HIK Alpex 4K Lite LRF vs Hik Alpex 4K Review
I began this review with a question I had: is the smaller Lite Alpex as good as the larger full-fat device? Having tested both side-by-side, I decided to document my findings. I couldn’t find anyone else online who had answered my question so time to find out for myself.
The regular HIK Alpex 4K is well-known for its decent quality and was one of the first digital scopes to replace traditional glass ones. It’s not a perfect replacement and not everyone likes it, but it has its uses. Its biggest selling point is its ability to gather light in poor light conditions and give the shooter the ability to operate way beyond the naked eye or traditional glass scopes. As a result of this ability stalkers have bought them in great numbers for the express purpose of deer control in low light.
Having used the larger Alpex 4K extensively since its launch and previously owned the original Alpex and Pulsar C50, I expected/hoped that this smaller version to be similar. It’s smaller and lighter (half the weight), but there are a few drawbacks.
The first drawback is directly linked to the Lite model’s biggest selling point: its compact size and weight. This offers decent weight savings compared to a transitional glass scope and a significant saving over the full-sized Alpex 4K. However, this also results in a very short mounting area, meaning you have limited 30mm tube for scope mounts. Coupled with the 45mm eye relief, mounting the Lite proved challenging. At least it did for me. The full-sized Alpex offers 10mm more eye relief but has more 30mm tube and a longer ocular section, making it easier to achieve the 55mm eye relief it likes. My initial attempts with the Lite focused on getting it “close enough”, assuming 10-20mm eye relief difference wasn’t crucial. However, the 45mm eye relief is essential for a focused image. With a Tikka test rifle and Tikka rail fitted, I finally managed to achieve the eye relief, but only with higher mounts. Surprisingly, the scope’s short objective sits above the rail’s end! If you’re considering a Blaser or similar mounting system, I strongly advise careful consideration of mounts, as Blaser scope fixing points are significantly further forwards.
Once mounted, the Lite is hardly noticeable if you’re accustomed to existing 30mm day-night devices. For example, my Tikka light in an MDT HNT 26 stock with a Lite and F&D 269 mod weighs 3.4kg, which is comparable to or even lighter than a bare Sako S20, Tikka T3X CTR, Blaser R8 Pro Success, or Sauer 505.
As previously mentioned, I was hoping this Lite would be a mini version of the 4K in every way, especially performance-wise. Having heard people say it “hoovers up the light” and “works without IR even in blackness,” I was expecting similar results. Perhaps even comparable to the 4K HIK 35mm or 25mm Habroks. However, my first impressions were disappointing. On a clear, cloud-free morning with a half moon, I couldn’t see anything through the scope in colour (day) or black and white (night) modes without IR. When compared side by side, the larger 4K showed a grainy image that was usable for identifying sheep, foxes and similar animals at 100-150 metres. As the light increased, the image improved on both devices, but the Lite lagged behind by about 10-15 minutes at all times. In reality, the Lite was only marginally better than my Leica HD-B 8x42 binoculars. Looking into the shadow under the tree canopy was pointless, while the full-sized 4K revealed detail. I tried a second outing and adjusted the settings, including brightness and a few other buttons, but the performance remained behind the larger 4K. I understand that many people will argue this is expected, given that the Lite is a 25mm lens and the 4K has a 50mm. However, some people are publicly claiming the Lite has the same performance as the full-sized or at least very close. My opinion is that it doesn’t, and there’s not a significant improvement over decent German optics. That said, you could buy four Alpex 4K Lite LRF’s for the price of my Leica binoculars new, so there’s a commercial argument to be made.
I deliberately skipped the £150+ IR torch to test the scopes’ IR capabilities, opting instead for a non-branded £80 torch. I’ve also lent my better IR scope to someone and can’t recall who it was! Under complete darkness in black and white (night mode), the 4K captured a usable image up to 350-400m, while the Lite managed a similar level of detail to about 200-270m. This result aligns with the comments above about general light gathering. However, for most users, 250m or more is sufficient for night-time shooting, and I’m confident this could be improved with a better IR scope.
Overall, I like the device, but I can’t claim it’s a 4K in a smaller package and £200 cheaper. Performance-wise, it’s not really. Without IR or with IR, the difference isn’t significant. Once the light is up, whether it’s the second hour of stalking time in the morning or full daylight, the difference disappears. Both the Lite and the 4K zoom in and show the same level of detail, but these aren’t designed for daytime use. If you want to use the Lite at night for air rifle rim fire, 22, 17 HMR, or short-range centre fire, or anything up to 250m with IR, it’s good to go, provided you can mount it correctly. However, don’t expect the same low-light performance as the 4K. These are low-light devices primarily designed for twilight or night use, which is evident because a £200-300 cheap glass scope probably offers a better image in daylight.
As a footnote, the LRF works very well on the Lite, the ballistics are good, and the battery life seems to be a solid 5 hours or more on both internal and external batteries. It drains the external battery first, which is convenient because it’s easier to remove and charge at home than the entire scope.
