You may also want to check out Swarovski. The old AV series are on sale in many places as they have now come out with a Z-3 and a Z-5 to go with the Z-6. I have two of the AV models and they are wonderful in low light. Just a thought. ;)

To be honest I like the 10 power, it isnt a lot past the 9 power but does make a littel diff and It will allow you to see well into dusk, actually with moonlight can make out an animails indiviual eyes ans and features.
I think the 3X9X50 would be fine as well.:sheep:

Actually the higher the mag the more critical the external lighting becomes, now 1x isn't going to make a hill of beans in difference but if you have or used a spotting scope you'd know more mag needs more light.

I have had 40mm, 44mm & 50 mm conquests the only positive difference the bigger objective had was FOV. I found no better twilght performance with a 50mm vs the 40mm. Negatives such as higher mounting, scabbord issues, etc IMO outweigh the positives of a larger bell (objectives). For biggame needs the 2-3x to 9-10x x 40mm is my choice. LR target &/or varmit I see the need for higher mag.

Our big game hunting hours are 1/2 hour before and after, no problems with my 40mm zeiss's.

One thing to add once you've selected your scope make sure to put on quality mounts. Talley or Warne would be my choice. However I've had good results in the past with Leupold Dovetails as well.

Good luck

Yea I have Talley mounts on my TC Triumph and they are a very high quality mount. I probably will not go with another mount. I plan on getting some Talleys for my Browning BAR Safari when I re-scope her and some for my Browning X-bolt I plan on getting.--DrAsus :rock:

I like the 50 mm objective, we are talking 10mm and with talley rings you only need the medium rings, I put mine in quick detach and keep a strait 6X40 in my pack incase of a fall or damaged scope, release the leavers, pop in the 6 powere and go, my 3.5-10X50 is zeroed for 180gr tsx and I have a 3X9X50 zeroed for the 130 gr TSX, great rifle and does it all:-)

I have both .... 2 Monarch's , 2 - Zeiss Conquests . In my opinion the Conquest is a superior value by far.

+1 for the Zeiss. I have a 6.5-20x50 Conquest on my varmint AR, and have no complaints whatsoever. It is clear and crisp from edge to edge, never loses zero, and seems very solid. I compared them side by side when I was scope shopping. Not to get off-subject, but another good one is the Burris Fullfield II. Good glass, great warranty, and a nice ballistic plex reticle. I have one on my 300 WSM. It's been used, abused, dropped, muddy, cold, hot, and has held up through hundreds of 300 WSM rounds without losing it's zero. They cost quite a bit less too.

Yep, the Diarairi V/VM series are 30MM tubes. I own many different makes of scopes and the V/VM series of scopes are the best of them. My 2.5-10x50IR is mounted on my 30/06 and it is what I used when hunted boar in Germany. This hunting is done at night and if there is any moonlight at all the scope gathers it and I had no problem being able to hunt at midnight.
WW

i have a 3.5x10 x50mm ZeissConquest and its got a better view,clearer and crisper image,and better E/R than the nikon monarch does,in an earlier post someone mentioned there is no difference in twilight between a 40mm VS. a 50mm,i am gonna argue that one.we have had the same identical scopes a 40mm and a 50mm sitting inside of a swamp,and could see 15 minutes longer with the 50mm than we could a 40mm,there is a world of difference.the 50mm is letting in way more light than a 40mm,do the test yourself you will see,
call [email protected] and ask his expert opinion

It was me who said it and I annotated that it was my experience on the same scope model of 40 through 50 mm objectives. Based on my legal hunting hours 1/2 before and after I saw no difference in the ability to acquire my target with the 50 vs the 40's. I see no need to see after or before that because: A) its not legal and B) a scope is an aiming device not a scanning optic (such as bins or spotter).