Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Fixed 4x's --- Leupold vs Schmidt Bender Vs. Zeiss

fwiw,
May I suggest THE PARADOX OF CHOICE by Barry Schwartz to those who are happy with their 4x Leupold, Zeiss, or Schmidt Benders. It may bad for business, however, peace of mind has always been preferable...

Regards, Matt Garrett
Chesapeake, Virginia

Hmmm, interesting E, my Swaro 6 was fairly 'tight' so maybe Zeiss oculars are easier turning???

Have any owners posted negative comments about the 4x Conquest's eye relief? I'd like to read what they have to say.

I use Leupold FX-III 6X42's and bought this year a 4X Conquest and a 2.5-8X Conquest. For this near-sighted glasses wearer, eye relief on all three is just fine. I still like the 6X42, but the Conquests fit a particular application a little better. I have not seen any tendency for the focus adjustment ring to move very easily in my two Conquests.

Grim Jim

That's because they don't.

Can you prove that the eyebox of the Leupold is better than the Zeiss?

I just handled a number of rifles with both Leupold and Zeiss scopes and I can use them both easily. I see no difference in their "eye box".

Over the years I have had examples of each, including the Swaro 4X. I decided to replace them with variables because the factories were putting their R&D into their variable products and many were canceling their fixed power scopes. I think the only fixed power scopes around here now are a couple of low-power scout scopes.

One way to evaluate the products from different makers is to compare weight, size and reliability f their top of the line. I usually like to use the smaller, lighter scope that fits the application. I also compare likely turn-around times when the scope breaks or factory service is needed. Pretty hard not to go with Leup.

jim

I'm not surprised. You don't report any significant differences in eye box of the respective variables of each company either.
The size and usefullness, or desirability, of a scope's eye box apparently depends on what and how you shoot.
Leupold has long insisted on maintaining this quality. Almost everybody else has sacrificed it in the name of brighter and sharper images. E

And for the 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000th time, one thing has nothing to do with the other. The only thing "sacrificed" with better glass is the profit margin, eyebox size has nothing to do with it.

SCHMIDT&BENDER - case closed!!!

I have a Swarovski PF 6x42 that has pretty awesome glass. The image is stunning.
Have you compared the Schmidt and Bender 6x42 to the Swaro PF? I have not had the opportunity to do so.

I have a 4x Conquest, and the eye relief is magnificent... It's a pleasure to use, with very good glass too.

Thanks Don, that's pretty much what I expected. To be explicit the eye relief is noncritical as well as plenty long, right?

Jon, if what you say is true, then my fully multicoated Leupold 4X should should resolve it's image much better than my older, single coated model. It doesn't. E

Does your old Bausch & Lomb resolve better than your 4x Leupold?

Yes. Better than either of my 4X Leupolds. E

So, eyebox aside, there are differences in riflescopes that you have seen. Now, imagine for a second that you were to look at some newer scopes.

Here is my take pretty much on all optics. This is my opinion and if some don't agree with me, that is ok - we are all different!!

More money = more quality!!!! To me there is no better quality of scope than a Schmidt & Bender.

This is coming from a PA farm boy with a decent job. Not a high paid, expert celebrity, sponsored funded big shot like we all see on TV.

I have owned Leupold, Nikon, Bushnell, Swarovski and Zeiss. They have been sold or traded - now I have nothing but S&B on all my rifles. I hear all this talk about fart boxes, eye boxes, resolution around the edges, resolution around the rim, prismatic rainbows, and all the other BS.

To a hunting SOB like me, here's what it comes down to: Having a scope that helps me see the best while hunting and can take a serious beating from hunting!!! S&B fits that bill for me.


PS: Just ordered a US Optics scope yesterday- the curiosity finally got to me. Looking forward to a hands on exam and putting it up against my S&B's !!!

My FXII, 4X Leupold is new. I just acquired a Burris FFII and I look through/use scopes that belong to others all the time. So your point is what ? E

You have been saying for years that all scopes are created equal or so close as to not matter, yet you have a old Bushnell (Bausch & Lomb) that can perform better than a new Leupold, just from an optical standpoint. Does that old B&L even have any coatings left on it? I think if you were to compare (and I know you won't) some of the scopes people have been mentioning over the years you would see that they are not pulling your leg.