Best low light scope

[1894]

I set up a roe silhouette at 100yds and tested the following side by side

Zeiss Diavari V 2.5-10x50i ret 44
Swarovski PF 8x56i ret 4a-N
Zeiss Diavari FL 4-16x50i ret 60
Zeiss Victory 2.5-10x50i HT ret 60
Zeiss Victory 3-12x56i HT ret 60

Very little difference between all but the HTs which were noticeably brighter throughout and continued on for noticeably longer. I’m not sure I could tell the difference between the little and big HT.
IMHO they are king in the UK. I won’t own a 34mm scope nor one with such a poor manufacturers service set up

 

[WildBoarHunter]

I set up a roe silhouette at 100yds and tested the following side by side

Zeiss Diavari V 2.5-10x50i ret 44
Swarovski PF 8x56i ret 4a-N
Zeiss Diavari FL 4-16x50i ret 60
Zeiss Victory 2.5-10x50i HT ret 60
Zeiss Victory 3-12x56i HT ret 60

Very little difference between all but the HTs which were noticeably brighter throughout and continued on for noticeably longer. I’m not sure I could tell the difference between the little and big HT.
IMHO they are king in the UK. I won’t own a 34mm scope nor one with such a poor manufacturers service set up

I see. So in order to match the performance of my 8×54 Victory HT the only way is to get myself a Victory HT riflescope. Swaro 8×56 is not going to be in this class...

 

[1894]

I see. So in order to match the performance of my 8×54 Victory HT the only way is to get myself a Victory HT riflescope. Swaro 8×56 is not going to be in this class...

Sorry no - at least to my eyes. Even the HTs will not quite match really decent binos.

 

[CBH Australia]

I set up a roe silhouette at 100yds and tested the following side by side

Zeiss Diavari V 2.5-10x50i ret 44
Swarovski PF 8x56i ret 4a-N
Zeiss Diavari FL 4-16x50i ret 60
Zeiss Victory 2.5-10x50i HT ret 60
Zeiss Victory 3-12x56i HT ret 60

Very little difference between all but the HTs which were noticeably brighter throughout and continued on for noticeably longer. I’m not sure I could tell the difference between the little and big HT.
IMHO they are king in the UK. I won’t own a 34mm scope nor one with such a poor manufacturers service set up

What magnification were these on in the testing?

It's good to see the higher end does actually have better performance and there is a return on the outlay.

I have a Diavari 2.4-10x50, for lowlight hunting it's one of my better scopes but it's heavy.

 

[TheCornishman]

Save another £400 and look for one of these:
View attachment 343201
K

6-24x56?????

to my eyes mine is better than the 8x56 illuminated S&B that was on the .308 previously

 

[TheCornishman]

I just sold a S&B 8x56 with illuminated L3 ret for less than £500 which included shipping to New Mexico from the UK (£26 Royal Mail)

That is your best option for excellent quality low light glass.

If traditional glass isn’t your thing or your not that bothered then the plethora of digital offerings are the way to go. I have a Pard 008 which is now old hat but for foxing takes some beating. I’ve taken deer with it several times. Usually when out for a troublesome Charlie and an opportunity too good to pass up as walked into the fray (Always observing legal timeframes). It will certainly do the job but it just doesn’t flick my switch like taking a deer with quality glass.

The S&B has been replaced by a Zeiss Diavari 6-24x56. To my eyes superior to the S&B but double the budget. It’s overkill for deer really but is fun on the range

 

[Deermanagement]

Forget all the static and get yourself a Swarovski the best light gathering glass period

Used them and looked through them all with clients and colleagues and my own and despite someone disagreeing above, have to agree..... Swaro No1, No.2, No3 ...........
And digital is looking at a video game, nothing like seeing eye lashes through quality glass

 

[BenBhoy]

not keen to spend a lot, prob £500 ish

Wow when did £500 become "not a lot" (of money)??

 

[JH83]

The conundrum here is that even 3k worth of absolute top end glass won’t even come close to £500 on an alpex. For stalking the glass scope is probably better in every way, but on a moonlit night like last night I don’t even need an IR torch to shoot foxes out to 150m or so. I’m just about to head out with the rifle again now, and If it were legal (much discipline needed!) I could start shooting straight away if I wanted too.
What I would say is that charging up a rifle scope and having a finite amount of battery reserve will never not be a ball ache, and in my opinion the digi scopes can’t hold a candle to glass for clarity either. But you have plenty good enough clarity to find your target and aim point.

