Haven't noticed any short eye relief issues with mine but its on a rifle chambered in 6.5 Creed.

Thanks for all of the discussion. I've read here and elsewhere that the glass in the VX6 is not as good in low light as the VX5, I do not have any personal experience with the vx6 though. I have fondled a 1-6x24 Trijicon Accupoint and it is super fast to the eye at low power. With an exit pupil diameter of 12mm @ 1 power and 4.1mm @ 6 power I would have thought it would be a great low light woods scope. The Leupold vx5 1-5x24 has an exit pupil diameter of 4.8mm @ 5 power. I put my 2-10x42 vx5 on this particular rifle and it is really too big for it, looks kinda goofy and is heavier than I want on it.

I wish the vx3hd 2.5-8x36 or the Swaro Z3 3-9x36 was available with the illuminated reticle. I may end up with one of these two anyways.

FWIW, I have no idea how the Accupoint 1-6 is in low light. I've only handled them in a shop setting. It was struck from my possibles list due to its 19oz weight. Did a lot of soul searching before the 16oz VX-6 was purchased. The Accupoint 3-9 weighs 13.5 oz.

Most folks probably aren't as concerned about rifle weight as I am. I cover a lot of rugged ground and pack out any game taken. A light rig is a right rig for my use. Ain't getting any younger, ya know.

VX5hd and VX6hd have the same glass, at least I have been told that by industry insiders.

I would still prefer the Swaro 3-9x36 if I was buying new.

Guessing that even with equal glass, there may be trade offs to get a 1:6 zoom ratio. Just a guess though.

Would a 1-4 Accupoint give you enough top end? At 14 oz it might be a contender for a woods rifle.

I don't know, I've never had a scope with this low of a top end.

FWIW, the vx5hd 1-5x24 with the custom dial system and the fire dot illuminated reticle is listed at 14.7 oz.

Here's some inspiration, lol. No sling in this shot but the Hill People Gear stock cuff is installed. The VX5 1-5 Firedot would likely be a nice glass.

Kahles made some 3-10x50 mm scopes a few years ago. Super light, 1" tube. I have 2, and will buy every one I can find.

I have a Minox vx series 1-5 on my 450 bushmaster. It has a 24mm objective and it is not the gun I take into the woods in the afternoon. I usually go in with my Ruger Carbine 308 which has 2-8x42 Zeiss duralyt scope, or my other 308 with a Minox zx 3-15x50. I find the Zeiss a little lacking at dark 30 as far as being able to zoom right up on a deers head and make sure it's not a spike.

My AR10 will be sporting a Vortex Viper 2-10x42, but I don't know what it will be like towards disk yet.

As someone who shoots a lot and hunts over 50 days a year, and also does some freelance work with Meopta, I would suggest that instead of the Optika6 1-6x24 (a favorite AR scope of mine), take a look at the Optika5 2-10x42. It will give you a wider FOV, a brighter picture, and still around the same weight, but less money. I have a .308 Win topped within Optika5 3-15x44 Z-Plus reticle just in case I get a longer shot and need to use bullet drops. Same great Optika glass, just on a slightly bigger frame.

Question for those of your who like Meopta scopes. I have owned a few of them old Zeiss Conquest scopes, which were actually rebranded Meopta scopes. These were a good a scope for the money IMO. But the Meopta Meostar scopes I have looked through had terrible tunnel vision, which is something I HATE in a scope. The Zeiss Conquest HD5 scopes had this to a small extent but not like the Meostar scopes.

Do the Optika line of scopes have this tunnel effect?

I dont know if it was mentioned already, but in a recent interview, a Leupold rep reported that the VX3 2.5-8x36 has the highest light transmission of ANY scope they make, as well as being very lightweight. If I was building a mountain rifle that's what I'd put on it.

I read that many years ago, didn't know if it still was #1. My son has a VX3 1.75-6 , to my eyes it's brighter. My 2.5-8 is 20+ years old though.

Wish they’d make a Firedot 2.5-8x36. Would also be great if they’d bring the 1.75-6 back, this time with a Firedot. To me, illumination is non-negotiable. Just luv a lit reticle!

Well they did, sort of, the VX-R 2-7x33 . It actually has better exit pupil numbers than the 2.5-8 . But they discontinued those too. It's getting harder and harder to find a good low power range, woods scope , with a deer killing reticle.

BTW, for some dumb reason, Leupold never offered the VX III 2.5-8 with heavy duplex . I bought a new one , never opened it, sent it to them and had heavies installed.

Unfortunately, Leupold has closed their custom shop and will not change reticles anymore.

Didn't know that .

Me too

Is there a difference between light transmission and being able to see better late? I have googled a ton of articles all saying the bigger diameter scope lets in more light or you can see better late with larger diameter. Any small scope I hav used - I could not pick up deer great at last light. This is the only site where I have heard people saying these small scopes bring in light better. I also called one of the top of the line scopes and asked for tech support. I asked if the larger scopes were an advantage to be able to see better late (i hav always heard this from large numbers of really good hunters as well as what I hav seen for myself). After the guy got thru laughing - he answered of course - that why we made the larger diameter. That’s what I thought

I hav seen a few articles - one was by Ron Spomer and he was touting the smaller scopes over large 56 diameter and how the smaller was better and hating on the larger - But at the end - he said - ok - yea - the large diameter brings in more light - we all know that - but the diff is so minimal - you would be crazy for the trade off. Maybe this is what you guys are saying

I will call a different large scope manufacturer and ask the same question tomorrow and I already know the answer I will get

Last year somebody on here posted an article supporting their view - i don’t know how to post articles - but there ton of articles saying exactly what I am saying. I May call all the large scope manufactures and talk to tech support - bet I get some answer from all. Somebody in this thread mentioned a sales rep said as supporting proof on better light transmission - a rep can say whatever he feels like saying - there sales.

I May be miss understanding what you guys are saying or maybe you prefer the lighter weight

Anyway - maybe the smaller scope is better for long range shooting