cranking a scope up to 15x. IQ > Magnification.

 

[hlee]

I'm in the "If its too dark to see your reticle then its too dark (too early or late) to shoot camp" with a caveat. If you are shooting into shadows at a dark target (black pig or black bear for example) an illuminated reticle can really help it stand out over the black background. Other than that, I've never needed illumination for shooting game with a FFP scope.

 

[CStroud]

I hunted most of this season with an SCR reticle, and definitely found it too thin for early morning/late evening. Swapped that unit out for a new Minox 3-15 with mr5 and couldn't be happier with the reticle.

To the OP, I honestly think you are expecting too much out of a $775 scope. Comparing it to a NF (even an older one) seems a bit unfair to be honest.

 

[Black max]

So no dice on asking your peeps about it?

 

[19dsniper]

I have never NEEDED illumination, but I still keep batteries in my optics. Nice to have it and not need, than need and not have.

OP, sacrifice some ounces and get an optic you are confident and comfortable behind. 10x is more than enough for an ethical kill, and a good pair of binos will likely give you more detail than cranking a scope up to 15x. IQ > Magnification.

This was what my reasoning was as I was looking at the NF 2.5-10x42.

 

[wade2big]

^^^^^^^^
20x at 1:30 pm. ?
@Birddog6424

 

[Black max]

Here's a fun one for reference. This is a spike bull at about 180 yards. Hes part of a herd of about 20 cows and 3 bulls that we caught in their beds at first light. This slope faces northwest in Riggins Idaho, the sun is about another 10 minutes from breaking the horizon.

This is a 20x Burris XTRII with the SCR. I'm not sure what that magnification is, around 10x'ish I suspect.

I didnt shoot this one. I held out and bagged a 5x6 a few days later.

Wow those XTR2's have amazing light gathering abilities!!!

 

[Black max]

Your fucking with us right? 10 minutes before sunrise? Looks like high noon...

 

[jwhjwh54]

Nx8 was fine at dark. I could have killed all the deer I saw . Illumination would have made it better when it was real dark but that’s pretty damn dumb to shoot that late.

A vx5hd that tracks like a NF would be perfect but that doesn’t exist so i chose the nx8. Illumination covers not seeing the reticle when I can’t see it.

 

[stello1001]

I dont. And I dont think a person will need it with the SCR.

I actually played around with this scope at 22 minutes before sunrise the other day. I could see the thinner SCR2, it was usable.

I've been saying for years the whole low light scenario is overblown. You hear about it in nearly every hunting scope discussion. But I've never seen low light conditions ever be an issue with seeing your reticle. I've been hunting been game fanatically since 1978.

If it's so dark that you cant see the reticle etched into a lense 5 inches from your face, how on earth are you able to identify what your shooting at.

I've spent countless hours night hunting for pigs with no IR, NV, etc other than natural ambient light. While I have not been able to take one down, I've been able to identify pigs on two different occasions. The sandy light colored dirt or lime ground makes the extremely dark and black silhouette of a pig stand out so much that you know it's a pig and not a deer, cow, coyote, etc. That's where I'd want an illuminated reticle. I know this a very specific type of night hunting and perhaps I may be the only one doing this way. For that reason, I'll be waiting until the illuminated version comes out. This scope checks a lot of boxes and it may be a good option for those not needing the illum.

 

[mws2000]

OP, I’d say you got a lemon VX5Hd. Mine definitely isn’t like you describe. Send it in and I’m sure they’ll take care of you.

 

[19dsniper]

I sold the scope already. Let the buyer know why I wasnt happy and he could care less about it. According to him, he just wanted a Leopold scope to go on his gun "because they are the best". OK.....

