Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Nightforce vs. Swarovski, S&B, Zeiss?

Still looking at various scopes, I found a Nightforce scope, NXS 3.5-15x50, illuminated, with the NP1-RR reticle. How does that compare to the S&B Zenith 3-12x50, the Zeiss Victory 2.5-10x50, and the Swarovski Z6 2-12x50 illuminated models? The price difference isn't an issue for me per se, but I also don't want to spend an extra $700 without getting a corresponding performance/quality increase. Thanks in advance for the advice.

I do not see the appeal of the nightforce scope but apparently some do. my preferences are

schmidt & bender
swarovski & zeiss (a tie)
nightforce

I imagine that they are all pretty good scopes.

I have the Ziess V series and it's incredible,also have the Swaro Z6,not quite as bright but huge field of view. These are the two finest hunting scopes in the world in my opinion.

Britt

I've got 4 -Zeiss VM/V 3x12x56 AND PREFER THEM OVER SWAROVSKI,I had a PH 4X16X50 SOLD IT TO BUY ANOTHER Zeiss,I'll replace the other Leupolds I have 1 at a time

First and foremost the NXS is a pure tactical scope, the others mentioned are hunting scopes. IMO, its kinda like comparing apples to oranges. Sure the Euro hunting scopes mentioned will have slightly better glass, but the NXS is considerably more robust/durable than the hunting scopes. The glass in a NXS is very, very good a bit better than Leupold.

I love NXS scopes and have 8 of them on my tactical rifles. They are xtremely durable, repeatable, reliable. They are my scope of choice, but keep in mind especially for a hunting rig, they are rather heavy- almost a pound more thatn a compareable Leupold.

after owning all of them, I think the swaro PH is a heck of a scope but they are all good. the s&b's will weigh the most
I think swaros patented 4 point coil spring is rock solid and an improvement over the standard leaf springs most commonly used..

john barness once said he has only seen 1 swaro PH ever break...
THE PH had less eye relief though ...
swaros warranty/service is 2nd to none

I've got news for you. All of the major brands that make fully multicoated scopes in that size are all very close in performance. So say the lab tests. Save your money and buy one of the cheaper, fully multicoated scopes. If you insist on more magnification than 10X, then you should consider either an Adjustable Objective, or a Side Focus/Parallax feature. Your call. E

You may want to also consider the US Optics line of heavy duty scopes like the SN3 1.8X to 10X. I have one and it is without a doubt the best scope I have ever had. Price is high but you do get what you pay for. They are custom built to your specs, many ways to configure these scopes. They are also on the heavy side but that is the only negative thing I can say about them.

I've looked through Zeiss "V" series and the Z6 and can tell you they are unreal compared to a VX II or III - no comparison. I could care less what a lab test says, the glass is clearly better on these models, period. It's no different on binos . . .

I normally NEVER get into this but.......

NOT ALL COATINGS OR GLASS ARE THE SAME. JUST LIKE SAYING ALL PAINT IS THE SAME.

I'm in agreement w/you.

For E and anyone else that thinks all Fully Multi-Coatings are equal.

One of the great myths of rifle scopes. They all test within a percentage point or two of each other these days. The only exceptions are Zeiss and Leupold. They test a tad higher. Not because of any "secret" coatings or glass, but because they do a better job of baffling and painting the inside of their scopes against stray light.
The differences our "expert" scope testers here see don't come up when guys like Barsness test and compare scopes. That's because he knows how to do it properly. He can do this because he understands fully how they work. Unlike some here.
Wasn't always the case. Back before the early 90's, many US style scopes didn't have fully multiocated lenses. Back then, the euros were better because they used fully multicoated lenses. But, nowadays, all the major players use them.
Properly focused and adjusted for actual, not indicated magnification, the major makers, Burris, Nikon, Bushnell's 4200's, the fully multicoated Sightrons, Weaver and Leupolds all test and perform right there with the big name euro makes. Some, but especially Leupold and the Bushnell Elite 4200's also have notably better records for holding up under recoil as well. E

[quote I've looked through Zeiss "V" series and the Z6 and can tell you they are unreal compared to a VX II or III - no comparison. I could care less what a lab test says, the glass is clearly better on these models, period. It's no different on binos . . . [/quote]

+ 1

E, I respect you but if you believe a VXII or VXIII is the equal of a Ziess V series then.........

I have read Johns book and did my own testing. I'll leave it at that.

Wonder why Johnny B or anybody else agree with your statement?

I firmly believe you don't "NEED" some of the quality available.

I'm done.........

Dave

First off no one really cares about the early 90's or holding up to recoil - both topics are off point and add no signifcant value to the discussion.

The real question is why are there 200 people around here barking at you constantly and you refuse to listen? I know we're all wrong and you're right . . . seriously look in the mirror sometime.

If you can kill a good buck with a Swaro, Zeiss or whatever you can do the same with a Leupold or Burris - no issue there. Problem is you feel like it isn't necessary to spend this much money on a scope (can't argue with that entirely) however some people have the financial ability to afford something that is optically better - and that is fact.

Question - is a Leica, Zeiss or Swaro better optically than a Burris, Leupold or Pentax in a bino? You bet and the same holds true on scopes. Wonder why? Glass and coating my friend, it's that simple.

I'd be happy to test one of my friends VM/V's against any of my Leupold's and prove to you that the Leupold will quit sooner - it won't even be that close.

By the way - thank you for sticking your nose into yet another thread where you offer nothing except starting an arguement.

During the Janauary rut I carried two rifles to the stand both Sterys,a 7mm-08 with a fully multicoated 3-9x40 Bushnell 3200 and a 270 with a Ziess V series 3-12x56.

When dusk came there were a lot of deer in the wheat field,I could see them plainly in the 8x56 binos. During the last few momments of legal shooting time,I could easily kill any of them with the big Ziess,but with the Bushnell which is clear as a bell in good light,I could not see well enough to tell if I was looking at a deer or a shadow.

If E's theory were correct,the difference in the 250 dollar scope and the 1500 dollar scope should have been negligible. But facts are facts,anybody who bothers to compare can see it for themselves. One is a nice scope that will handle most hunting very well but fails in extreme low light conditions. The other is an amazing optical instrument,built to perform in low light or even starlight conditions.

Most people don't need a Ziess V series scope to kill a deer,but for the way I hunt for seminocturnal mature trophy class whitetails,the big premium euro scopes are priceless.

I just can not get the job done with anything else,you don't see the big deer early enough to kill them with an ordinary scope.

Britt

My opinion - Schmidt&Bender. Buy it once, buy it for life!!

Eat your heart out "E":
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...&topic=0&Search=true#Post1512678
MULE DEER: "I have had three Swarovski AV's fail on me during hunting trips over the years, all zeroing problems. The PH's, however, are mechanically different and apparently much tougher. I say apparently because I've never had one fail, and have rarely heard of them failing."

Actual testing,what a novel idea. I always purchase what my eyes say are the best scope(if I can afford). I find Zeiss Conquest a quality scope at a very reasonable price & have purchased to replace Leupolds. I have a Swarovski PH on a 416 Rigby that does everything I can ask of a scope. If Leupold meets your requirement then by all means purchase. If I could see bullet holes at 200 yards as some claim, hell I would use a peep sight.