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

I dunno about those damn things. My good buddy Jerry uses one. Bless his heart, he's a safe hunter but by design, muzzle discipline goes out the window with that method of carry.

Jeff O, don't mean to steer this thread off topic, but as this model doesn't show is that the canting of the muzzle can be shifted downward as well as upward by shifting the sling foward on your shoulder.
The sling is also very quick to shoulder the rifle.

I own 6 various 30mm S&B scopes, 1 Zeiss V/MV (2.5-10x50) and 1 Kahles (2.5x10x50) scope.

I would rate them all comparable to each other, but better to lower level scopes in that flare control, chromatic aberration and clarity are superior to lesser priced scopes. The S&Bs are particularly good in low light conditions IMNSHO.

All these scopes are multiples in price to the next tier down, so whether they are worth it or not is of course, very subjective.
I will say that since I bought my first S&B, I've never even considered buying "cheap" scopes again.

You're very wrong.

Apochromatic lenses can clean up the coloring. And proper coatings can control the chromatic aberration in your picture. I'm assuming of course that there was a lot of mirage on the day the pic was taken.

If no mirage was present, then a good lens could pick the separate hairs out.

Wass this shot from a tripod, or handheld? That alone would make a big difference!

Carl Zeiss was one of the founders of Schott, as I understand it. I was going to post a link of how the 2 companies are related but my Blackberry won't allow it. Maybe after work.

I do know that Zeiss is the sole shareholder of Schott AG.

Either way, I'd say it is safe to say that Zeiss has the inside track to Schott's best glass.......

If you say so.

Exactly Stoney - LOL!!!!!

John, from what I can tell, Schott is now owned by Zeiss. Even though they carry on as separarte entities, the Carl Zeiss Foundation owns both Zeiss and Schott.......

mrmarkilin, you have to consider that the camera being used is going to affect a photo as well. The image first hand will be different from adding another optical element for photography purposes.

2muchgun,

It's a confusing situation, but yes, the Carl Zeiss Foundation owns Schott Glass.

But the Foundation is different than Carl Zeiss Inc., and apparently both Zeiss and Schott have hundreds of subsidiaries around the world--and apparently some of the subsidiaries are owned by different companies than Zeiss.

One of the interesting tidbits I found is this:

SCHOTT Gemtron Corporation (Sweetwater, Tenn.) is a joint venture of AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc. and the majority shareholder SCHOTT. AGC is a subsidiary of Asahi Glass Co. Ltd. SCHOTT is a technology-driven, international group that sees its core purpose as the lasting improvement of living and working conditions through special materials and high-tech solutions. SCHOTT�s Flat Glass business has operations in Europe, Asia, South America, and North America, with SCHOTT Gemtron serving North American customers.

Asahi, as you probably know, is a major player in Japan's optics industry.

Go to the doc, get some testosterone, and hit the weights.

yeah it is confusing. And somewhat interesting also. They both definitely operate on a global basis.

I think it was Schott that I read had facilities in over 40 countries.....

Yeah, and they make all sorts of stuff.

One interesting piece of scuttlebutt I've heard through my contacts in the optics industry is about lead-free glass, which is required now due to environmental laws in some European countries. Leaded glass, however, is still considered a little superior.

China doesn't have any such laws, and some companies are having their lenses made out of Chinese glass, cut and ground in China. All that's being done at the other factories is the lens coatings. This is apparently still legal since they aren't cutting or grinding the lenses, which results in illegal lead-glass waste. Dunno if the Schott plant in China makes leaded optical glass, however.

The clarity...... talk is just gack in the daylight.
With the big 3.
In twilight/lowlight.
Its still S&B.



dave

Mirage was wicked. No glass can clean that up. That was my point.

I would be interested in knowing what companies were using this glass.

I read on Schott's site that they are supplying all the bullet proof glass for China's new high speed trains as well as the glass for the EDMs for China's new nuclear reactor.

They have a lot of irons in a lot of different fires.....

Mirage was my thought when I first saw that photo. It seems to me that the better the scope and higher the power, the more mirage one sees.

That speed goat is set up for a classic Texas Heart Shot. Pretty nice set of horns.

DF

Yes, MM, and you've hit on another point. Atmosheric conditions do limit the use of even the best glass. It gets even more complicated after the sun sets. What happens is that the light availiable for one's eyes to use varies widely from day to day and even hour to hour.
I find it fascinating that the posts so far seem to be all about which scope make is better or best. This does not take into account the various levels of coatings used by some makers or the difference that objective size makes.
Last of all, nobody is putting numbers or examples as to what can and can't be seen with these scopes.
For my uses, if I can see small bullet holes at 100 yds in daylight and well enough to ID a target in the dark, that's plenty good enough.
Is another point that isn't under consideration or being discussed. Just what are the tradeoffs that one makes to have this "super sharp" scope ? E

Thanks for all the feedback fellas!
I ordered a Diavari 3-12x56. It's specd at only 17.9oz, which was more in line with what I wanted than the others. I don't really care for the large size, but maybe I'll change my mind once I look through it.

Y'all have a good one,

loder

What'll you do when you figure out it's a new glasses prescription you need?