My eyesight is about 20/20. I am in my 40's so close up I can
no longer focus fully without help (worn out AO I guess).
But that doesn't effect this testing. And I have had a recent
eye exam, and had 20/20 but with some astigmatism.
I did these tests once at midday in August. I found that for
the most part, on a sunny day, heat waves at higher magni-
fications(somewhere around 8-12x depending on things, like
wind or no etc.), that resolution was diminished by the turbulent
air conditions. The Simmons was good enough under these
conditions. The Sportview even then showed a lack of resolution
however compared to better scopes.
I did this test once, in late September, starting an hour before
sunset, and below a hill crest so there was no direct sun on the
field I was using. In this calm air with plenty of remaining light
is where resolution differences showed up best. The Simmons
on hand was an 8-32x 44mm target scope. It had all the
resolution I needed to about 16x or 18x. And diminished above
that. The Sightron SII was 6-24x 42mm. And had all the resolu-
tion I could use at all powers. For instance I could see no finer
details with the Simmons at 32x than I could with the Sightron
on 24x. The image was larger which for shooting a target might
still have been a valuable benefit.
I had two Monarchs, 4-12x and 6.5-20x. Both had all the resolu-
tion I could use at all powers.
The Burris Fullfield, Pentax Lightseeker and Bushnell Sportview
were 3-9x scopes. So testing had to be at 100 yards. And
testing the lower magnifications meant the fonts would have
been too large. So I only did those at 9x.
Also had some Nikon Lookout IV binoculars in 10x50mm. These
had all the resolution I could use. I think maybe just almost at
times they were not quite good enough resolution. But if not
they were real close. As an aside, these medium quality binoculars
were far brighter than the best riflescopes. When set at similar
powers or exit pupils it didn't matter. The binoculcar was much
much brighter. Don't know if it is because of using both eyes,
or there are fewer lenses or what.
I continued on into darkness for brightness testing. I was under
some large pecan and pine trees. And there was a half moon
just after sunset.
The Sportview was pretty useless just minutes after sunset.
The Sightron was too dark just about 5 minutes before the
Simmons. Both of these had fine crosshairs with target dot.
And dot's were too dim to see a few minutes before they were
useless anyway.
The Nikon's, Fullfield and Lightseekers were plenty bright. You
could make out images quite well long after the duplex crosshairs
were gone. Like others have said, thick crosshairs are needed
after darkness. And this was generally 30 minutes or more after
sunset.
Now looking into shadows as darkness fell, the Simmons would
see with magnification just about anything you could see with the
naked eye. The Fullfield would see a little better. Shadows
appearing a grey void, would reveal useful images through the
Fullfield. The Lightseeker had useable images several minutes
longer. As did the Monarch's.
Surprising to me at the time was the finding that despite a smaller
exit pupil, higher magnification let you see more right at dark.
I could see pure black areas under bushes. But look through my
Monarch at 20x and see limbs, grass, leaves etc. pretty well. The
crosshair was long gone however. And as darkness fell the Monarch at 12x became a grey void, but turning it back up to 20x
would again reveal usable images.
Even more surprising, was switching to the binoculars. Was like
someone lightened things up again. The Monarch at 20x was
still showing some useful images after darkness in the dimly
moonlit areas. The binoculars at 10x would let you see very
well. Including some of those shaded areas under brush.
As for font sizes, depends on distance and magnification used.
I started with 8 and went up. I don't believe I made any use of
anything smaller than a font size of 12. And at lower mags the
biggest fonts were useful even up to 36.
