Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Do I have to compromise on a scope?

I have the Z6's in 1.7-10x42 with Plex and the 1-6x24 #4.
I prefer the Plex over the #4 for low light.
If the #4 had the same dimensions as the Plex, I would think it near ideal.
I am a big fan of the Zeiss 1st Focal #4, it is my favorite. Though, I have not viewed the Schmidt & Bender 1st focal #4.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you Jeff O. I think that is the way I am going. The Z6 1.7-10x42 BT reticle #4 is the closest I have found with the least compromises (30mm). I would like to compare a Kahles and a Z6 to be sure but with the Kahles there are more compromises to be made. Do you or anyone else have any experience with the Swarovski Z6 #4 (not 4a) or the plex reticles. I have been playing with the Swarovski subtension program but i think it's acting crazy. Thanks again [/quote]

Swaro z3's in 4-12x50 are not only very bright but they are also very light and slim for their size, they weigh what many 3-9x40's weigh. The only issue is to me the plex reticles are very thin so you just need to find a reticle that works for you. That would be the best way to get great glass without going too big or heavy.

Today I looked at a Z6,Z6i,Z5, and Z3. The Z6 plex was razor thin. The Z5 plex was thicker but didn't look as bright and vibrant to me. I think the ocular on all but the Z3 is too big to run Talley lightweight lows. I'm taking the gun down there in a couple of weeks to be 100% but I'm 99.999% sure they are too big.

[quote=ldmay375] I have the Z6's in 1.7-10x42 with Plex and the 1-6x24 #4.
I prefer the Plex over the #4 for low light.
If the #4 had the same dimensions as the Plex, I would think it near ideal.
I am a big fan of the Zeiss 1st Focal #4, it is my favorite. Though, I have not viewed the Schmidt & Bender 1st focal #4.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Since you said this I'm going to call on Monday and make sure that the demo Z6 was a plex and not a #7. He said it was a plex but I didn't see the box. The Z5 plex was much much thicker than the reticle in the Z6. If that is the case then I will be really excited and if it will mount in lightweight lows while clearing the bolt handle i will buy it.

Talley lows aren't very low, they're closer to a lot of other's mediums. I'd be hard pressed to see them not working with just about any ocular.

I have a couple of sets of them and one is a set of mediums with a 56mm objective meopta, that gives you an idea of how high they are. I'd hate to see the scope that required highs.

I've started getting away from them lately, I've put on a couple of sets and had alignment problems. The problems went away when I switched mounts so it was the talleys and not the rifles. I think their QC is slipping.

I have the lows on it now but they are 1". There is about enough room to slide 2 pieces of paper between the bolt handle and the ocular when the bolt handle is up The Z6 ocular is bigger than the Z5 and the Z5 is bigger than the Leupold. I didn't measure, just with them ocular to ocular.

I think it will depend on how you mount the Z3. If you want it further back the taper of the bell on the objective end might touch. But you might be ok. I'm pretty sure I ran Talley mediums with mine but it's a Rem 700 not a Kimber.

I just called Schmidt and Bender. There is no turret available for the Summit. You can order a Summit with the A4 reticle. It will take 6-8 weeks to get it. An elevation turret is available for the 6x42 classic for $350. I have it narrowed down to these two. They will both work with the lows I have now. Which do you think would be the best when the light is fading?

Summit with A4 reticle
6x42 Classic 1" tube with A4 reticle and turret.

I personally would go with the variable set-up.
I am sure the fixed 6x would work also. I like 1-6 / 1.5-6 variables, but can appreciate a bit more power at times.
My main attraction to the variables is the lower power ability. But, my hunting situations and requirements are different from yours.
I have been in search of "do-all" scope to use on 338's and smaller for sometime. Still searching, inspires many head aches, lightens the wallet considerably and frequently.
My quest for the perfect scope has replaced the quest for the perfect rifle/cartridge combination.

Edit Addition:
I will add that my "current" favorite low-light binocular is the Zeiss HT 10x54. I find it extremely helpful in identifying smaller details in very low light.


