24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 223
C
CWD Offline OP
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
C
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 223
I'm looking to put a scope on a Rem. 700 5R .308, I plan on shooting out to 800yds(Target). I have a couple of Zeiss Conquest scopes and I'm real happy with them.
For the folks that have used both Swaro and Zeiss which is the better value? With the AV line being a little cheaper now that they are discontinued I'm not sure which route to take. In the Zeiss I'm thinking 4.5-14x50 w/z-1000 reticle. In the Swaro 4-12x50 w/ BR reticle.


RLTW
NRA Benefactor Member
BP-B2

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 519
R
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
R
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 519
I own both and I prefer the cheaper Conquest. If I were you I'd try to look thru both and see which you like better.

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,017
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,017
I have owned both,but I mounted a Nightforce nxs 3.5x15x50 on my own 5-R.Nightforce isn't cheap,but for a target scope,it is by far my favorite.

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895
I am a big Swarovski fan, but was never taken by their AV range for some reason. I've not owned a Conquest, but has a chance to shoot a rifle with 4.5-14x50 on it and I was very impressed.

Quality wise, I'm betting there little in them so just try to handle one and look through it and see which you prefer, but for me it would be the Conquest..

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 5,730
F
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
F
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 5,730
No target shooting here, but I compared the AV to the Conquest when looking for a 3-9, and I preferred the Conquest, even without the $500 advantage.

Then again, I also preferred the Zeiss 8x42 FL's to the comperable Swarovski model, so it might be that I'm just not a Swaro kind of guy. Maybe my eyes prefer a different kind of coatings - dunno.

With both brands having sterling reputations, go take your eyes for a stroll at the gun store, & pick the one that your eyes like best. Some may make fun of your choice, but I promise that I won't!

FC


"Every day is a holiday, and every meal is a banquet."

- Mrs. FC
IC B2

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,640
jpb Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,640
I have both.

I slightly prefer the Swarovski AV over the Zeiss Conquest, but the difference is not large!

John

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,731
M
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
M
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,731
Don't have a Swaro anymore. Still have that Zeiss. Being that the glass is the same, I would be very surprised could a person tell the difference without instrumentation.

Everyone should have such choices.

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,179
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,179
I have both. I like the optics slightly better in the Swaro, I like the etched reticle better in the Zeiss. They have both been super tough and reliable. I'd probably pick the conquest due to price since it is close to the AV optically.


It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,757
P
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
P
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,757
I have both and prefer Swarovski!

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,749
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,749
Both are good scopes but I see them as being for quite different purposes. The Swaro is an excellent hunting scope, it's lighter than some 3-10x40 scopes and not having the adjustable objective is an advantage in some hunting situations.
The Zeiss is pretty heavy at over 20oz but has target knobs and side focus which are advantages on a tactical style rifle where the extra weight isn't as big an issue.

I'd choose the scope depending on whether the rifle is a hunting or a tactical style rifle. I don't think the optical differences are nearly as great as the features differences...............DJ


Remember this is all supposed to be for fun.......................
IC B3

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,280
B
Campfire Tracker
Online Content
Campfire Tracker
B
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,280
I have both and like both. The zeiss is heavy but on a heavy varmit rifle. The swaro sits ona kimber 257 select and works great on it.


MOLON LABE
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 18,263
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 18,263
Originally Posted by Folically_Challenged
No target shooting here, but I compared the AV to the Conquest when looking for a 3-9, and I preferred the Conquest, even without the $500 advantage.

Then again, I also preferred the Zeiss 8x42 FL's to the comperable Swarovski model, so it might be that I'm just not a Swaro kind of guy. Maybe my eyes prefer a different kind of coatings - dunno.

With both brands having sterling reputations, go take your eyes for a stroll at the gun store, & pick the one that your eyes like best. Some may make fun of your choice, but I promise that I won't!

FC

your eyes are like mine, I like the Zeiss 8 x 42 Victory over the Leica and Swaro binocs and the conquest view over the swaro scope.


Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,768
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,768
I've had both and prefer the Swarovski. The image from each is quite good. My preference is more because of the lighter weight and slimmer profile of the Swarovski.

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,436
D
DMB Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
D
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,436
I do have a few of each, and have never done a side by side comparison, and probably never will.
There are things about each one that I like, and a few don't likes too. But, both have very good glass.
I just watch to see when Doug has a good price for something I need, whether it be Swaro or Conquest, and buy it.
Amen on the sleekness of the Swaro AV's however.


Don Buckbee

JPFO
NRA Benefactor Member
NSSA Life Member






Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,640
B
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
B
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,640
Originally Posted by CWD
I'm looking to put a scope on a Rem. 700 5R .308, I plan on shooting out to 800yds(Target). I have a couple of Zeiss Conquest scopes and I'm real happy with them.
For the folks that have used both Swaro and Zeiss which is the better value? With the AV line being a little cheaper now that they are discontinued I'm not sure which route to take. In the Zeiss I'm thinking 4.5-14x50 w/z-1000 reticle. In the Swaro 4-12x50 w/ BR reticle.


You mention shooting to 800 yards, at this range the time for using whatever fluffy reticle you prefer is over and it is time to start clicking in your elevation turret. It is when this happens that the Swarovski AV falls short, not just of the Zeiss but of most scopes.
If you get a Swarovski AV dialed in it will hold Zero. but if you have it dialed in with say a 300yard zero then dial it up for a 800yard shot then back to your 300yard zero IT WILL NEVER RETURN TO ZERO. this line of scopes have some of the better glass you will find but have the worst mechanic's of any scope on the planet priced over $300.
For long range use I would opt for the Zeiss.
B

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
B
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
B
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Easy choice for me between the two....Conquest.

I agree with boatanchor.




The 280 Remington is overbore.

The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 18,263
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 18,263
is the Zeiss erector system still made in Germany?


Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,200
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,200
I also have both scopes and like the Conquest better.

Coop

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,742
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,742
I havent owned an AV but I have owned a PH and a few schmidt & benders and while those were great, the conquest hangs with them for 1000 less so i would take it over an AV. I believe the conquest to be more durable bbut have no proof


"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered."
― George Orwell, 1984
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,954
A
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
A
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,954
I think we get to much into unneeded quality to put the cross hair on an animals shoulder and pull the trigger..I have some high dollar European scopes but I find them too heavy, the coating finish too slick, and I do fine with a Leupold for all hunting purposes, and I hunt a heck of a lot more than most and always have..

I do look for the kind of quality that you describe in my binoculars...

BTW I have a Swaroski 1.5x6x42 30MM as new in box for $1000. That is supposed to be $500 below cost I am told..

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
720 members (117LBS, 10gaugemag, 12344mag, 01Foreman400, 10Glocks, 79 invisible), 2,696 guests, and 1,316 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,686
Posts18,399,755
Members73,820
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.134s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8953 MB (Peak: 1.0450 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-28 22:27:44 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS