You definitely need to include these Zeiss V6 in this discussion:
I had a chance to wring them out at the FTW Ranch, and there was a whole lot to like about 'em. The teachers there are retired snipers, know their [bleep] cold, and EVERYONE was impressed with these things.
Made in Germany, all the bells, whistles and coatings on the optics, this model (3-18x50) has 103 MOA elevation, and, last but not least, repeatability was impeccable.
I will personally own one of these as soon as they arrive in US markets, which is slated for early summer.
These are the real deal.
RickBin,
Can you tell me how this scope's performance is in low light? I have this scop on order, but I'm very curious to know how it performs in low light. I have only read 2 reviews from 2 individuals that were at the FTW all were positive but they said the low light performance was ok. I would have thought it would be good, since this scope is using the same glass used in the Victory Scopes from Zeiss. Just would like another opinion before I purchase this scope. If not I may go with a Z5
Max:
Full-on Schott glass and Zeiss' premium multi-coatings in these. The last thing to worry about is low-light performance.
I got to use all 3 models. They were superb. The 3-18x50 is my huckleberry.
Rick
Already being a Zeiss guy, I have a new item on my list of wants and desires.
I'll also add that one to my list....
Originally Posted by raybass
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style.
Originally Posted by Pharmseller
You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole.
From the stuff I have bought: 1) Leupold VX6HD [I have the 12x and the 18x and I am still in the honeymoon phase] 2) Sightron SIII [turret too easy to turn] 3) Nightforce NXS [too heavy] 4) Weaver Grand Slam [no turret, should have got super slams] 5) Vortex RZR-1558 Razor HD LH [reticle too fine] 6) USO [too heavy and FFP makes reticle disappear on low power] 7) IOR [too heavy and FFP makes reticle disappear on low power]
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
From the stuff I have bought: 1) Leupold VX6HD [I have the 12x and the 18x and I am still in the honeymoon phase] 2) Sightron SIII [turret too easy to turn] 3) Nightforce NXS [too heavy] 4) Weaver Grand Slam [no turret, should have got super slams] 5) Vortex RZR-1558 Razor HD LH [reticle too fine] 6) USO [too heavy and FFP makes reticle disappear on low power] 7) IOR [too heavy and FFP makes reticle disappear on low power]
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
From the stuff I have bought: 1) Leupold VX6HD [I have the 12x and the 18x and I am still in the honeymoon phase] 2) Sightron SIII [turret too easy to turn] 3) Nightforce NXS [too heavy] 4) Weaver Grand Slam [no turret, should have got super slams] 5) Vortex RZR-1558 Razor HD LH [reticle too fine] 6) USO [too heavy and FFP makes reticle disappear on low power] 7) IOR [too heavy and FFP makes reticle disappear on low power] 8) Kahles Helia CL [ busy mil turret]
I tried to make a tracking video with this old 2004 Mark IV Leupold, but it seems the exit pupil moves. Although the human head may track it, my camera mounted on microscope rack and pinion did not. So I can only make small changes on a video.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
Odds are better with the NF, I like the VX6 reticle, the optics are fine, but mine went back for their amazing warranty service in the first 4 months I had it.
I used to sing a different tune on reticles - preferring the tried/true Leupold stuff. But after using the IHR, MilDot and Velocity reticles in NXS scopes, I've come to prefer aiming "fine" over thicker stuff. The illumination makes losing a reticle a non-factor.
While still a staunch Leupold supporter, with the NF scopes, I've come to truly appreciate 12 clicks actually (and always) moving 12 clicks - not 10 one time and 13 another.
I used to sing a different tune on reticles - preferring the tried/true Leupold stuff. But after using the IHR, MilDot and Velocity reticles in NXS scopes, I've come to prefer aiming "fine" over thicker stuff. The illumination makes losing a reticle a non-factor.
While still a staunch Leupold supporter, with the NF scopes, I've come to truly appreciate 12 clicks actually (and always) moving 12 clicks - not 10 one time and 13 another.
Scott I too have learned to like the thinner reticles wasn't sure at first but am really liking everything the compact has to offer, including the tracking, and am still using a VX 6 on a 270 win but it doesn't get twisted at all , I'm not a leupold hater and actually like the VX6 line but will choose something dependable on a rifle I like to twist turrets on!
He wasn't shy about pimping things that literally have not been out for a full year yet (Athlon)... how could they possibly be vetted?
I guess he did give himself an out by kiboshing the notion that mechanical precision isn't a big factor... "use the reticle!"... but that in itself makes me suspicious of his cred. Is he known as a highly skilled LR shooter?
