SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
Hey Sully... Got my Swaro El's. That hurt a bit.
Better glass or a bigger objective?
- Thread starter Ycreek
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Hey Sully... Got my Swaro El's. That hurt a bit.
Sully2
Well-Known Member
Whine, whine, whine. All I hear is you got no money.....
Only reason I bought Zeiss over Swaro is my wallet is a lot skinnier than yours.....LOL
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
Whine, whine, whine. All I hear is you got no money.....
Only reason I bought Zeiss over Swaro is my wallet is a lot skinnier than yours.....LOL
You can look through them when you come up to hunt......lol They are very nice and dam expensive too. I got the optional winged eyecups, big difference.
I ain't got no money....now.
Sully2
Well-Known Member
You can look through them when you come up to hunt......lol They are very nice and dam expensive too. I got the optional winged eyecups, big difference.
I ain't got no money....now.
Id be dragging my Zeiss along with me....never fear. Those cracker-jack glasses you got only cost a few grand.......(cheap, cheap, cheap)
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
Sully.... I only said I'd share not give.....
scottyd2506
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2009
- Messages
- 159
Leupolds are good scopes, but for low light transmission, they are not that great. Euro optics are worlds better than Japanese optics that are uses in today's Leupold and Nightforce scopes. But some of the Asian glass is pretty good. I have compared my 6.5-20 x 50mm Leupold at dusk and low light to my Nikon 6-18x40. and both at 18x they look the same at dusk/dark. Now keep in mind the Leupold is a 1994 model vs the Nikkon a 2011. But I have looked through my friends 6-18x40 Leupold at dusk at 18x and my old Leupold seems to gather slightly more more light.
When I compare them to my Zeiss Conquest HD5 5-25x50mm at 18x.. the difference is like WORLDS.. it's like the Zeiss has Night vision compared to the Luepy. This is not a top of the line Zeiss either. Low light performance difference is utterly GIGANTIC.
You can not tell this looking through demo models in a sporting goods store w all the lights on a 6x
This is not to say nice high end Leupolds are not as good in other areas. Different coatings do different things, some scopes are much better and clear than Zeiss in the daytime.
Those Zeiss HD5's are a little over $1000. worth it too. the Nikons are wayyy under-rated, they are VERY clear and I paid like under $300 for my 6-18x40.
good luck
When I compare them to my Zeiss Conquest HD5 5-25x50mm at 18x.. the difference is like WORLDS.. it's like the Zeiss has Night vision compared to the Luepy. This is not a top of the line Zeiss either. Low light performance difference is utterly GIGANTIC.
You can not tell this looking through demo models in a sporting goods store w all the lights on a 6x
This is not to say nice high end Leupolds are not as good in other areas. Different coatings do different things, some scopes are much better and clear than Zeiss in the daytime.
Those Zeiss HD5's are a little over $1000. worth it too. the Nikons are wayyy under-rated, they are VERY clear and I paid like under $300 for my 6-18x40.
good luck
Rich Coyle
Well-Known Member
scottyd2506,
It looks like you are missing out on some things. I compared my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 side by side with my Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 in good light and low light. During the good light the z5 needed 2 powers setting higher to see the same detail. It also gave a more washed out look to the colors than the VX-6. They both went down at the same time in low light. What's even worse for the z5 is it didn't last any longer in low light than my Bushnell 4200 4-16X40 when on the same setting.
I have no idea where the scopes I have were made. But I can tell you none of mine are in the same league as my Nightforce 12-42X56 for good light or low light performance.
By the way I don't use leaves and twigs or bark for comparing. I use eye charts and deer antlers at distance. Before I started using charts and antlers I couldn't determine the difference in a Bushnell 6500 and the Nightforce above.
It looks like you are missing out on some things. I compared my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 side by side with my Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 in good light and low light. During the good light the z5 needed 2 powers setting higher to see the same detail. It also gave a more washed out look to the colors than the VX-6. They both went down at the same time in low light. What's even worse for the z5 is it didn't last any longer in low light than my Bushnell 4200 4-16X40 when on the same setting.
I have no idea where the scopes I have were made. But I can tell you none of mine are in the same league as my Nightforce 12-42X56 for good light or low light performance.
By the way I don't use leaves and twigs or bark for comparing. I use eye charts and deer antlers at distance. Before I started using charts and antlers I couldn't determine the difference in a Bushnell 6500 and the Nightforce above.
Sully2
Well-Known Member
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
I have a nikon on my muzzle loader. The glass is fine, the magnification asjustment is clunky... way too stiff to turn easily.
scottyd2506
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2009
- Messages
- 159
Sorry for the review Wildcater, but I saw what I saw. Everyone's eye are different and some of us see things different
Your comparing a Swaro vs Leupold. Mine was Zeiss. I sure certain models of Sawros are better at low light than my zeiss. Sounds like yours has coating optimized for daylight. .
years back I got to compare the Best Model Nightfroce 5-22x56 vs my 6.5-20x50mm Leupold and I agree with you the Nightforce looks better and seems to gather more light at high magnification. Not huge, but very noticeable This could have been due to the 50mm vs 56mm also.