I began this review with a question I had: is the smaller Lite Alpex as good as the larger full-fat device? Having tested both side-by-side, I decided to document my findings. I couldn’t find anyone else online who had answered my question so time to find out for myself.
The regular HIK Alpex 4K is well-known for its decent quality and was one of the first digital scopes to replace traditional glass ones. It’s not a perfect replacement and not everyone likes it, but it has its uses. Its biggest selling point is its ability to gather light in poor light conditions and give the shooter the ability to operate way beyond the naked eye or traditional glass scopes. As a result of this ability stalkers have bought them in great numbers for the express purpose of deer control in low light.
Having used the larger Alpex 4K extensively since its launch and previously owned the original Alpex and Pulsar C50, I expected/hoped that this smaller version to be similar. It’s smaller and lighter (half the weight), but there are a few drawbacks.
The first drawback is directly linked to the Lite model’s biggest selling point: its compact size and weight. This offers decent weight savings compared to a transitional glass scope and a significant saving over the full-sized Alpex 4K. However, this also results in a very short mounting area, meaning you have limited 30mm tube for scope mounts. Coupled with the 45mm eye relief, mounting the Lite proved challenging. At least it did for me. The full-sized Alpex offers 10mm more eye relief but has more 30mm tube and a longer ocular section, making it easier to achieve the 55mm eye relief it likes. My initial attempts with the Lite focused on getting it “close enough”, assuming 10-20mm eye relief difference wasn’t crucial. However, the 45mm eye relief is essential for a focused image. With a Tikka test rifle and Tikka rail fitted, I finally managed to achieve the eye relief, but only with higher mounts. Surprisingly, the scope’s short objective sits above the rail’s end! If you’re considering a Blaser or similar mounting system, I strongly advise careful consideration of mounts, as Blaser scope fixing points are significantly further forwards.
Once mounted, the Lite is hardly noticeable if you’re accustomed to existing 30mm day-night devices. For example, my Tikka light in an MDT HNT 26 stock with a Lite and F&D 269 mod weighs 3.4kg, which is comparable to or even lighter than a bare Sako S20, Tikka T3X CTR, Blaser R8 Pro Success, or Sauer 505.
As previously mentioned, I was hoping this Lite would be a mini version of the 4K in every way, especially performance-wise. Having heard people say it “hoovers up the light” and “works without IR even in blackness,” I was expecting similar results. Perhaps even comparable to the 4K HIK 35mm or 25mm Habroks. However, my first impressions were disappointing. On a clear, cloud-free morning with a half moon, I couldn’t see anything through the scope in colour (day) or black and white (night) modes without IR. When compared side by side, the larger 4K showed a grainy image that was usable for identifying sheep, foxes and similar animals at 100-150 metres. As the light increased, the image improved on both devices, but the Lite lagged behind by about 10-15 minutes at all times. In reality, the Lite was only marginally better than my Leica HD-B 8x42 binoculars. Looking into the shadow under the tree canopy was pointless, while the full-sized 4K revealed detail. I tried a second outing and adjusted the settings, including brightness and a few other buttons, but the performance remained behind the larger 4K. I understand that many people will argue this is expected, given that the Lite is a 25mm lens and the 4K has a 50mm. However, some people are publicly claiming the Lite has the same performance as the full-sized or at least very close. My opinion is that it doesn’t, and there’s not a significant improvement over decent German optics. That said, you could buy four Alpex 4K Lite LRF’s for the price of my Leica binoculars new, so there’s a commercial argument to be made.
I deliberately skipped the £150+ IR torch to test the scopes’ IR capabilities, opting instead for a non-branded £80 torch. I’ve also lent my better IR scope to someone and can’t recall who it was! Under complete darkness in black and white (night mode), the 4K captured a usable image up to 350-400m, while the Lite managed a similar level of detail to about 200-270m. This result aligns with the comments above about general light gathering. However, for most users, 250m or more is sufficient for night-time shooting, and I’m confident this could be improved with a better IR scope.
Overall, I like the device, but I can’t claim it’s a 4K in a smaller package and £200 cheaper. Performance-wise, it’s not really. Without IR or with IR, the difference isn’t significant. Once the light is up, whether it’s the second hour of stalking time in the morning or full daylight, the difference disappears. Both the Lite and the 4K zoom in and show the same level of detail, but these aren’t designed for daytime use. If you want to use the Lite at night for air rifle rim fire, 22, 17 HMR, or short-range centre fire, or anything up to 250m with IR, it’s good to go, provided you can mount it correctly. However, don’t expect the same low-light performance as the 4K. These are low-light devices primarily designed for twilight or night use, which is evident because a £200-300 cheap glass scope probably offers a better image in daylight.
As a footnote, the LRF works very well on the Lite, the ballistics are good, and the battery life seems to be a solid 5 hours or more on both internal and external batteries. It drains the external battery first, which is convenient because it’s easier to remove and charge at home than the entire scope.
whatever
