Which Scope? Roos. Daylight & Spotlight

[shoot2eat]

Hi Guys, I'm brand new to this forum. Tried to post this already but didn't seem to work for some reason...
I'm in the market for a new scope, and want to hear people's opinions from personal experiences.

My primary use is shooting kangaroos for personal consumption (yes I am legally permitted to do so). I need a scope that is capable in both daylight and by spotlight. Accurate enough for head shots out to a maximum of 200m, but often much closer.
To be mounted on a Tikka T3X Hunter.

I will do some target shooting, mainly for checking zero, and practice for hunting accuracy.

I'm not overly restricted by budget, but I don't enjoy throwing money down the drain either, if you know what I mean...

Looking forward to hearing from people in the community with personal experiences.

[JohnV]

I have used scopes in the 4 to 12 power range for spotlighting roos and foxes . Usually sett the scope on 10 to 12 power under the spotlight . You don't want too much power and a small field of view and small eye box as it can make it hard to find the target . A quality scope with a good sharp image can get away with less power . I used an 8 x 56 Kahles for some years and it was great until the Army confiscated the gun and scope just because I tried to take it to Vietnam in my kit bag . No sense of humor at all . My current spotlighting scope is a 4 to 12 x 50 Leupold VX2 and it works good on a 223. Also used a 3.5 to 10 x 50 Leupold VX3 on a 22-250 as a back up spotlighting / varmint rig . You want a scope with a duplex or fairly fine cross hair so you can see the cross hair well and target the roos head with some precision . Don't buy a scope with a heavy picket style cross hair that comes in some quality European scopes that is designed for thick forest hunting . Not very good for spotlighting .

[deye243]

I've been using loopy 4.5-14 for decades and now use a zeiss conquest v4 4-16x44 and won't be going back and it gets used on 16x under the ligh as well .
I have not noticed any problem with target acquisition or eye box but I don't have a problem with any scope in that regard as I have stocks that fit and practiced for years.

[Jorlcrin]

I have a T3 Hunter in 7mm-08, with a Nightforce SHV 5-20x56 scope, MOAR illuminated reticle.

I've done a lot of sunrise/sunset shots with it, and found it works really well.
I dont use the IR much, but there has been the occasional twilight shot where it's been worth it.
The IR version of that scope retails for just over $1800, and the non-IR version around $1600 or so.
But the Nightforce SHV is on the largeish side.

On my Tikka T3x CTR(.223), I run a Zerotech 'Thrive' 3-12x44, with a simple Duplex reticle.
No IR on my ZeroTech, but havent found it's been needed, and I've done some pretty low-light shots.
My Zerotech cost around $550 through the local store, and I cant see it's a third of the scope compared to the Nightforce.
A bit more compact, and ticks all the boxes for me.
I see they sell a 4-16x50 version of the 'Thrive', which seems to be available online for about the $550 mark, plus shipping.
Having a larger objective lens should pull in a bit more light.
I dont do a lot of spotlighting but I'm confident both work just fine if I go on a night-time prowl.

Both my scopes are 2nd Focal Plane scopes.

My preference would be to have a MOAR reticle, but thats simply what works for me, and most of the shots I'd use it for would be over 200m.
Other people find the graduations get too 'busy' for them, and I can understand that.
The distances you are talking about, a simple duplex would work just fine.

Both of these rifles/scopes have been used both under the spotlight, as well as sunrise/sunset.
I tend to run my scopes on lower magnification, especially when I'm only shooting 100-200m or so.
Rarely have my magnification up to half the max zoom; usually maybe a third or so?
Again; It's what's worked for me.

[bigpete]

Best thing I've ever used for this purpose was a Hakko 8x56. Plenty of power to headshoot roos at 200,lots of field of view,and great light transmission

[GQshayne]

I would add Meopta to your list. I have two Meostars, and they compare with Zeiss and Swarovski in my opinion.

[JohnV]

I have used up to 24 power scope spotlighting but on average I found it too much power . Ok if the game stays still but if the game moves as you line up the shot you have to take your head away from the scope to track the target and realign the gun because the field of view is small . If a pig runs out in the early morning it makes it harder to lead the moving target than using a lower power like 8 to 12 . A 12 power with a 50 mm objective has an eye box of 4.16 mm making it easier to swing onto a target than the more powerful scope and would be brighter . 24 power with a 44 mm objective has an eye box of 1.8 mm , much smaller . 16 power with a 50 mm objective has an exit pupil of 3.125 mm still pretty good . You can see that the bigger objective lens has an advantage .
High magnification and a small objective lens is a poor combination . 8 to 16 power with a 50 to 56 mm objective is a good range .