Yesterday I jumped on the Bushnell LRTS 3-12x44 from cameraland. I might put that on this tikka and see how I like it. I know it's going to be about 11 oz heavier. I have mixed feelings about that. In the past I have tried to set up light weight hunting rifles that I'm happy with and I have failed. Those rifles quickly had their stocks replaced, 5-25x56 scopes installed, suppressor hanging off the end, etc. For this rifle, I wanted to go as light as possible without getting silly. What I mean by that is, I know I can replace the bolt handle and save a minute amount of weight, I know i can remove material from inside the rear of the stock and make it lighter at the sacrifice of feeling like hollow plastic and increased noise. I'm not into that. I'm just wanting to keep the gun factory at 6 lbs 2 oz and add a lightweight scope that will allow me to take coyote to deer size game, accurately out to 600 yards. I prefer to get within 400 yards or less and we can do that 99% of the time. I did however have 1 time last year that we couldn't get any closer than 597 yards. There was a wide open draw between us with no cover to speak of and he was up on the opposite hillside. So, it left us waiting it out for hours hoping he would move or just take the shot. We waited so long that the wind had slowed to about 3 mph and I just decided to take the shot. Good shot placement and no problems. As a personal rule, I dont like to take shots on game that far. I practice out to much farther to make those shots easier, but even when you practice at 1,000-1400 yards, when you are staring into a nice 6x6 at 600, buck fever starts all over again and I know my accuracy will suffer because of that.

Back to the beginning, I would rather carry those extra 11 oz and have 100% confidence in my setup, but if I can find something just as good, at a lower weight, that's what I would prefer. My budget is $1,600 or less.

 

[spife7980]

This is worst case scenario early morning shooting light.

No way in hell is that worst case.

And not everything has legal shooting hours

 

[NateVA]

Back to the beginning, I would rather carry those extra 11 oz and have 100% confidence in my setup, but if I can find something just as good, at a lower weight, that's what I would prefer. My budget is $1,600 or less.

Sounds like you have the same requirements I have for a scope I want to buy soon. Looking forward to seeing more replies with recommendations.

 

[spife7980]

Then allow me to clarify.

That's worst case shooting hours here in Idaho and most states where there are legal hunting hours. In this case, 30 minutes before sunrise in heavy overcast conditions.

You cant even see the sun coming up through the cloud cover.

Are there states without legal hunting times?

I dont know as far as deer and birds go but I do know I pull the trigger 10x more on critters that arent "game" animals.

 

[MarinePMI]

Uhhh...Spife...the OP specifically says this rifle is for deer and elk....

 

[spife7980]

Uhhh...Spife...the OP specifically says this rifle is for deer and elk....

Yet the other 80% of the thread took a bit of a detour

 

[morganlamprecht]

i pull way more triggers after dark than i do in the light so i use illum a lot

but that isnt at game animals like OPs elk/deer intentions

pigs, varmints, exotics dont care bout shooting hours

 

[spife7980]

Hogs and yotes etc but Im also never on all that low of a power with our space around here in shrub country so I dont have a problem "seeing" the reticle really ever so I have never really had a use for illumination to see the reticle, just distinguishing it from the other blackness its aimed at

So I guess Im not really sure to what ends we are arguing at this point other than I find Wades pic more representative of my experience in early morning hours hunting.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Here's some context for some of you fellas that seem to think illumination is an absolute necessity on FFP scopes.

It's the perfect morning for it too. This is absolute worst case scenario low light conditions. It recently rained, we are socked in with cloud cover. The only way it could be worse out is if there was an eclipse.

This first photo is taken bearing about 75 degrees down my street. So almost due east. The second one is taken facing west. The street lights are still on, so let's not get confused about what time it really is. This is exactly 7:41am, exactly legal shooting light 30 minutes before the 8:11 am sunrise.




This is through the XTR3 at 3.3x zoom looking at trees at roughly 100 yards, the pine is further. The fuzzy phone pic through the camera makes the crosshair tough to distinguish. But getting on the stock and looking through the scope, I have absolutely zero issues seeing the crosshair in what is most likely the worst low light conditions I would ever encounter in legal hunting hours.



