Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Equipment Discussions
Leica geovid 3000 vs Zeiss Victory 2500
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="31perersen" data-source="post: 1519781" data-attributes="member: 66782"><p>I was hoping somebody who owns either of these or can get their hands on them could do a review and or comparison? They have been out for a little while now and I'm having troubles finding alot of good information and reviews. I think alot of us would really like to see how well they do on soft targets (i.e. hunting situations) compared to like a geovid 2200 where there is quite a bit of data to use references to compare. I have the 2200 geovids and like them but wish the reticle where smaller for ranging small targets or targets with things like trees, shrubs, buck brush or small hills around them. I remember some very good info we had gotten from in depth reviews on the kilo 2400 when it came out as far as ranging soft targets and reticle size/actual location of beam vs reticle location and so on. If anybody could give their thoughts on these 2 binos that have fairly in depth use with them I'd really appreciate it. Is the ranging reticle smaller on the new geovid 3000 vs the 2200? I see the beam divergence is quite alot smaller which is great, but havent been able to find any info on whether the reticle is as well to reflect it. Thanks for any and all info guys!</p><p></p><p>Josh</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="31perersen, post: 1519781, member: 66782"] I was hoping somebody who owns either of these or can get their hands on them could do a review and or comparison? They have been out for a little while now and I'm having troubles finding alot of good information and reviews. I think alot of us would really like to see how well they do on soft targets (i.e. hunting situations) compared to like a geovid 2200 where there is quite a bit of data to use references to compare. I have the 2200 geovids and like them but wish the reticle where smaller for ranging small targets or targets with things like trees, shrubs, buck brush or small hills around them. I remember some very good info we had gotten from in depth reviews on the kilo 2400 when it came out as far as ranging soft targets and reticle size/actual location of beam vs reticle location and so on. If anybody could give their thoughts on these 2 binos that have fairly in depth use with them I'd really appreciate it. Is the ranging reticle smaller on the new geovid 3000 vs the 2200? I see the beam divergence is quite alot smaller which is great, but havent been able to find any info on whether the reticle is as well to reflect it. Thanks for any and all info guys! Josh [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Equipment Discussions
Leica geovid 3000 vs Zeiss Victory 2500
Top