Meostar R1r 3-12x56 vs Swaro z8i 2.3-18x56 quick observation

[Austin Dial]

So for the past two years I've drooled over the reviews of the Swarovski z8i and has been a dream scope for me(being a Hunter low light is #1), but she's fairly pricey. With that being said about 5 years back I stumbled on a meopta meostar and fell in love with it and this weekend my z8i came in the mail. So quick review(now I'm a Hunter more than a shooter) #1 hunting advantage first night low light goes to meostar #2 the field of view in the z8i is incredible and puts the meostar to shame. As of first night low light outweighs fov so meostar for me. This was a quick 10 minute view out if my kitchen window looking about 150yds. So I'll have a better field report later.

 

[Austin Dial]

Comparisons were at 3, 8, 12 zoom

 

[Riflehunter1776]

I dont have that particular Swaro, but in my tests between the Meostar R2 2.5-15x56, which their CS said was their "ultimate" low light scope, Mine came in around the same brightness as a Kahles Helia C with a 56mm obj, and and a bit behind a new S&B 8x56. My brightest is still a Zeiss Diavari with the T* coating. That zeiss is hard to beat.

 

[Austin Dial]

I dont have that particular Swaro, but in my tests between the Meostar R2 2.5-15x56, which their CS said was their "ultimate" low light scope, Mine came in around the same brightness as a Kahles
elia C with a 56mm obj, and and a bit behind a new S&B 8x56. My brightest is still a Zeiss Diavari with the T* coating. That zeiss is hard to beat.

Was just a quick check but for me I'm all about low light. Was actually a first time I have ever noticed fov. So I was very impressed from that stand point. I just sold a leica er5 3-15x56 and it was good, but wasn't illuminated and I've be one accustomed to the illuminate reticles and that joker was huge and heavy I feel all 3 are great scopes. Might have to check out the diavari

 

[Riflehunter1776]

Was just a quick check but for me I'm all about low light. Was actually a first time I have ever noticed fov. So I was very impressed from that stand point. I just sold a leica er5 3-15x56 and it was good, but wasn't illuminated and I've be one accustomed to the illuminate reticles and that joker was huge and heavy I feel all 3 are great scopes. Might have to check out the diavari

I had an ER5 and was very disappointed. For such a big, heavy scope it was no brighter than some of the Meopros I put it up against. For maximum bang for the buck, the S&B 8x56 is a great low light scope.

 

[Toydy]

I have a Zeiss Victory 4-12 HT, best I have looked through in low light

 

[Austin Dial]

I have a Zeiss Victory 4-12 HT, best I have looked through in low light

Might have to try the zeiss, was thinking of going diavari. We'll see what others have you tried

 

[Toydy]

I have tried a few others like Nightforce, Bushnell, Swaro.
We shoot vermin at night under a spotlight so light gathering is very important.
I think most top end European stuff with a big (56mm) objective would be hard to beat.

 

[SHDeersniper]

Why don't you just get a thermal and ditch the spot light ?

 

[Toydy]

Why don't you just get a thermal and ditch the spot light ?

I am pretty setup now I suppose and the money I have to spend on shooting goes towards other stuff at the moment, so I guess money?

 

[WildBillG]

I noticed all of you picked a different scope for light gathering capabilities. Does this part of the optic equation differ from person to person depending on their eyes. I have heard S&B are the best at light gathering before.

 

[Toydy]

Never used one.
Sounds like the polar has potential though

 

[bearcat2]

Have looked through Swarovoski and Leica binos, but never used one of their scopes. Nor have I ever so much as seen a Meostar, so I can't compare to them. I've used Zeiss binos and have a rifle sitting upstairs with a Zeiss Victory 4-12 scope on it though. I can tell you that my old Leupold 3-9 compact I bought as a teenager is comparable to the Zeiss for light gathering; and my Leupold Mark IV 4.5-15x50 with a 30mm tube blows it away. I've never been impressed with any of Leupold binos I've had a hold of though, and I've got a 6.5-20x40 Vari-x III with a 30mm tube that absolutely sucks in low light. So you have to go by particular model, not just brand. I will say that while I've looked through a few Nightforce scopes (made only an hour from me) I've never owned one and the one I actually checked in low light I wasn't impressed with. I really wish I had my Mark IV along to test side by side, but I was guiding and glassing with my Steiner Nighthunter binos and could see about like daylight through them, looking through the clients Nightforce I would have been lucky to pick out a deer or elk, and actually seeing horns would have been impossible. For such an expensive, heavy boat anchor of a scope I wasn't impressed. Made me think back to a former client I had with one though who couldn't spot two bull elk standing in a logging road at last light through his. Maybe he wasn't such an idiot as I thought. . . yes, yes he was; he turned the illumination on to try and help spot the elk because he couldn't find them in the scope in low light.

 

[the blur]

I love my Zeiss Victory. The glass is simply amazing. I'd buy another one... but their reticle selection sucks these days.