These photos are facing east at 10 minutes till sunrise. And then again at 8:15 am 4 minutes after sunrise. The sun "should" be coming up over the roof of the house in the right of the photo.




This is worst case scenario early morning shooting light. From the minute it became legal to shoot and beyond, I had a usable reticle at 3.3x with the thinnest reticle I own.

I'm not posting this up as an attack on anyone. It's not about what brand of scope you use. I'm posting this to show you guys what I've said all along. Low light scenarios are overrated. If you own a hunting scope without illumination, it's extremely unlikely it would ever limit your ability to take a shot during legal hunting hours.

If you want illumination, buy it. It doesnt effect me or anyone else. It's your scope and you're the only one you need to be please. As long as the question is there about whether you need it? It's not likely. Everyone can come up with a scenario and say what if. If what if worries you, then get illumination. If you didnt have it, you would probably discover you can still take the shot just fine.

If this still isnt enough to get you guys thinking about it, do this yourself. Test it out. I'll think you'll be surprised at how much you can see. Especially if the sky is clear. It's pretty bright outside just before the sun comes up.

You might want to check your clocks homie, I've been all over this country and I've never seen anywhere that it's that bright 30 minutes before sun rise, especially when it's that overcast. I still think you're full of shit.

Sunrise here was 7:21 AM and at 7:00 it was still dark as fuck because that's the time I went out to put my trash out. It's started getting light around 7:05.

I'm on the west coast of FL and it does stay surprisingly bright here after sun set but that's because everything is flat and I'm right on the coast where the sun sets. That's an exception though. Where I lived in VA all of my life until June of this year it started getting dark about 5 mins after sunset and that pretty much been the norm everywhere else I've been. Usually by the 30 minute mark all you can do is make out shadows, you sure as shit aren't seeing a black etched reticle whether it FFP or not.

 

[morganlamprecht]

You might want to check your clocks homie, I've been all over this country and I've never seen anywhere that it's that bright 30 minutes before sun rise, especially when it's that overcast. I still think you're full of shit.

Sunrise here was 7:21 AM and at 7:00 it was still dark as fuck because that's the time I went out to put my trash out. It's started getting light around 7:05.

I'm on the west coast of FL and it does stay surprisingly bright here after sun set but that's because everything is flat and I'm right on the coast where the sun sets. That's an exception though. Where I lived in VA all of my life until June of this year it started getting dark about 5 mins after sunset and that pretty much been the norm everywhere else I've been. Usually by the 30 minute mark all you can do is make out shadows, you sure as shit aren't seeing a black etched reticle whether it FFP or not.

i gotta agree...30 min before sunrise looks way darker in south tx than the pics posted

its 715-720 sunrise down here also. i drive into work from 630-650 and its still dark almost with all cars head lights on

 

[SmartDonkey]

I'm also in Idaho... at 6000 feet- and that's not how it works here. When the sun goes behind the mountains thats about it- things get dark fast. It has nothing to do with thick timber- just angles. Down in a valley or flat land you may get light way before you see the sun but not when the sun rises over one mountain range and sets over the other.

If I wanted to shoot 30 minutes after sunset with a ffp on low power I would need a spot light.... and I hear they frown on that.

 

[wade2big]

Here's some context for some of you fellas that seem to think illumination is an absolute necessity on FFP scopes.

It's the perfect morning for it too. This is absolute worst case scenario low light conditions. It recently rained, we are socked in with cloud cover. The only way it could be worse out is if there was an eclipse.

This first photo is taken bearing about 75 degrees down my street. So almost due east. The second one is taken facing west. The street lights are still on, so let's not get confused about what time it really is. This is exactly 7:41am, exactly legal shooting light 30 minutes before the 8:11 am sunrise.




This is through the XTR3 at 3.3x zoom looking at trees at roughly 100 yards, the pine is further. The fuzzy phone pic through the camera makes the crosshair tough to distinguish. But getting on the stock and looking through the scope, I have absolutely zero issues seeing the crosshair in what is most likely the worst low light conditions I would ever encounter in legal hunting hours.



