Getting over the need for daylight bright illumination in low-powered variables

[Failure2Stop]

Frequently, folks demand that an upcoming optic purchase be "daylight bright", when in reality it is not necessary.

I used to be firmly of the school of thought that I wanted my low-powered variable (1-4x+) to have an Aimpoint-like bright center dot or reticle illumination.
I believe this to be a combination of people's experience with Aimpoints and EoTechs in contrast to early 1-4s with thin reticles and less than optimal illumination. The low powered variables proved to be poorer performers than the bright 1x optics at close range. The single early stand-out from that constriction was the Schmidt and Bender ShortDot. The point that made it stand out was the relatively bright center dot illumination. The only reason that it was not more popular as the hefty price-tag associated with it.

With that, the race was on to find an optic that provided equivalent close-range performance with a price tag that wasn't equal to two month's rent.
The first question asked about every optic since then is, "Is the illumination daylight bright?".

Well, things have changed. Or really, optic manufacturers have started to put out reticles that don't need to be illuminated to be useful.

Handy example: the USO 1-4 DFP.

(Read Kyle Defoor's thoughts at: http://www.kyledefoor.com/2011/11/us-optics-sn-4s.html)

The outer ring is big enough and bold enough to stand out against pretty much any background, without being illuminated.

One common issue with dot optics is during low-light the dot/reticle needs to be adjusted to not bloom/overpower the background or target. Once the white light comes on, the reticle is lost unless the intensity is adjusted. This is not an issue with a bold traditional reticle. The illumination can be adjusted to be useful in the reduced light condition, but the reticle stands clearly out with a white-light illuminated target area.

Another issue is that most traditional low powered variables have terrible battery life, and some folks have been known to forget to turn the illumination on or accidentally off before needing to use the optic in a timely manner. A bold reticle alleviates these issues.

So, while daylight illumination is good (and needed for some reticle arrangements) it is not the be-all/end-all in optic selection, and really only beats around the bush as to how useful or "fast" an optic can be. Overly focusing on illumination forces manufacturers to devote time and money toward only one aspect of their product.

[ra2bach]

yup. but I'll say this is probably the main reason I prefer SFP on a low-x variable. or like the reticle above and the SWFA SS1-6, the circle/cross gives a good aiming point without illum. the Vortex 2.5-10x32 is almost unusable at the low end without illum due to being FFP...

[l8apex]

I will agree that DFP like reticles help a lot. For my eyes, a standard cross hair with a circle at center through all quadrants like the Leupy VXR Patrol does very well with/without illumination. I've always been a bit slower with reticles on X optics that don't have these 'frames' of reference i.e. NF FC2.

[quaesitor logica]

One common issue with dot optics is during low-light the dot/reticle needs to be adjusted to not bloom/overpower the background or target. Once the white light comes on, the reticle is lost unless the intensity is adjusted. This is not an issue with a bold traditional reticle. The illumination can be adjusted to be useful in the reduced light condition, but the reticle stands clearly out with a white-light illuminated target area.

One of my favorite things about a Low power variable optic. I set mine for the lowest Illumination possible so as to operate indoors or night. If i need to white light anything, my reticle instantly goes black and highly visible. Lighting and red dots do not play nice at night. I have one RDS left and I think it will go if I decide that the USO SN4 is worth $1200.

[Failure2Stop]

yup. but I'll say this is probably the main reason I prefer SFP on a low-x variable. or like the reticle above and the SWFA SS1-6, the circle/cross gives a good aiming point without illum. the Vortex 2.5-10x32 is almost unusable at the low end without illum due to being FFP...

Agreed.
I recently reversed my trend toward only accepting FFP optics.
The biggest reason is that there were some interesting options out there that were not bold enough at 1x for rapid use.
I still have a lingering preference for well balanced FFP reticles, but I think that much of that preference is carried over from previous 3-9 and 2.5-10 optics that were virtually unusable at low power, or caused issues with mil-holds at low or mid magnification ranges.

I will agree that DFP like reticles help a lot. For my eyes, a standard cross hair with a circle at center through all quadrants like the Leupy VXR Patrol does very well with/without illumination. I've always been a bit slower with reticles on X optics that don't have these 'frames' of reference i.e. NF FC2.

While I do really like the DFP concept, I used that picture as it shows a very usable size of the outer ring at low power.
If what I thought I heard is correct, the USO 1-4 DFP with the new dot brightness will be absolutely killer, appealing to both the guys that want Aimpoint bright dots and those that like bold reticles, with no draw-back to either.

[Chameleox]

This post comes at a good time for me, as I'm considering switching from a red dot to a 1-4 for my patrol rifle. Great read!

Jack, how we'll does the transition go, when in a daylight environment, when placing the aiming point over a dark object (guy with black shirt)? Would putting the optic on a low illumination setting help with that?

[Koshinn]

yup. but I'll say this is probably the main reason I prefer SFP on a low-x variable. or like the reticle above and the SWFA SS1-6, the circle/cross gives a good aiming point without illum. the Vortex 2.5-10x32 is almost unusable at the low end without illum due to being FFP...

Really? I've used the vortex 2.5-10x32 at close range set at 2.5 without issue during the day. At night, I'd agree, but that's any aiming device without illumination out a flash light.

I really like the vortex pst 1-4 capped for a few reasons. Standard moa hashed cross hairs in the middle with bold circle around it to see without illumination. SFP so it never gets too small. Capped turrets for durability (can be used without the covers too). Illumination just in case.

The only things I'd change is the illumination to a dot instead of the reticle so it's brighter and lasts longer and if possible, shorter and lighter are always things to strive for.

[Failure2Stop]

This post comes at a good time for me, as I'm considering switching from a red dot to a 1-4 for my patrol rifle. Great read!

Jack, how we'll does the transition go, when in a daylight environment, when placing the aiming point over a dark object (guy with black shirt)? Would putting the optic on a low illumination setting help with that?

I've never had an issue.
Here are some examples that SWFA did with their 1-4 when it was first hitting the market:




If the ring is too small, it gets lost in dark spots, which is where illumination is helpful.
I had this issue with the Mk6 1-6x with the CMR-W reticle.
Most noticeable when at 1x, with targets over 50 meters, but before needing to dial up in magnification.

[ASH556]

Wow, great thread Jack. I think you're right. The problem I've had was trying to make the 1-4 work like a red dot. What I realized is that it isn't supposed to. I will say that personally I much prefer the Aimpoint's simple dot to the Eotech's ring. I'm wondering if the Nightforce's FC-2 reticle would carry over that same concept in a 1-4. Specific thoughts/experience with that optic?

[jonconsiglio]

I've been using a Leupold vx-r patrol 1.25-4. I've gotten very quick with it and have been using it on a 14.5" Colt and a 9" AAC 300blk. I'm not sure how others work, but even when I'm not looking through the scope, the red dot is viable out to the edges, almost like an occluded red dot or the front cover closed. This has made it very fast for me.

Now, I'm seeing the thicker reticle as a benefit. This belonged to munch520 and I figured I'd use this until I could afford a MK6 1-6 or something similar.

As for now, these won't replace my Aimpoints, but I'm getting pretty quick with the Leupold and I really like how precise it is. I'm more accurate than using a t1 and magnifier. I'd love to get to a point where these replace the Aimpoints for me.

I think if this was a 1x or 1.1x (since 1x seems smaller than what the eye sees) I could see this being a primary optic, even for home defense or work (or duty) use. Hell, even the 1.25x should work fine with a little extra time training.