Glass quality is a subjective perception -2

[jeb405]

I'm about 60 now, back when I was more like 50 I bought a SS 10x and one of the same but the HD version. I so wanted to see how the HD was far superior. I was at 200 yards focussed on blades of grass and tiny branches, stayed at the range past shooting time to even try and see if the difference showed up at low light. Maybe I just don't know what to look for and the HD isn't a crazy expensive scope but I just could not justify the cost of the HD (although the turrets are clearly superior). I even tried those optics test pictures and didn't get differences.

JB

 

[whirlwindjml]

I'm about 60 now, back when I was more like 50 I bought a SS 10x and one of the same but the HD version. I so wanted to see how the HD was far superior. I was at 200 yards focussed on blades of grass and tiny branches, stayed at the range past shooting time to even try and see if the difference showed up at low light. Maybe I just don't know what to look for and the HD isn't a crazy expensive scope but I just could not justify the cost of the HD (although the turrets are clearly superior). I even tried those optics test pictures and didn't get differences.

JB

Makes me wonder about their hd glass.... My 8x Leopold HD binoculars picked up 20 more minutes of usable daylight vs my SS10x on my Lapua. We were shooting 1800 yard white target. When I switched so he could shoot I could not believe the difference. That was the first real 'eye opener" for me on better glass.......

 

[jeb405]

Makes me wonder about their hd glass.... My 8x Leopold HD binoculars picked up 20 more minutes of usable daylight vs my SS10x on my Lapua. We were shooting 1800 yard white target. When I switched so he could shoot I could not believe the difference. That was the first real 'eye opener" for me on better glass.......

But don't you have twice the amount of light with binos due to two oculars?

I have written before about trying to compre binos that are not the same and finding some inexpensive 10x50's appear superior to much higher quality 8x32 and 7x40. It's why I wanted to do the SS comparison as they were both 10x42.

JB

 

[gohring3006]

Makes me wonder about their hd glass.... My 8x Leopold HD binoculars picked up 20 more minutes of usable daylight vs my SS10x on my Lapua. We were shooting 1800 yard white target. When I switched so he could shoot I could not believe the difference. That was the first real 'eye opener" for me on better glass.......

That's the subjective part.
Athlons version of HD or ED glass is different than Vortex's version, one is better than the other for one person and the other brand would be better for someone else.

 

[whirlwindjml]

But don't you have twice the amount of light with binos due to two oculars?

I have written before about trying to compre binos that are not the same and finding some inexpensive 10x50's appear superior to much higher quality 8x32 and 7x40. It's why I wanted to do the SS comparison as they were both 10x42.

JB

Maby so. But it's not really a big difference now with my better vortex razor scope....so I assume it's the SS glass. Just my eye opinion though. I'm not nearly the optics snob that I would be if I made more money or was single....


I ditched the Ss scopes because they puked turrets on me twice. It's not worth dealing with the warranty.

 

[ButterBean]

I'm about 60 now, back when I was more like 50 I bought a SS 10x and one of the same but the HD version. I so wanted to see how the HD was far superior. I was at 200 yards focussed on blades of grass and tiny branches, stayed at the range past shooting time to even try and see if the difference showed up at low light. Maybe I just don't know what to look for and the HD isn't a crazy expensive scope but I just could not justify the cost of the HD (although the turrets are clearly superior). I even tried those optics test pictures and didn't get differences.

JB

The HD SWFA's are really good glass

 

[Rich Coyle]

But don't you have twice the amount of light with binos due to two oculars?

I have written before about trying to compre binos that are not the same and finding some inexpensive 10x50's appear superior to much higher quality 8x32 and 7x40. It's why I wanted to do the SS comparison as they were both 10x42.

JB

My Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 lasted two minutes longer than my Minox 13X56 binos. This proved to me exit pupil is a joke. When I did the same comparison with the Minor 15X58 the scope got spanked by twenty minutes.

By the way the scope magnification was set to match the binos in both tests.

 

[Rich Coyle]

jeb405,

You just made me get out my March 2 1/2-25X52 to compare it with the Bushnell. With both on their maximum setting I could see all the way down to 4 - 1 on the military optic chart 127 yards from the porch!

When I first got the March I compared them for low light. I couldn't find the deer antlers 131 yards away with the 6500. Once I found them with the March I was then able to make them out with the Bushnell.

Getting post sold is fun for me.

May I cry on your shoulder? It is months since the March's rifle was to be here.

 

[skipglo]

After reading the other thread and the title again I figured I would post a question about an experience or two or three.

Many times I have purchased two or three or four of the same brand and model of scope. Is it subjective to put them side by side on sand bags and have them all pointed at the same optics chart and discover no two are the same? Or is it a fact that quality control for manufacturers is less that stelar?

Interesting question Rich
to which you have the answer. Fortunately or unfortunately...I have never had 4 of same or even 3......but as for quality control anywhere...times are changing! You should try dealing with Ford warranty work. You will have another answer to your question.

 

[Darryle]

Yes it is, and you get what you pay for.

I have had several Leica scopes, a couple of higher end Vortex, Leupold, Burris, Zeiss and there has been nothing I have had or looked thru that compared to the Swarovski Z6 currently on my 280 Ackley. I will be replacing anything with a 30mm tube with a Swarovski Z6 or higher.

I just purchased a Leica Magnus 1.8 - 12 x 50mm and while it blows everything else I mentioned, it still isn't close to the Swarovski.

I just wish they would get off their duff and make a ballistic turret that is dialable, repeatable, durable and accurate.

 

[Old Rooster]

3 Leupold VX ll 3-9x40 all 3 looked the same.1 VX lll 4.5x40 and 1 VX lll 6.5-20 X 40 on 14 both looked fairly equal but on the VX lll 6.5X50 was crisper and could see more of the little things around the target.2 Bushnell Nitro 5-20X44(mine and a neighbor)looked the same.

 

[sp6x6]

I have a handful of scopes and rifles and do look and compare and get friends set up too. My March is comparable to my Mark 4, or swaro z5.My Mark 5 is much sharper past 20 x,to where I can see the barbs on fence at 440 yrd,not so with March which cost me more,but the low turrets ,size weight,fits my mountain rifle better.But I do a lot of judging threw scope.Pain to always pack a spotter. I would like to compare to another of the same,might have see anyone has one, mines 7 years old.

 

[Deleted member 48126]

Which is why I have no idea why anyone buys Swarovski rifle scopes.

Are Swarovski scopes not reliable?

 

[nksmfamjp]

Yes it is, and you get what you pay for.

How are you determining that? Do you have some detailed test regimen? Are you doing double blind comparisons somehow?