[Peterwho]

I would add Meopta to your list. I have two Meostars, and they compare with Zeiss and Swarovski in my opinion.

I couldn’t agree more with this recommendation. Imo they compare to scopes that cost twice the price.

[shoot2eat]

Some great advice, and a lot to consider. Much appreciated.

[GQshayne]

I would also agree with the variable power being useful with a low power of around 4. The low power will be good at closer ranges. 4-12 or 4-14 would be adequate for 200m.

Also, in regards to scope quality, each of us is different in what we "need". As we get older our eyesight diminishes. I now appreciate high quality lenses, whereas when I was younger I thought they were a bit of a waste of money. Not so much of a concern for spotlighting, but the high end scopes perform very well in twilight situations.

[JohnV]

I would also agree with the variable power being useful with a low power of around 4. The low power will be good at closer ranges. 4-12 or 4-14 would be adequate for 200m.

Also, in regards to scope quality, each of us is different in what we "need". As we get older our eyesight diminishes. I now appreciate high quality lenses, whereas when I was younger I thought they were a bit of a waste of money. Not so much of a concern for spotlighting, but the high end scopes perform very well in twilight situations.

I have culled hundreds of roos and many foxes using a 4 to 12 x 50 Leupold . Most shots are well within 150 meters . When the roos got skittish and stood further off I swapped to a 22-250 HB Sako with a 3.5 to 10 x 50 Leupold which was all I had at the time . You need a powerful spotlight and clear conditions with a good rest system to reliably target a roos head over 250 meters or more . Dust in the air during a drought can make visibility bad under a spotlight . I have pulled off a few long shots but I generally passed on the longer shots due to humane considerations and plenty of roos at closer range anyway .
One time many years ago on Oxley Station there was roo mobs in the hundreds , like one mob estimated at 800 roos .

[tuknal]

nightforce shv are not bad ,,i have 3 of them and use them for what your intending (harvesting)
but just out of curiosity what permit have you got that allows shooting roos for personal consumption

[mchughcb]

Haven't used a spotlight in years. Last fox hunt I did was 13 foxes with the Pard DS35-70.
Foxes didn't even know there was a problem.

[gunderson]

I still spotlight, any 12 power scope that isnt complete garbage does the job just fine, most the time I am on 8 or 10 power anyways. 50mm objective is better for grabbing light but a 40mm made of good glass is gonna be same as an average one at 50mm

biggest problem nowadays is most scopes have horrendously large crosshairs and a million tacticool features that no honest person can say they actually use when you have a few seconds to take a shot on a fox etc. and considering shooting roos has to happen inside 200m, you dont need much of anything fancy for that.

[geoff]

I have used a Leupold VX5HD 3-15x44 with a duplex reticle to good effect commercially harvesting roos

The meopta optika5 on one of my other rifles is no match whatsoever for the clarity of a Leupold VX5

[Billo]

I doubt Ill use a spotlight ever again, sold a few rarely used rifles before Xmas and bought a thermal.

Shot 3 pigs at a bit over 100m from a mates house on Friday nite, might got 1 if I had known they were there spotlighting.

[gunderson]

I doubt Ill use a spotlight ever again, sold a few rarely used rifles before Xmas and bought a thermal.

Shot 3 pigs at a bit over 100m from a mates house on Friday nite, might got 1 if I had known they were there spotlighting.

I've not used thermals, but here we have paddocks that range from 200 acres to 650 acres and the country is pretty flat, I doubt a thermal would pick up the same animals that the light does across the distance. one tiny little faint red eye waaaaay off in the distance after some whistling till finally its within 300-400m of the ute... id imagine you'd need to be zoomed in a long way on a thermal scope to see that.

horses for courses tho, if I lived in valley country and was looking for pigs and so on in thicker cover... hells yeah I would go thermal, do i think thermal is needed for roos? not unless you are professionally culling, destroying a small number on a place for the landowner wouldnt justify the cost in my mind.

[mchughcb]

I doubt Ill use a spotlight ever again, sold a few rarely used rifles before Xmas and bought a thermal.