I can tell you that the glass on my 5-25x50 Zeiss HD5 is not the best that come out of Europe. It's not the premium high grade coating Schott glass. I think the conquest glass is made in Romania, but they use older Zeiss Schott equipment.
I'm sure the Nightforce's are much stronger than any zeiss scope, they certainly have better zero stops, maybe better tracking. and Leupolds are high grade and have outstanding customer service. And in the daytime those scopes may look better than a lot of the Euro glass scopes.
at Dusk Dawn (when most deer coyotes etc are out) and dark the Eruo glass is has no equals per $$ The Zeiss 5-25x56mm Victory would utterly destroy anything Nightforce could even dream about in the low light gathering department. The older tech Romanican Glass (older zeiss equipment) that is used in the Zeiss HD conquests I would still put up against vs any Nightfoce for low light hunting.
Like I said the Europeans know night hunting and have done their homework through the years and are a 100 years advanced on the rest of the world.
Even just glass resolution and clarity, they have no equal.
Our eye's are different, and so can be our opinions on some minor subjects. To each their own.
But below are facts anyone can research
The US government and NASA when they wanted to build the worlds most advanced space telescope. They didn't go to Leupold and they sure didn't go to Nightforce to help them make the optics in the Hubble telescope. They didn't go to ANY glass maker in Asia. They went to Zeiss.
Rich Coyle
Well-Known Member
I still maintain you lack experience; at least with Swarovski. When I purchased my first Swarovski z5 5-25X52 I compared it with my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50. The z5 needed one more power on the magnification ring to show the same detail. It was slightly better than the 6500 in low light and surprise of surprise of surprises it matched my 4200 4-16X40 in daylight and low light. Since it was a near total failure to me at those performances I returned the z5 for a refund.
The next z5 was NOT as good as the first one and definitely no better than the 6500; even in low light. It went away also. Same with the next one. Finally the forth one was still slightly behind the 6500 in day, but as good as the 4200 in low light. The only reason I didn't just go with the 4200 is the z5 goes to 25X and the 4200 stops at 16X.
I compared them with a z6 3-18X at the shooting range. It was no better than the z5 or the 6500. I am convinced the statement, "You get what you pay for," was coined by a high dollar scope salesman.
scottyd2506
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2009
- Messages
- 159
I guess Swaro isn't as high quality as Zeiss then. I have heard good and bad reviews on all of them, even S&B scopes.
I agree the term "you get what you pay for" is not always true, although most of the time is it, but sometimes less is more, We have low $$ savages that are more accurate than big $$ Weatherby, Remington, Winchester etc. Now a days we have the Sig Sauer kilo 2000 range finder at $499 besting $900 Leica 1600b's.
We have $1200 Zeiss 5-25x50 Conquest besting $3000 Nightforce 5-22x56mm scopes for clarity, low light gathering etc.
Some manufacturers have made some great products in the last 20-25 years, gotten cocky, raise prices, then get lazy and focus on gather $$$ while some other company comes about or some existing company makes a great new product w new technology , and leave the other one in the dust. the high price company is wayyy to arrogant to lower the price, and relies on the FAN boys to keep giving em the $$$ while the rest of us get something that blows em out of the water for performance.
There was a time not too long ago I remember Nightforce was no match for Leupolds, then in a few years the top Nightforces where $1300 while the top Leupy was $900.
I think Leupold may have caught back up with Nightforce in optics if we compare best vs best. People buy the $700-900 Sighton scopes and swear they track as good, have as good or better clarity then the $2500 Nighforce they own.
Don't get me wrong here, For hunting low light dusk dawn, I'd rather have my Zeiss, but for my long range target daytime rifle I'm building, If someone gave me the Top Nightforce I'd not replace it and love the features is has. . Nightforce is actually coming out w some a 5-25x 56mm B.E.A.S.T at $4400.00 uses German glass and has a lot of features.
US military spec- yeah the US military has to ask Nightforce is they would put some good glass in there scopes for them. Sounds more like a Zeiss scope with Nightforce stamped on it. I mean the 5-25 power is something Zeiss uses, Nightforce internals are 5.5-22 power usually.
But for $3900 I could get a Zeiss Hensoldt 6-24x 72mm for high magnification, no scope on this planet can touch it, esp for high mag light gathering (minus night vision) the Ginormas high quality schott 72mm has got to suck in the clarity and light at 24x nothing can compare to.
Again I agree with you, $4400 vs $3900 the lesser is better.
Rich Coyle
Well-Known Member
scottyd2506,
Very good post. Thanks for taking the time. My heavy rifle could sure use the 6-24X72. But cash flow is a little lacking.
Very good post. Thanks for taking the time. My heavy rifle could sure use the 6-24X72. But cash flow is a little lacking.
