I am looking at getting a new scope for my 375 H & H. Still have not decided on the gun, but it will be a 375 H & H in the next few weeks.
Here is my dilemma. Zeiss or Swarovski? I am thinking of 1.5- 6 x42mm. I have a Zeiss on my 300 Weatherby and like it, and have Swarovski Bino�s and like them.
The scope will be used to go back to Africa for Leopard again, and other dangerous game. I am also planning a Brown Bear hunt in Alaska in 2008, and would take it there. I was thinking of maybe a lighted reticle that would help for leopard. I know they are both good. If money was not the issue, what would you chose. Any rings recommendations?
Thanks

I have a Swarovski on my 416 Rigby & have been very pleased. I also have Zeiss Conquest on a number of rifles & prefer to Leupold. A few of my SCI buddies have Trijicon on Leopard rifles & are pleased. Seemes to be able to handle recoil of 375H&H. I may try one. The S&B flash dot scope seems to be the best if money is no object. Matt of Virginia is the resident expert if interested. Of course, both Zeiss & Swarovski make Ill. scopes also. So many good choices. With the dollar exchange rate in Europe I decided to go back to Africa with my wife in 08. Good hunting.

Zeiss is my choice. See better through this brand. Maybe my 50+ eyes. Have had Zeiss and still own three Zeiss scopes 3-12x56 Diavari V and three binos from Zeiss. Also have three Swarovski scopes: 1 of 4-12x50 and two 4x32:s.
Sold my other Swarovskis: 2,2-9x42 (2 scopes), 1,5-6x42 and 3-12x50) and also one Kahles 3-9x42 and S&B 1,5-6x42 and 3-12x50. Have also sold some Zeiss old scopes 3-9x36 and 3-12x56 Z. So guess I am a bit familiar with some of the existing brands. Principally take the brand YOU like best. Good hunting.
Choose good steel rings.

I've had my Swarovski AV 3-10x 42mm scope on my .375 Ouch & Ouch, as well as my Zeiss Conquest 3-9x 40mm, and a Leupold 2.5-8x 36mm.

Both the European scopes have a number 4 reticle, and I much prefer this for woods hunting than the Leupold Duplex (or Heavy Duplex reticle -- I own both).

The Swarovski is a tad better optically than the Zeiss Conquest, but both are way ahead of the Leupold. The Leupold is lighter of course, and has the reputation of being tougher (but the Zeiss Conquest is getting a pretty good reputation for toughness too!).

Eye relief is a bit longer on the Zeiss than the Swarovski, but the AV Swarovski's have good eye relief (unlike their 30mm scopes which do not). The Leupold and the Zeiss Conquest have about the same eye relief, with the Zeiss actually being about a cm more (I measured this with a flashlight through the objective lens and a white card at the ocular end, but can't find my notes regarding the exact figures).

All of these scopes (plus a Bausch & Lomb 6 - 24x 44mm scope that I use for working up loads and "fun shooting" at the range) have stood up to many hundreds of shots. Yes, it seems odd to have a .375 H&H with a scope that goes up to 24x, but it is a blast to dribble some honey on a white page, then back off to 100m and shoot flies with a .375 H&H and 24x scope, prone -- just to watch the local shooters (with their 6.5 x 55 Swedish Mausers) marvel how I could do this without breaking my shoulder!

If I was to do it again with Africa in mind, I'd likely go for a Zeiss Conquest 1.8 - 5.5x 38mm, the 2.5 - 8x 32mm, or the 3-9x 40mm.

The longer tube of the Zeiss (compared to Leupold or Swarovski) makes it a lot easier to mount on a "real rifle" like a .375 H&H without ugly extension rings.

I have not mentioned prices because they don't matter to me (perhaps I get paid too much?!), but the Zeiss is cheaper. I'd recommend it even if it were more though, because they have nice long eye relief, and nice long tubes to ease mounting problems.

I wish I had experience with the Swarovski Z6 line, but I do not -- yet!

John

On the cheaper side, Zeiss 1.8x5.5x38 - I really like this one.

All the scopes have been on Sako and Remington .375:s. All have funktioned well. But why beeing totally rational, so I chose Zeiss to be my number one and Swarovski the second. And by the way new scopes will be bought again. Planning to get me a light 9,3x62 and maybe another light .308 cal rifle, maybe even a 30-06 again. So much happy time is ahead to plan waht I absolutely will need. (Just cannot understand my wife�s objections, they are totally irrelevant; of course I need all new items I buy...)

Since I found Zeiss VM/V'S I' VE BEEN CHANGING SCOPES ON RIFLES.every 3 months.I won't use anything else.Swarovski can't hold as candle next to them.

Wonderful dilemma!

But IMHO a lot like wondering whether Peter or Gabriel is a better saint.

I find it a little odd that some are comparing Zeiss Conquest line of scopes to Swaro's and saying the Swaro's are a little better optically. How about compairing the Zeiss VM's to the same price range Swaro's:-)Now who has the best optics? :-)Zeiss wins hands down IMHO but bottom line, go with what you think you think is best for you. Both will withstand heavy recoil.

Thanks for the input. I think I am going with the Zeiss
1.5-6 with Varipoint #56. Great big game scope, quick acquisition with the Varipoint. The dot illuminates.
It will go on my Sako Model 75 H & H I bought over the weekend.
Any recommendations on mounting?

Both Zeiss and Swaro make a good scope, but also look at Schmidt & Bender. Try the Zenith 1.5-6X42MM - would be a good fit for the .375 H&H.

Good luck with your decision - let us know what you get.