I recently bought a ruger 6.5 creedmoor target/varmint and I'm looking to replace the glass. I've found a deal on a zeiss conquest MC 6-20x50 mil dot reticle a deal on a vortex viper 6-20x50 with the illuminated reticle, and a deal on a Burris elite 6.5-20x50. All around the same price range. I've got $600 cash right now. This rifle will more than likely be my go to gun for deer varmint and hogs. Low light shots are a huge deal for me. I haven't handled these exact ones but I've looked through vipers and zeiss but no Burris other than the full field II. Can't tell much in the store. Any advice?

If low light is important don't let your first power be 6.5.

Leupold is usually pretty strong in the lower light

If low light is a mail concern, get your low end down to 2.5X or 3X.

Burris XTR II 3-15X, I've been using has really impressed me.

Have a vortex and its been a great scope, but my 20 year old Leupold 3x9 is better in low light.

Plus be Leary of a FFP scope turned down to 3-4 x during low light. You might just find it hard to seeing

What is the difference between FFP or SFP on low power? I'm pretty sure all the scopes I own are FFP and do better on low power in low light.

Looking for info, not arguing.

Ffp will look/appear smaller while actually being the exact same size. Unless you have a lot of euro glass or target scopes I'd bet you got sfp.

You've got SFP.

When you increase magnification, the reticle is stationary.

On a FFP scope the reticle grows with the target image. So when using Mils or MOA on a reticle, they remain correct at every magnification. With a SFP scope, they are only correct at one magnification, with is usually maximum.

Zeiss

Zeiss is great for low light. I've ID'd exotic game through my 4.5-14x50 Conquest under only star and half-moon light. Like others said, be wary of a higher low magnification if low light is a concern.

Only thing bad about the Conquest is that it is annoying to find in any tactical reticles for long range. I mean the RZ reticles might work if that's your cup of tea, but my #4 reticle offers no help at longer distances because I don't have subtensions.

Burris Veracity is a great scope for the money.

Didn't really think bout it like that. I've never really shopped for high powered scopes just thought I'd like it. May just try to find a good vx3 or vxiii 4-14 then

Yes you and Dee are right I got it backwards, but why would one be better or worse for low light than the other?

The problem with FFP at low light is that to shoot in low light, you have to reduce the magnification. And when you reduce the magnification on an FFP, the reticle gets really small and hard to see/read. SFP reticle stays the same size regardless of magnification, which makes it better for zoom scopes that have a low bottom-end magnification that you'd want for hunting in low light.

Ok make sense so with FFP the crosshairs are probably real thin on low power.

They stay in the same relationship as the image, at all magnification, so when the image is small (large field of view) the reticle is thin. With a little practice FFP can do it all, including low light shooting. After all, if eyes are in the center of the scope, so is the reticle.

Illumination really helps when magnification is turned down, but some models' illumination is so bright it washes out what you're trying to aim at. As time has passed, manufacturers realized this problem, and have made the lowest setting of illumination very faint, with the ability to increase as needed.

FFP illimunted. Problem solved!

I like the Leupold Firedot reticle, I'd get a smaller, lighter scope than what you are looking at, 3-9x max.

I have a Conquest. It is good in low light. I own a Fullfield and in its price range is one of the better low light scopes. I've never been impressed with any Viper in low light. The scopes you are considering have too much magnification for hunting deer and hogs to me.

I'd get the zeiss.

Zeiss 6-20x50 1" tube or leupold vx 3i 4-14x50 30mm tube. Which is better

I was shooting the Zeiss 4.5-14 today. The guy who won (Brother in law) was shooting a Leupy of some sort with the CDS dial.

I would choose the leupold


The hunter line razor has good glass

EXACTLY! I want to take my 6.5 CM Custom to deer hunt but haven't because I have a March 5-40x56 FFP and the reticle at 5 power is pretty much invisible to me in low light...so it sits in the safe during hunting season...so my advice is, based on what you want to use it for, stick with SFP and if glass is your first priority I'd go with Zeiss.

I've owned Zeiss, Vortex, Leupold, Nikon, Simmons, etc. I still own and use the Zeiss and Leupold. Zeiss is the clearest to me of all of those. Vortex has more bells and whistles like illuminated reticle, 30mm main tube, but I was disappointed in the vortex viper PST glass and sold it for the Zeiss. I have not tried any of the new bushnells but they seem to get good reviews as others above have stated.