---------------------------------------------------------------

What's up guys. My first deer season with my new rifle just wrapped up. It's a Kimber Adirondack 308 that I have done all the bedding and pre flight stuff to. It shoots great. My scope is a Leupold 6x42 heavy duplex. I killed a good buck with it at 178 yards. But, I also lost a chance at a bigger buck with it because I couldn't see it through my scope 28 min after sunset at 145 yards. I could see it through my 8x42 Mojaves just fine. Needless to say I'm putting this scope on my sons 300 blackout. I'll admit that my eyes are not great and I'm having lasic surgery this year. Ok so to the topic. I want to put the best scope I can put on it without compromising features. Our property is heavily managed and we have to be able to make sure it is 8 points and 15" wide before we shoot or else be in hot water. Something else I have thought about doing is 2 scopes for 1 rifle. Like a Leupold 3.5-10x40 VX3i with heavy duplex and cds for everything until sunset. Then I would have a Schmidt and Bender 8x56 with #4 reticle. I would have rings that I could take off and return to zero. I don't mind carrying a torque wrench to the stand with me and swap them out as needed. If I was going with one scope I have it narrowed down to a Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44 #4 reticle, Swarovski Z6 1.7-10x42 #4 reticle, or the Schmidt Summit. I bought this rifle to be a one gun kind of guy. Now I just need a scope to go with it. I really don't want to put a 30 mm tube scope on it but if I have to oh well. So my requirements are 1. Be able to judge a whitetail buck at 30min after sunset. 2. Keep the weight under 6lbs all up. 3. Be able to dial for shots up to 400 yards. 4. Fit in Talley lightweight lows. (Unless I go with 2 scopes). 5. Have a bold reticle like the heavy duplex or #4. I don't scan through my scope but if I see a big buck I'm judging him through my scope bc they don't stick around long. Im sorry if this is jumbled up but I'm not a great writer. Which scope would you recommend even if it's not on my list and cost is no object. Can Schmidt and Bender add a turret and bold reticle to the Summit? I have a headache after all this and I appreciate any and all feedback anyone can give me.

Seconded on that particular Zeiss bino for low light hunting...:)

**

RAAK, if you would spend some time with low light performance page (link above), it may be helpful to making a decision. And if your eyesight was possibly the culprit, why would consider going back to Egypt?

The Summit has considerably more mounting latitude than the fixed 6x. Fits most anything. I put a 6x42 S&B on a rifle with a shorter LOP than I usually use.

Definitely order the A4.

The S&B website pic of the A4 doesn't show the center of the reticle being very thick.

If you email them, they will send you the reticle subtensions. The ladies are very nice...:)

Added:
mathman, the reticle subtensions for the 6x42 at 100yds are .60" for the crosshair, heavy posts are 6.30" and center space is 25.20".
Tis substantial...

The .6" crosshair isn't that thick, and the center space is too wide. Super heavy outer bars way out to the side aren't to my taste, the center being the business part of the reticle. I'd rather the center wires be a full MOA thick if I'm worried about deep dark visibility.

Well, I agree with you on the 1" crosshair, but only Leupold does it. Too bad the Germans didn't have us helping the design team...

Zeiss #4 FFP variables were advertised at .54. Swaro at .40. The 8x56 A4 S&B is .50. Swaro's FFP plex was .60. The center section for FFP variables is basically the same as as the 6x42.

However, Zeiss 4 & Swaro Z3 2cd plane centers are tighter at around 16" but Zeiss discontinued the 4.

Its dang difficult to lose Swaros FFP plex in anything near legal light...

You're OK with the real wide spacing of the outer bars?

If I'm counting on the heavy outer bars for bracketing, especially given a thin wired center, then I'd like them to come in tighter.

Yes, with buts...

I like the Zeiss 2cd plane #4 the best, like you say, for bracketing. The Leupold HD always show up. The Swaro (PH) plex reticle's crosshair is really tough to lose, but the plex doth suck at the low powers.

Excluding moonlight, with the FFP #4 centers, some Kentucky windage is necessary but not too difficult. By the time I lose the crosshairs, it's too dark to see my feet and so the shots are closer--as the scene at longer distances gets pretty washed out.

fwiw...

I've compared a bunch of scopes including high end Euro stuff and IME once we're up to the level of full multicoating the reticle makes more usability difference in dark spots than the last nth degree of lens coatings.

gets expensive, but do save on the bar tab...:)

sometimes comparing in two scopes of the same make & vintage a guy can see differences...which is a bit disconcerting for brand arguments...

too, sometimes as the light changes in the same evening, one brand looks better than the other & then they trade places...

it's interesting to see it, but do agree the most advantage for killing is netted with a good low light reticle

You are trying to shoot past legal shooting hours

I helped you. Some places allow 1 hour after sunset.