These photos are facing east at 10 minutes till sunrise. And then again at 8:15 am 4 minutes after sunrise. The sun "should" be coming up over the roof of the house in the right of the photo.




This is worst case scenario early morning shooting light. From the minute it became legal to shoot and beyond, I had a usable reticle at 3.3x with the thinnest reticle I own.

I'm not posting this up as an attack on anyone. It's not about what brand of scope you use. I'm posting this to show you guys what I've said all along. Low light scenarios are overrated. If you own a hunting scope without illumination, it's extremely unlikely it would ever limit your ability to take a shot during legal hunting hours.

If you want illumination, buy it. It doesnt effect me or anyone else. It's your scope and you're the only one you need to be please. As long as the question is there about whether you need it? It's not likely. Everyone can come up with a scenario and say what if. If what if worries you, then get illumination. If you didnt have it, you would probably discover you can still take the shot just fine.

If this still isnt enough to get you guys thinking about it, do this yourself. Test it out. I'll think you'll be surprised at how much you can see. Especially if the sky is clear. It's pretty bright outside just before the sun comes up.

Idaho is a hell of a lot brighter 30minuted before sunrise than in Texas for some reason. Your opinions differ on the over stated illumination on ffp scopes used for hunting. Lets just agree on that and let it die in this thread as not to derail any longer my friend

edit: @morganlamprecht, @redneckbmxer24
I wrote my post before reading what you guys wrote. Said the same damn thing. ?
Sunrise is 7:24 here this morning. We couldn’t start working until 7:15 because it was too dark for the hands on the rig.

 

[MarinePMI]

Not to stir the pot even more, but I've hunted a fair bit in Texas too. In legal shooting hours I never needed illumination. Just my experience....

(Now my buddy, that was shooting with irons, yeah, he was screwed out of a nice buck because he couldn't see his sights at first light).

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Isn't Boise in an inversion zone where it's at a lower elevation than the surrounding mountains? That's my understanding because that was my other choice of place to move when I moved to FL and was doing research. If that's the case that would mean the mountains would shield Boise even more from the light after the setting sun, and would mean you're even more full of shit.

 

[DJL2]

I dont. And I dont think a person will need it with the SCR.

I actually played around with this scope at 22 minutes before sunrise the other day. I could see the thinner SCR2, it was usable.

I've been saying for years the whole low light scenario is overblown. You hear about it in nearly every hunting scope discussion. But I've never seen low light conditions ever be an issue with seeing your reticle. I've been hunting been game fanatically since 1978.

If it's so dark that you cant see the reticle etched into a lense 5 inches from your face, how on earth are you able to identify what your shooting at.

I got a boar on Saturday and would have had a difficult time picking up any reticle that wasn't either a RDS or illuminated. I saw a Boar at legal shooting light (30 mins prior to SR) and couldn't see a damn thing but the red triangle in my Trijcon, the pig and big trees - I didn't take that shot because I was unsure of my shot through the trees and where a couple other hunters might be/backstop.

An illuminated reticle of some kind was a HUGE help in the shot I did make and would have been a necessity for the one I passed on. I'd rather have irons with a fiber optic or gold bead up front to a non-illum reticle if you were to give me the same shot(s) again. Granted, it was close range and magnification was completely irrelevant (I think I had it on 2x...which was more than enough).

ETA: OP - take a look at Trijicon. They do some SFP stuff you might like if you can abide any of their reticle choices.

 

[MarinePMI]

Isn't Boise in an inversion zone where it's at a lower elevation than the surrounding mountains? That's my understanding because that was my other choice of place to move when I moved to FL and was doing research. If that's the case that would mean the mountains would shield Boise even more from the light after the setting sun, and would mean you're even more full of shit.

First off, you might want to keep it civil there dickhead.

Second, why do you give a fuck if he can or can not see fine without illumination?

