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

tbear,
I've made the suggestion to a certain poster that a simple IMHO at the beginning of the crap he posts about scopes hes never seen would make life alot easier.No luck so far.
dave

E, since you bring up the word fool, surely you heard your mom or dad tell you "it's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt", didn't you? I don't think you listened very well.

I'd like to see the results of the test also.

I recently bought a Zeiss Conquest 3.5x10. I see some differences, optically, between it and my Loopy 2.5x8's.

Other than stating the fairly obvious- that the Zeiss seems tilted to the blue-white end of things, while the Loopy is tilted more towards the yellow end, and the Loopy has more eye relief- I am reserving judgement or comment on the optical qualities for a while. There's a good reason for that- or at least I think it is. I worked in professional audio for a long, long time and folks who do that find out in a hurry just how malleable is the connection between perception, and what your brain THINKS is happening.

In other words you can really fool yourself.

Usually over time things become more apparant- in terms of audio anyway. Listen the next day and the next and you get a pretty clear idea of what's going on.

So since I'm stuck home with a fever today I've been sitting on the back deck dry-firing at robins and comparing the two scopes. I feel like I made some good headway on it.

I don't know if this is really a valid comparison- the audio thing vs. the optics thing- though I suspect it is. Forgive me if it's not, I'll bow out and leave you guys to your... discussion. However, in audio there's a saying- "if it sounds good, then it IS good". At least as far as optical quality (ignoring reliability and cost) I think there's a Big Truth there. Heck if a guy looks through his scope and it looks good to him and gets the job done then it IS good. To him.

-jeff

Dave,

You seem to manage to disagree with him without being personally insulting. That is how it ought to be done. I see you insulting Leupolds, and last time I checked it didn't bother the scopes to be insulted at all......................

After all, nothing discussed on the optics thread--or most other forums here for that matter, is really all that important in the overall scheme of life.

Blaine, well said and I applaud you for saying it.

-jeff

Blaine,

I�ll go ya a step further and say that these forums have ZERO importance in life. They certainly don�t affect me one way or another in any other facet of my life. That�s why I find it so curious that people would get upset over, of all things, posting etiquette. Who or rather what are you insulting? A screen name. Everyone, including me, gets too wrapped up in this little cyber world. No more; I�ve had an epiphany and I intend to follow my instincts.

God I love these posts! LOL

AFP,
If it truly doesn't matter AFP.Then why would you put anyone.Especially on this optics board,on ignore?Its good to see you dont have me on ignore.Im happy about that.
dave

+1
MD,
I just got back from your home state awhile ago.Dead hog pictures to follow.
dave

I'd like to thank everyone for their comments. It's been interesting, informative, and certainly, entertaining. In all seriousness, I'm not in a position where I can just go to the corner gun shop and check out all the various scopes, but I'm leaning toward the Swarovski at this point. I like their TDS recticle (also available illuminated) to estimate distance.
Thanks,
Dan0859

It absolutely amazes me the exchanges that get so heated over optics on this and other sites.. I don't think it would get as heated if one called anothers wife an ugly b tch. It goes to show how personal a choice optics are and how much their performance is based on personal preference and preconceived notions. Therefore I personally believe that all other scopes are junk compared to whatever one I am shooting at any particular time and that I could kill more with the cheapest scope out there than most could with the most expensive.Entirely because I am out there shooting while all this contention is going on here.lol

Where'd ya go Dave?

A conclusion worthy of examination certainly, however, I think you'd find that people post on here because can't get out in the field for whatever reason.

That kind of contentious debate happens in any field where folks... well, let's be honest here... NERDS <g> debate things that are on the bleeding edge, the way-sharp point of diminishing returns, etc.

Add in the fact that gun folk can be downright... uh... forthright in their opinions and there you have it.

A debate over subjective minutia involving very expensive stuff, carried out by gruff, aggressive men (and people pretending to be).

-jeff

ad 1. a) Yes, I'm still and always nice, even to stubborn agressive, offending, belittling concrete heads

ad 1. b) NO, this was no "try" to convince somebody, not at all (in some cases it's useless anyway)

ad 2) Ahh, good morning and welcome back - this case is solved, discussed, recognized (ok not by you) and shut - so do you, please.

ad 3) I beg your pardon but this is a silly conclusion. I say: no BR Shooting - no BR scopes

Happy stalking

thanks matt