Illuminated or Non Illuminated

[.300 RUM Guy]

I'm in the market for a new scope. What are the pros and cons (if any) of illuminated vs non illuminated scope reticles? Thanks.

 

[Barrelnut]

Well if your are shooting a black bear, in dark shadow, late in the evening, with a fine reticle, the illumination can be nice. Otherwise you will probably have no need for it. Try with your scope some by targeting dark objects in dark shadow areas in your hunting situations and see if you lose the crosshairs in the sight picture. The youthfulness of your eyes can also play a roll...

 

[HARPERC]

Except initial cost there isn't a down side to having illumination. Turn it off it doesn't help you.

Some of the various models don't have the option of non-illuminated.

For me the reticle often seems crisper with the illumination. Better contrast.

 

[FearNoWind]

Well if your are shooting a black bear, in dark shadow, late in the evening, with a fine reticle, the illumination can be nice. Otherwise you will probably have no need for it. Try with your scope some by targeting dark objects in dark shadow areas in your hunting situations and see if you lose the crosshairs in the sight picture. The youthfulness of your eyes can also play a roll...

What he said .....................

 

[.300 RUM Guy]

Well if your are shooting a black bear, in dark shadow, late in the evening, with a fine reticle, the illumination can be nice. Otherwise you will probably have no need for it. Try with your scope some by targeting dark objects in dark shadow areas in your hunting situations and see if you lose the crosshairs in the sight picture. The youthfulness of your eyes can also play a roll...

I won't be shooting black bear, as there are no bear in my country (New Zealand) I was thinking more 'red deer', I get your point however! My eyes certainly aren't what they used to be, I can tell you.

 

[.300 RUM Guy]

Except initial cost there isn't a down side to having illumination. Turn it off it doesn't help you.

Some of the various models don't have the option of non-illuminated.

For me the reticle often seems crisper with the illumination. Better contrast.

Yeah, well the initial cost (on the scope I'm looking at) is only $300 more than the non illuminated version, and when you're paying $5,000 for a scope, the time to buy it is now.

I've never seen through an illuminated scope. What are these things like reliability wise? Swarovski X5?

 

[.300 RUM Guy]

Some people say that on the 'high end' scopes, it is advantageous, as the good optics can draw in enough light to contrast the game you're shooting at with the dark back ground, and it's just the cross hairs that get lost. The more one thinks about it, however, if the optics were that good at light gathering then, surely it would gather enough for to see the cross hairs as well? Maybe illumination just helps but is not absolutely essential, like Barrelnut says.

 

[HARPERC]

... when you're paying $5,000 for a scope, the time to buy it is now.....I've never seen through an illuminated scope. What are these things like reliability wise? Swarovski X5?

I can't say for Swarovski, the Leupold, and Nightforce have worked well for me.

 

[HARPERC]

.......Maybe illumination just helps but is not absolutely essential, like Barrelnut says.

Certainly not a deal breaker in my mind.

 

[.300 RUM Guy]

I can't say for Swarovski, the Leupold, and Nightforce have worked well for me.

What are these illuminated reticles like for daytime shooting, and advantage there?

 

[scrmblr1982cj8]

I would definitely go for the illuminated scope if you can afford it.

I've taken 3 white tails at the last of legal shooting hours with my illuminated NF scope. I doubt I could have done as well without the illumination. I'd hate to lose out on taking a shot for not being able to see the crosshairs.

 

[.300 RUM Guy]

I would definitely go for the illuminated scope if you can afford it.

I've taken 3 white tails at the last of legal shooting hours with my illuminated NF scope. I doubt I could have done as well without the illumination. I'd hate to lose out on taking a shot for not being able to see the crosshairs.

Yeah, like I say, the time to purchase would be 'now' when the difference is only $300 more, as opposed to having to sell a non illuminated model and trade up risking another $2,000 or more! Just wanting to gather people's opinions as to whether it's worth getting or whether it's just another fancified gimmick?

What sort of range were your whitetails at?

 

[HARPERC]

What are these illuminated reticles like for daytime shooting, and advantage there?

Bright, mid day use, no advantage to me, no problem either. Typical fall overcast early or late better for me.

 

[scrmblr1982cj8]

Yeah, like I say, the time to purchase would be 'now' when the difference is only $300 more, as opposed to having to sell a non illuminated model and trade up risking another $2,000 or more! Just wanting to gather people's opinions as to whether it's worth getting or whether it's just another fancified gimmick?

What sort of range were your whitetails at?

The farthest one I've shot was 226 yards. For me, it wasn't the distance, but the terrain. I was hunting in a 2 year old clear cut in November. The deer blended into the background almost perfectly. I doubt I would have dropped him if it hadn't been for the NF scope I was using.