Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Swarovski Habicht vs. VX-III

Western Oregon under dark timber and an overcast sky gets dark pretty fast. I haven't had issues with making out a head to the end of legal light with my vx3's. However the bushnell 4200's are a great scope too, maybe a little clearer. Also heavier and larger with less eye relief but built like a tank. I'm sure there are much better scopes. For those with deeper pockets, you should purchase whatever makes you the happiest. At what point diminishing returns factor in is for you to decide. For anyone that thinks I'm a moron; that's cool, wish you the best in life.

Facts vs. fiction, how interesting. Thanks for the usual informative post.

He's right. Keep what you have. The 1-inch Swaros are nothing to crow about, especially at $1,000. You can get a significantly better scope for half that.

I have both Swarovski and Leupold scopes on my rifles. I also have 1 Schmidt and Bender. I believe the S&B to be the best. The S&B is also the heaviest by a wide margin.

The emotional rants about which is best is like arguing politics/religion.

The reason I don't have more Swarovski scopes is basically due to their cost. Leupold makes an absolutely great scope, and even if their scope wasn't any good, you couldn't find better customer service or warranty/repair on any product!

I am not saying that I would own only Swarovski scopes either, there are many applications that a Leupold suits better. When I take my varmint rifles out, and I have 5 of them, 3 of the 5 have Leupolds and one is Swarovski, one is Zeiss.

I believe the glass is better in the Swarovski and Zeiss. It takes quite a bit more money to accomplish a very slight improvement in optics. That is the difference I see in the 3 scopes. Seeing small things clearly, contrast, definition, etc. will all require alot from the optic ability of any scope.

When I bought my first scope for a varmint rifle, years ago, I bought a Bushnell 3-9 wide angle scope. It worked for awhile. I chose it over a Leupold 3-9 for 2 reasons...I couldn't see any difference in the optics in the store, and it was cheaper. Years later, I can see a difference in a Bushnell scope or Leupold, or Weaver...etc., I believe that is true today, and that is why I have varied scopes for economic reasons as well as function.

All manufacturers have different goals, some want to look sexy, some want tracking and more durable internals , some want better coating and glass,some just want a wide profit margin..They set their specs and then manufacture accordingly.You can't argue the quality of a scope simply by any one criteria.Sometimes if you cannot afford or are not willing to spend the extra for the more expensive whatever it is , then most likely you will not be able to percieve the difference in qualities.I have excercised this practice many times over the years . And conversely if you blow you money and buy something expensive , you will be able to come up with all kinds of support that purchase over the cheaper .Just human nature.

If someone wants a Swaro 3-9x36 Habicht I have a take off from a safe queen that for which I have no immediate use.

The one I was referring to was $345. I'll pay you that!!

Oh good. I was worried that after we finally talked you into trying the B&C, it'd cost you a nice deer! :-)

Wes,
If you can get a Swaro 3-9x36 for $345.00, you had better do it.
MSRP on them now is close to $1,000.00 and going up again in 2009.