Fuck dude, quit being "that keyboard, internet douche guy" and hurling insults at people without a fucking shred of anything to back it up other than your own fucking opinion.

These are all OPINIONS, so get the sand out of your vagina...

 

[morganlamprecht]

I’ve got this pic from a few weeks ago...it was 32 min after sunset based on google for that day vs pic time stamp

brush in front is prolly 20 yds
Hill with the arrow is 725...I shot from there about 30 min prior...used illum on a low setting

did i NEED it? maybe not, i could see the reticle, but it helped tho

 

[19dsniper]

For everyone, let's not forget that our new fancy cameras and phones adjust the ISO automatically to brighten a picture in low light.
Bird dog, I'm not saying you didnt take the pic when you said you did. Im not here to argue that, hell I'm just here for recommendations, but I've spent enough time behind a camera to know that what you see with your eye isn't what you always get in your photos. I will try to snap a few pictures tomorrow morning from my location in Texas AT legal shooting light. I will line up my NF, Razor gen 2, bushnell g2, and some others. FFP. I will set up my DSLR (cannon 5dMk3) to represent what I see with my naked eye and I will lock in the setting on Manual so all pics are taken with the same exact settings. I am curious to see for myself how well it photographs. I've spent plenty of time behind them before, during, and after legal hours, but never tried to photograph it. We will see how it turns out. What I find interesting is that at least here in central texas, I can promise you that we didnt have that much light this morning. It would be interesting to find out if elevation plays a part in how much light there is at different times and locations. I've never considered that before. Legal shooting light tomorrow is 0658. I will be ready with camera!

 

[redneckbmxer24]

First off, you might want to keep it civil there dickhead.

Second, why do you give a fuck if he can or can not see fine without illumination?

Fuck dude, quit being "that keyboard, internet douche guy" and hurling insults at people without a fucking shred of anything to back it up other than your own fucking opinion.

These are all OPINIONS, so get the sand out of your vagina...

Because he's spewing nonsense to peddle his brand just like he does all the time. Sunrise and sunset times and ambient light is fucking science and a matter of fact, not an opinion.

Short of being extremely close to the north or south pole and it being the right time of year, this is not something that is even remotely debatable. He's talking out of his ass and it's as simple as that. I've been to Boise and I've been to places that are more north than that, and they are not special where it gets light sooner in the morning or stays light significantly longer than the rest of the continental US. You've gotta to well up into Canada or Alaska to see that.

 

[MarinePMI]

For everyone, let's not forget that our new fancy cameras and phones adjust the ISO automatically to brighten a picture in low light.
Bird dog, I'm not saying you didnt take the pic when you said you did. Im not here to argue that, hell I'm just here for recommendations, but I've spent enough time behind a camera to know that what you see with your eye isn't what you always get in your photos. I will try to snap a few pictures tomorrow morning from my location in Texas AT legal shooting light. I will line up my NF, Razor gen 2, bushnell g2, and some others. FFP. I will set up my DSLR (cannon 5dMk3) to represent what I see with my naked eye and I will lock in the setting on Manual so all pics are taken with the same exact settings. I am curious to see for myself how well it photographs. I've spent plenty of time behind them before, during, and after legal hours, but never tried to photograph it. We will see how it turns out. What I find interesting is that at least here in central texas, I can promise you that we didnt have that much light this morning. It would be interesting to find out if elevation plays a part in how much light there is at different times and locations. I've never considered that before. Legal shooting light tomorrow is 0658. I will be ready with camera!

I'm thinking terrain and surrounding vegetation plays a more significant role. I hunted up in Abilene (south of) and didn't have issues, but it was in an area that had a lot of low cut feed plots that had been allowed to dry out (yellow in color). Hunted in Va, NC, MT, CA...hell, even in the UK. While there are times illumination would have been nice, it wasn't really needed. The exception to that was in NC (Croatan NF), where there are some deep hollows that get dark as hell at sunset. Again, terrain and vegetation. But those are just my experiences.