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

Dave, you're just as bad as E, just in the opposite direction.

I have many of the scopes on rifles in my safe that E has never looked through and have some that he has looked through. If anyone has a gold ring scope that will outperform my PMII's or my US Optics or my VMV series optically I will gladly replace them on my rifles. The comparatives that are continually drawn from questionable data are IMHO not valid nor or the conclusions drawn from same. Is it not strange that no one ever concurs with the opinions continually presented in this thread by the aforementioned?

Brit

+1
LC

Until E has actually even looked through the Euro scopes he admonishes much less owned and used a bucketfull of them, I'd have to disagree.

I think I owe you a cigar.

VERY well said!

JonA,
I only have 30 lupies.leupold is way overrated.Specially buy a certain few on this board.99 guys out of 100 who actually bother to compare a conquest to a lupie will say the Zeiss looks better.
The answer is simple.Inferior glass and coatings.And thats not even Zeiss best glass.
No BS honest.
dave

All complements accepted.Thank you very much.
dave

Im sorry dave.You just dont know what your seeing.
Owning a scope doesnt mean anything on this board.
You should attend the E school of scope focusing.
dave

Leave it up to E to challenge a phycisian regarding anything having to do with physiology and then believe his own bullshit.

E would argue relativity with Albert Einstein using quotes from his high school physics professor.
I still can't imagine how he can be so hard-headed about some things. There are a lot of us who still own quite a few Leupold scopes as well as scopes we consider superior. We just realize that sometimes the little extra performance isn't always worth the extra cost. E, seems to take it as a personal insult when anyone says that they prefer a scope other than his personal favorite. I've seen the same thing on other forums however, he seems to think that whatever he chooses HAS to be the best in the world and can't get it through his head that other people might make different choices or have different needs - or that he's just dead wrong on some things. Maybe he's like a child who acts out just for attention, we do seem to talk about him too much (myself included), but it's easy to spend a lot of time just correcting his misinformation........................DJ

I'm really impressed by ANY manufacturers testing. I worked as an engineer/manager for the 3 largest electrical equipment companies in the US & each could & did develop testing that would show their product(s) were the best. So much for a manufactures testing.

OK here goes.
I have been following this thread and others like it, with some bewilderment, all i seem to read is this coating and that glass and this and that and which way the sun shines, but i have yet to read about the reticules in these scopes, it (appears) that nobody seems to realise the importance a reticule can have on a scope for low light shooting.I think one of the reasons that Euro scopes "seem" to do so well is because the reticules in them on average are a lot thicker than the ones that you find on the American made scopes.Whilst skinny cross hairs are great for mountain hunting and cross valley shots how good are they for woods hunting in the thick stuff were their are branches and bushes and low light levels and such like? likewise a german #7 for example CANNOT be beaten in these conditions, but is not the ideal choice for the mountain hunter or long range shooter.

Right i`m going to stir things up,a few years back one of the shooting mags did a scope test, their were various models used but the two that i will mention were a Leupold VXiii variable 50 and a sworovski variable 50 the test was as follows, a target was placed 10feet inside a wood, the scopes were all placed on a made rack so as to eliminate and speed up any variables, the scopes were focused and adjusted so no further fiddling was requered, the tester just moved along the line of scopes.The test it self was very simple, which scope (coating/glass and reticule) allowed the tester to "see" well enough to place a shot on target, ie, to see the cross hairs correctly for a killing shot.The winner was the leupold by a couple of minutes.The scope in question had a Heavy duplex reticule this i think is why it won as IIRC the swaro had a #6 which is a skinny one.
For the record i have 9 Euro scopes, just sold a leupold and am messing with a Bushnell firefly (from Natchess) 2-7x32 with the two step reticule and have to say it is fantastic (i havnt got to the "firefly" part yet).

This reply is just to point out that the glass its self isnt the be all and end all of scopes and there are many other aspects of a scope that should be looked at and the reticle IMHO should be the first.
Dave

Don't try to use technical issues(thickness of reticle,etc.) & actual testing on this thread. It will only confuse the posters with unfounded opinions & frequent misquoting of others work. Incidentally, love hunting in the UK. Plan to return for several of the small imported deer. Great people & great hunting.

I agree completely. Little by little, I'm going over to heavier reticles on my scopes. Not just for their ability to show up better during low light situations either. They "feel" faster or perhaps I feel more confident when I'm in a hurry to get on a target. That alone makes them worth the extra trouble of either selecting that option or having them altered by the factory. BTW, I hunt lots of open country. They don't inhibit you nearly as much as you might think when used on big game or large varmits.
Focus does make a big difference. Magnification makes a big difference. Larger objectives make a big difference. And so does eye relief or the ocular size we are told.
Leupolds are no good at night ? I've used many of mine plenty in full darkness. So have guys like JJHack. They don't hold up until the end of legal shooting hours ? That's funny. Only if you don't adjust them properly. The same with all the others.
You insist on a 56mm whatever to be sure you can see something until the end of legal shooting hour if you wish. I know from long expereince my simply 40/42mm Leupolds will work well past such twilight on the very darkest of days. E

UK,
Well thats what you get from lupie.Because of very poor quality controll.One will be good the next not so good.The next crap.
Just think about how screwed up there power rings are.They just cant seem to get the power setting to match up with whats on the power ring.
Every once and awhile lupie screws up and builds an exceptional one.They have no controll over the glass they buy from china.(a communist country)
These are the ones that always seem to make it into gun rag test.With lupies in general inferior glass and coating.Typically you lose minutes of hunting time over a euro.
Want to hunt less? buy a lupie.
dave

Heavy reticles are old tech.lit reticles are superior to a heavy reticles in every way.leupold as usual is 20 years behind.
Nothing new there.
dave

Funny, I've got a Leupold with a lit reticle. Does that mean they caught up?

Dave, seriously, did someone from Leupold sleep with your wife or something? Are you just trying to keep the world in balance by offsetting E?

Funny !!!! E

I have many Leupolds as well as Zeiss Conquests & Swarovski. I have hunted in Europe with some of the best illuminated reticle scopes. You can rest assured that Leupold has not caught up with any scope manufacturer on illuminated reticles. Mine failed twice & a new updated module was installed the third time. Reticle washes out target, module prone to failure, battery drains if left on & battery drain in use excessive,& adjustment cap falls off(lost one crawling in bush). Other than these few issues they are state of the art. I have a Simmons Atec that has an illuminated reticle module that is superior. I have used this Simmons to shoot many predators & many of my SCI buddies borrow this rig to hunt predators. I am not bashing Leupold scopes in general. I still have many but am changing to Zeiss Conquest as I can afford replacements.

First hand user of lupie tech.With Leupold its always about the hype.Never about the performance.
dave