I have a couple of scopes with illuminated crosshairs. When I turn them on in low-light situations I can't see the target. Someone told me if I buy a better scope that won't happen. I'm not sure that is true and wonder if the problem is my eyes. My thinking is that when the light is fading and the pupils are naturally open wider it makes sense that if you put something bright in front of them they are going to constrict. The target isn't illuminated so it is going to fade. Are these scopes a gimmick? I don't turn them on anymore and when I can't see the crosshairs I go home. Thanks.

I do not find them to be a gimmic
I use them on the lowest settings for illumination typically
I have cheap ones and expensive ones
I like dot over post or crosshair reticles.

I would agree. I only have one - a medium priced model - and it has 16 (I believe) settings for brightness. I set it on the lowest/dimmest setting pre-dawn and then raise the level as the light increases. I find it a real help for older eyes.

I understand from a friend that was with 3 Para in the Falklands conflict that they had to save and use almost discharged batteries to get round this problem.

Apparently the kit they were then issued with lacked a brightness control. I hope it does now!

This is an interesting subject.


I had a Bushnell Elite 4200 with an illuminated dot that couldn't be turned down enough to be useable in low light, the red dot in it was so bright that in low light all you could see was the red dot and very little behind it.

I have a couple others that have worked well for me, an Alpen XP, Konus and Burris, when the dot is illuminated enough to work in low light you can barely see it in bright light but can be turned up enough to be useable in bright light.

I don't care for the illuminated reticles that light up the whole christmas tree reticle, it is too easy to wash out the whole background with them, I prefer just an illuminated center dot. I don't use christmas tree reticle anyways as most of my rifles I can hold on fur to 300 yards and rarely need to shoot any farther. I figure if I have to take a shot longer than that I did something wrong.

Another thing I've found is that since moving from the PNW to the SW I use the dot far less to almost the point of not at all and have even swapped out some of them for lighter scopes on the same rifle. I think it has to do with the much shorter transition from dark to light here, less moisture in the air, less overcast and less shaded areas.

My equipment gets used a lot as I coyote hunt, I'm in the field from Oct -March and summers if there is a problem coyote.

Maybe beside the point of this thread, but if the lighted reticle prevents seeing the target, legal shooting hours are probably over or not in yet. Sometimes you just have to admit it got dark on you and your best bet is to wait until the trophy you are interested in goes away, then go home and come back tomorrow...Geo

Either these are old tech without brightness controls (which are near worthless for its intended use), or you didn't know you have a brightness control. Which is the case?
JR

If you are old, the problem might be aggravated by developing cataracts. They sneak up on you, so it might be worth a trip to an ophthalmologist.

Thank you to all who replied. The scope has five brightness levels and I have only tested the lowest. I have never actually used them to target a game animal but as daylight wanes, I have tested the illumination feature on tree trunks, as an example. Some mentioned the RED DOT instead of an actual crosswire might be better. I also have a Halo sight that has less of an issue for me. Set to the lowest setting. At a recent visit with an Optometrist it was mentioned I have the start of cataracts so I had the thought this could be a factor but I didn't think to mention it when there. The scope blindness is not any real problem, I was curious if others had the same experience. I probably should have posted this more that way, and I note that some have. Thanks again to all who replied. Always informative!

I think they are generally for quick snap shooting, and not really for precision, and it's pretty common to see better during low light without looking through the glass. No doubt, there is light transmission inefficiency. I think some scopes have quite a bit more brightness options than yours, so some probably go quite a bit lower, but generally the problem is they aren't bright enough in bright conditions.

See if you can look through a really good scope, side by side with yours. It can be impressive, but pricey. A first focal plane scope, where the reticle shrinks and grows with magnification changes, can be a different ball game. On low power, some might see a fancy reticle as useless, because it's so small, but lit or not one can often use it like a dot, and pick things up really quickly with both eyes open.

This probably has nothing to do with the subject liverwort inquired about, but the only illuminated reticle scope I own is in an ATN thermal that is mounted on my .300 Blackout. It is used strictly for deer and hog control, in our crops. The brightness of the reticle has never bothered me or my grandson, but it being a thermal it's a whole 'nuther ball game. He made a fine shot with it night before last. His front yard overlooks an irrigated peanut field and he killed a hog with it at somewhere between 350 and 400 yards, from his front porch. DRT.

I have never cared for "fancy" reticles for deer hunting, which I do no longer for sport. I have always preferred either very fine crosshairs for crows and such, or a duplex reticle.

The illuminated dots on my two Schmidt and Benders and one Swarovski work great....they are all adjustable for low light.