Ridiculous to write off SFP scopes, too.
Thinly-disguised mashup of google-fu is my opinion.
An apt description of 80% of 'outdoor' writing, professional and otherwise.
I do not entertain hypotheticals. The world itself is vexing enough. -- Col. Stonehill
I used to sing a different tune on reticles - preferring the tried/true Leupold stuff. But after using the IHR, MilDot and Velocity reticles in NXS scopes, I've come to prefer aiming "fine" over thicker stuff. The illumination makes losing a reticle a non-factor.
While still a staunch Leupold supporter, with the NF scopes, I've come to truly appreciate 12 clicks actually (and always) moving 12 clicks - not 10 one time and 13 another.
The older I get the less I appreciate Leupy scopes but the more I appreciate their thin reticle.
I do not entertain hypotheticals. The world itself is vexing enough. -- Col. Stonehill
I used to sing a different tune on reticles - preferring the tried/true Leupold stuff. But after using the IHR, MilDot and Velocity reticles in NXS scopes, I've come to prefer aiming "fine" over thicker stuff. The illumination makes losing a reticle a non-factor.
While still a staunch Leupold supporter, with the NF scopes, I've come to truly appreciate 12 clicks actually (and always) moving 12 clicks - not 10 one time and 13 another.
Scott I too have learned to like the thinner reticles wasn't sure at first but am really liking everything the compact has to offer, including the tracking, and am still using a VX 6 on a 270 win but it doesn't get twisted at all , I'm not a leupold hater and actually like the VX6 line but will choose something dependable on a rifle I like to twist turrets on!
Kind of missed the point, didn't ya? NOTHING is made perfect by anybody...
Could relate a few experiences, (not stories), actual product defect situations I had to endure that "great (vetted?) companies chose not to make right; but so what?
If you look at life as some kind of daily shell-game experience, where everybody is out to cheat you out of a buck, then I can understand trying to limit your chances of being scammed.
If everyone had waited until NightForce or Vortex were "vetted" to buy their products, then they probably wouldn't have become the companies they are today. There are, afterall, consumer protections and reasons that a new firm KNOWS it has to deliver innovative and better products if it is going to ever be successful.
Not everyone is a prospective buyer for many reasons. Whatever makes you happy.
For others who might venture to try a new thing, sometimes you score big! And sometimes you score big and get a lifetime guarantee that you won't be disappointed later if there's ever a problem. That's even better!
I'm reminded of Belarus Tractors.
Originally Posted by 16penny
If you put Taco Bell sauce in your ramen noodles it tastes just like poverty
The idea you pay a lot for a name brand company's scope means nothing about longevity. I would trust a Tasco before I would trust a Swarovski. I never had a Tasco fail and had a Swarovski need to be repaired twice in two years. I don't want something with a good warranty. I want something good.
I was reading Varmint Al's website in ~2002 and he liked is $200 Tasco World Class Plus 10x40x50 scope with turrets. So I ordered one. I used it for a few months as a test scope for Mausers I was sporterizing before the image shattered. I sent it back under warranty, and .......18 months later [a year and a half] the replacement arrived.
Back then Gale McMillan, scope supplier to the US Marines, was explaining scopes to me. He said there never has been a Tasco company. It is one of 50 names put on scopes imported from a 3 different Asian factories. I did notice my SWFA SS scope had the same turret knobs as the Tasco. Back in the 1990s there was a gun list called the shooter's list or shooter's forum, where Chris Farris of SWFA explained optics. Before world wide web merchandising, I got a lot of scopes from SWFA through SHOTGUN NEWS. Chris was knowledgeable, intelligent, and helpful.
But what ever parts are being picked from the Asian catalogs today for Sightron SIII and Weaver grand slam... those are good parts.
The OP's link is dead tonite.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
Leupold doesn't make a scope that could do what the NF 2.5-10x42 does...
Do you try a lot of Leupold scopes or something?
I get the opportunity to try a bunch of them, and have owned and used several, as well. Leupold makes scopes that do some things well (lightweight, hold zero once adjusted, etc), but I stand by what I said about the NF 2.5-10...
![[Linked Image]](https://www.zeiss.com/sports-optics/en_us/hunting/riflescopes/conquest-riflescopes/conquest-v6/conquest-v6-3-18x50/_jcr_content/stagepar/stage/slide/stageimageml/image.mobile.980.jpg/1493220746420.jpg/feature1-v6-3-18x50-no-turret1.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/X0n16mr.png)