Shot 3 pigs at a bit over 100m from a mates house on Friday nite, might got 1 if I had known they were there spotlighting.

I've not used thermals, but here we have paddocks that range from 200 acres to 650 acres and the country is pretty flat, I doubt a thermal would pick up the same animals that the light does across the distance. one tiny little faint red eye waaaaay off in the distance after some whistling till finally its within 300-400m of the ute... id imagine you'd need to be zoomed in a long way on a thermal scope to see that.

horses for courses tho, if I lived in valley country and was looking for pigs and so on in thicker cover... hells yeah I would go thermal, do i think thermal is needed for roos? not unless you are professionally culling, destroying a small number on a place for the landowner wouldnt justify the cost in my mind.

I used a thermal monocular the other week around Esperance way and I could see foxes approaching 800m on the back of the ute in the stubble. As we didn't need to shine a light around my mate was driving to about 100m and the foxes would just sit in the stubble waiting for the ute to drive on and we then just hit them with then Pard night vision and that was that. My mate was on fire one night and shot 4 foxes within 50m radius at about 150m from the ute. They thought they were safe as they got picked off one by one.

[gunderson]

nice work, yeah mint... like I say I have never used one..... and considering the cost vs all the gear I already have I am unlikely to ever use one... but good to see others getting results on pests.

[mchughcb]

Getting cheaper by the day. A second hand pulsur under 2K is a bargain.

[Shootermick]

I doubt Ill use a spotlight ever again, sold a few rarely used rifles before Xmas and bought a thermal.

Shot 3 pigs at a bit over 100m from a mates house on Friday nite, might got 1 if I had known they were there spotlighting.

Same here.
Sold off some gear that I didn’t use last year and bought a thermal scope and a monocular.
Used it a couple of times, then sold my spotlight as well.
I’ve still got an old ute with a spotlight in the roof if I wanted to go spotlighting with a mate, but I love the thermal now and it’s just so easy to go out when I want on my own.
A month ago I shot 4 foxes, 6 Roos, and 3 rabbits, the rabbits were just for fun at the end, and missed one fox. So 13 hits from 14 shots, in about 200 acres and an hour and a half.

[zbenga]

I use a Leica 1x6, has a daylight visible super small and bright red dot

under 200 meters would not hunt with anything else, super fast to acquire targets and for stuff at 100m can stay on 1x or 2x with both eyes open

Try an LPVO first maybe, some are really cheap and light

[mchughcb]

Leica is a great scope

[Die Judicii]

Haven't used a spotlight in years. Last fox hunt I did was 13 foxes with the Pard DS35-70.
Foxes didn't even know there was a problem.

May I be so cheeky as ask why the "Foxes didn't even know there was a problem", Did you keep missing ?

[Die Judicii]

I've not used thermals, but here we have paddocks that range from 200 acres to 650 acres and the country is pretty flat, I doubt a thermal would pick up the same animals that the light does across the distance. one tiny little faint red eye waaaaay off in the distance after some whistling till finally its within 300-400m of the ute... id imagine you'd need to be zoomed in a long way on a thermal scope to see that.

Any decent quality thermal scope would do it with ease.
Mine reaches out to 1.2 klms plus.

[Die Judicii]

I would add Meopta to your list. I have two Meostars, and they compare with Zeiss and Swarovski in my opinion.

I couldn’t agree more with this recommendation. Imo they compare to scopes that cost twice the price.

For the OP,,,,,,,,,,,,
My recomendation would be to try and pickup a 2nd hand (good condition) Zeiss Duralyt 3-12 x 50 illuminated,, or Zeiss Conquest DL illuminated.
With the Number 60 reticle.

Magnificent performance especially in low light conditions with same performance in full daylight.
The illuminated reticles are infinately adjustable to suit from extra strong daylight right through to the darkest of nights.
The simple fact that I've invested in thirteen of them says a lot.

[safeshot]

I had a mate long time back who had a few basic rules about scopes.
1. Spend on a scope what you spent under it.
2.Rifles and scopes is a bit like breeding horses. You put your best 'on-top'.

for me I like larger objective lens. If you take a 40mm objective lens it will have a surface area of1257 q mm. A 50 mm lens is 1964mm.
formula. diam twice x11= then divide that x 14 for surface area.