Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics High end rifle scope clarity......

I realize this is more so an opinion to most, but I'm looking into buying better hunting rifle scopes on my future purchases and would like some input. Hopefully this will not turn into a pissing match

Let me first state that I currently own dozens of rifle scopes, but nothing particularly fancy. I run several Conquests, VXIIIs, VX2s, 3200s, Monarchs, Vari X2s, and Buckmasters on my current rigs. I also have experience with some of the older Swaros(can't remember the exact models), Vari-X 3s, LPS, Meoptas, Pentax Lightseekers, and several Burris offerings in the past, but don't use any now.

The reason I titled this clarity is that I'm just not very pleased with the clarity of any of the mentioned rifle scopes. I'd have to say that out of my current stock that the Conquest and Monarch Gold line are probably the most crisp to my eyes, but still lacking. Maybe it's my eyes getting worse, but it just seems like most of my scopes are a little blurry. Some much better than others, but none what I would call top notch. I'd have to say the best rifle scopes in terms of clarity that I've personally used were by Nightforce and Swaro.

That said, in terms of clarity for riflescopes, what has seemed to be the best glass in your experience? Really looking at variables in the 4-14 range or close to and with weights coming in around 13-18oz.

Thank you for your input,

loder

How much more clarity do you really need?

I have 2 of the Minox ZA5 scopes and am very pleased with them. They are basically the same as the Conquest with better contrast of darker colors to my eyes at dusk and dawn.

You don't mention price.....

Bob, what about your S&B Summit?

To step up from that list to a more clear hunting scope, it seems you need to be looking at Swarovski & the Zeiss Victory line. It don't get any better.

Easy. There are 2 scopes out there that have better glass than the rest. One is March. The other is Zeiss. Not Conquests, the top of the line Zeiss. They are better than S&B and better than Swarovski.

Maybe some of the more educated members here could state why this is so.......?

Yup, forgot March. Prolly cuz I can't afford a Tasco right now. My next scope purchase will be a March. It may be three years from now, but I'm not buying any more scopes until I have a March.

I think it's really good,and a top tier glass.Any of the Shmidts I've looked through have been like "Wow!"

I also think the Z6 Swaro's are great...Kahles has excellent glass IME.

For the money the Zeiss Conquest and Minox are the best I've peeped through in that price range.

Never seem a March but would like to...ditto a Zeiss Victory.

Ronny, Z6 scopes are hands down the finest I've ever used. There not cheap, but you want crystal clear optics?....Z6 is hard to beat.

In low-light, it was brighter than my S&B. I started with one Z6 and now have a few.

If you do you'll be pulling out your wallet; especially if you get to peer through them in lowlight conditions in the woods and not in a sporting goods store.

Zeiss over S&B and Swaro. Which only stands to reason.....

I have a Zeiss Davaria and yes the it has an excellent view, but to say that it is better than S&B is not the way my eyes see it.

I have 6 S&B's and only 3 Zeiss 2 Conquest which aren't in the same ball park and the 1 Davaria. I think that tells you how I see it

After a point, price to quality ratio increases geometrically. You're spending a lot to gain a little, IMHO. I like 1" scopes and have had the big Euro's in the past, traded most of them.

For the buck, it's hard to beat the Conquest. The Z3 and Z5 Swaro's are great, not heavy and not 30mm. The new VX-3 Leupy series is good, better than the older ones. I think most glass in the $2K+ range is pretty darn good. The trick, as I see it, is to find great glass under $1K, or even in the $500 range.

I have too many guns to put $2K scopes on many of them. I could buy more guns with that kinda money...

DF

Reloader7RM,

My comparison is with a couple higher magnification scopes. But they should be indicative of the Bushnell 2 1/2-16X and Swarovski 3 1/2-18X.

I purchased my first Bushnell 6500 in 2009. I sent it back for warrantee work because it was blurry above 25X. When it was returned it was great on the top end but the lower magnifications were blurry. I returned it to Bushnell for a refund. After a few months I purchased another, the present one, which is better than any other scope I compared it to for daylight hunting; except my NightForce.

At the range I have compared this Bushnell with many Leupolds, Burrises, Nikons, a Swarovski, and others. None so far are as sharp or bright as this Bushnell except a Minox 62 spotting scope. With both set on 30X the Minox produced a barely sharper image. Since none were as good as the Bushnell and none were as variable as the Bushnell I decided to purchase a more competitive Swarovski to compare with.

I compared a Swarovski Z5 5-25X52 ($1,675) with my Bushnell 6500 4 �-30X50 ($620). I made an "eye" chart with five lines on an 8 1/2X11 copy sheet, laminated it to keep it dry, and taped it to a cardboard box. The lines are 9/32� wide with 9/32� spaces between the lines. After setting the box out I drove down the road a ways.

The test idea was to see at what range I could no longer see lines, but a grey rectangle and then turn the scopes up and focus them and record the magnification setting. After this comparison I returned the Swarovski for a full refund. Last week I ordered another because it is lighter and has WAY better low light performance than the Bushnell.

Here are the yardages and magnification results:

202 - Swaro: 5 1/2, Bush: 4 � with ease
236 � Swaro: 6 Bush: 5 �
309 � Swaro: 8 � Bush: 7 �
393 � Swaro: 10 Bush: 10 �
470 � Swaro: 14 Bush: 15
521 � Swaro: 16 � Bush: 15 �
572 � Swaro: 17 � Bush: 17
690 � Swaro: 24 Bush: 24
706 � Swaro: 24 Bush 24
724 � Swaro: 25 Bush: 27

Will be comparing a NcStar 3-12x50 to a Zeiss Davari this weekend. Will post results/opinion soon.

For hunting, any of the Zeiss, Swaro and S&B in the 2.5/3-10/12 in 50mm could be the best scope money can buy. The Zeiss has the best optics per oz. At any oz, the S&B has the best optics (best resolution, worse flare) but it�s the heaviest(but very well build). If I have to choose between the two, I would be so confused I would probably pick the Swaro(best balance in optics/oz and build/oz). If you want better optics than the above mentioned �best scopes�, chose any of the above in 56mm. If all of the above scopes are too heavy, chose any of the above in 42mm. For best in optics/$ and build/$, Zeiss Conquest. Aic

Where do Zeiss, S&B and Swarovski get their glass from?

I see several scopes mentioned and suported by opinion. How about some side by side compaisons on an optics chart to suport these claims?

For not much more money, you could move up from your NcStar to a Simmons 8-point.

They get it from the same place Kahles, Meopta and most of the other high end Euro optics makers get theirs: Schott glass works, which Zeiss owns.

I have 3 Zeiss 1.5-6x42s, 1 Swaro 1.5-6x42, 1 Meopta 1.5-6x42 and one S & B 1.5-6x42. I cannot say one is better optically than the other. I have preferences in reticles between them.

I like the S & B the best and by a good bit. But... that's only because it has the best reticle (a modified German #4 with windage hashes), and it has very low turrets that give me one click to 300 yards and 3 clicks to 400 with the .270 Win. it sits on. This is the only scope with this reticle I have ever seen. The listed reticles on the S & B site are not at all like it.

If you have any kind of Zeiss that isn't as clear as scopes come, there's something wrong with it and it needs to go home to mama for fixing or you need to learn how to adjust it. I have two Conquests and even they are sharper than my eyes will stay hour to hour.