Fully agreed on all counts, the Alpex is in a different league in half light, beats the snot out of anything else (I’ve had them all) and you can really see what you are pulling the trigger on unlike thermal in certain conditions. I must have inadvertently sold a dozen after getting one, the scope cam vids doing the rounds!

As much as you are correct about the ball ache of charging it, I still reach for it more often than the others. A power bank and cable and a spare CR123 are easy to stash in the truck. I suspect they will be the norm in 5 years.

 

[1894]

What magnification were these on in the testing?

It's good to see the higher end does actually have better performance and there is a return on the outlay.

I have a Diavari 2.4-10x50, for lowlight hunting it's one of my better scopes but it's heavy.

Started at 8x then whatever was best.

 

[WildBoarHunter]

I am an old school guy and I am bothered by too heavy optics. Would not buy something like a thermal which weights 1 kg. My Z8i SR weights about 700 g and it's just too much to me to dragg around every day and not shooting very much. I also had a very discouraging situation. Looking at a trophy red deer stag about 100 m away I felt confident about a quick shot. I had the scope zoomed in to 16 × so the stag felt very close. I felt I couldn't miss it. So took an instant shot. What a mistake to make. Missed it completely.
So a good old Swaro 8×56 with its just about right magnification and about 470 g of weight really appeals to me.

 

[JH83]

I am an old school guy and I am bothered by too heavy optics. Would not buy something like a thermal which weights 1 kg. My Z8i SR weights about 700 g and it's just too much to me to dragg around every day and not shooting very much. I also had a very discouraging situation. Looking at a trophy red deer stag about 100 m away I felt confident about a quick shot. I had the scope zoomed in to 16 × so the stag felt very close. I felt I couldn't miss it. So took an instant shot. What a mistake to make. Missed it completely.
So a good old Swaro 8×56 with its just about right magnification and about 470 g of weight really appeals to me.

This is-with respect-something I can never fathom. Talking about a pound here, a pound there. I personally weight 280lbs (former loosehead ) and if being perfectly objective could certainly lose 20-30 pretty comfortably so it just isn’t on my radar at all.

The days of variables being unreliable are well gone, so they lead the way IMO. Stalk with it on low mag-always time to turn up, sometimes not enough time to turn down. Where a fixed mag is at a premium to my mind is those requiring quality at low price, for a classic stalking rifle, or for beginners (less fussing). My opinion only.

 

[tarponhead]

This is-with respect-something I can never fathom. Talking about a pound here, a pound there. I personally weight 280lbs (former loosehead ) and if being perfectly objective could certainly lose 20-30 pretty comfortably so it just isn’t on my radar at all.

The days of variables being unreliable are well gone, so they lead the way IMO. Stalk with it on low mag-always time to turn up, sometimes not enough time to turn down. Where a fixed mag is at a premium to my mind is those requiring quality at low price, for a classic stalking rifle, or for beginners (less fussing). My opinion only.

I know what you mean - except I’m a mere 168lb, so proportionally a pound weight is worth more to me! I find a balanced set up with a comfortably set sling, properly carried, removes the weight issue. Like wearing a pack properly- get it wrong and it’s uncomfortable. Fitness helps too.

 

[WildBoarHunter]

I am mostly hunting in mountain area, I have to do a lot of uphill walking with my rig. I am a lightweight guy. By choosing an ultra light mod and scope I can significantly reduce the weight of my rig. A heavy rifle is just a nuisance to carry all day. I just prefer lighter rigs. They are a pleasure to use and carry around. When going uphill even half a kilo can make a very noticeable difference.

 

[User00040]

I am mostly hunting in mountain area, I have to do a lot of uphill walking with my rig. I am a lightweight guy. By choosing an ultra light mod and scope I can significantly reduce the weight of my rig. A heavy rifle is just a nuisance to carry all day. I just prefer lighter rigs. They are a pleasure to use and carry around. When going uphill even half a kilo can make a very noticeable difference.

Balance is the attribute that is often forgotten in these discussions.

I'll always sacrifice some weight gain in favour of reliability.

 

[Keith Edmunds]

56 is good but I find them v. Heavy and prefer 42 or less, to have a better balanced rifle. I also prefer to get closer but that’s my ground and my age. Steiner are good if you can find one - great low light glass.

Especially in shorter range woodland situation.

 

[woodlandvenison1]

Personally I would got for the best quality scope you can get with that budget