Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics MINOX ZA5 2-10X Review

I was intrigued by all the good reports on the MINOX ZA3 3-9X40 but decided to try out the ZA5 2-10x40 open box special (Cameraland NY) with the standard Plex reticle. I was looking to upgrade my Leupold VX-II 3-9x40 that is currently sitting on a CLR 30-06 that's been reworked by Melvin.

Externally - scope is relatively compact and is not a heavy weight. Not as svelte as a Leupold or Weaver of similar size but not bad at all. I didn't mess with the turrets or adjustments so no comment.

Optically - Compared the ZA5 2-10X40 against the following scopes.
Kahles 2-7x36 Plex
Leupold Vari-X III 3.5-10x40 Plex
Leupold VX-II 3-9x40 Plex
Weaver V10 2-10x38 Plex
Nikon Omega 3-9x40 BDC250
Leupold 2-7x32 shotgun/mzldr (late 90's vintage) Vari-x?? with Heavy Plex

My test set-up was my back porch looking slightly down and to the west into a swampy area that gets dark very quickly. I placed a set of antlers against a water oak (light mottled grey/black bark) about 100 yards from the house. I adjusted each of the scopes to fine tune the focus adjustment to give the clearest image available for each of the scopes.

During daylight hours with the above scopes I didn't notice much of a difference between any of the scopes. I was surprised by this as I thought for sure I would see a large variance between scopes. Since I was on a covered porch I didn't notice much of a problem with flare in any of the scopes during daylight or early evening hours. The big difference was when the sun was setting behind the trees (heavy overcast) and the sodium vapor lights on the other side of the patch of woods were visible. The Minox had a terrible flare that made the scope virtually unusable at higher powers in that situation. Two other scopes were also affected, the Nikon and the Leupold 2-7 shotgun/mzldr scope but not nearly as much. The Weaver also had a tiny window for flare if I really tried to make it happen by shifting/moving the scope around. The Kahles, Leupold Vari-X III and VX-II were unaffected.

The so-called eye-box on the ZA5 wasn't bad at lower powers but was quite critical at 10X, more-so than the Leupolds and on par with the Weaver and Nikon.

A comment on reticles in low light conditions looking into a dark background. The easiest to see was the Heavy Plex on the 2-7X followed by the Weaver, Kahles and Minox. The Leupolds (other than the Heavy Plex) were harder to see and the Nikon BDC was awful and unusable to the point I wouldn't have taken the shot where all the other scopes were capable.

My overall ranking for the top three was Kahles followed by the two Leupold variables with 40mm objectives. I may try one more evening of testing to further validate my results, including looking in another direction to see if the flare is gone.

As a final check, I asked my son to look through the scopes and he picked the Leupold Vari-X III and VX-II as the best overall whilelooking at the antlers at last light. He could hardly see through the Minox (flare) and did not like the critical eye-box at all.

FWIW
Ed

Ed, Thanks for posting. Interesting results and nice to know.

I have a ZA5 in the mail now. When I get it I'll see how it stacks up with my Leupolds.

I have one in the mail to me as well, maybe the 3 x 9 is a better deal.

35fan,

Interesting post..

One suggestion...When you repeat the test, try using the sun when its low on the horizon for the flare, rather than the sodium lights..

It might be that there is something peculiar with those lights that are different to natural sunlight..

Regards,

Peter

I appreciate your posting your observations. Had I been in the market for the Minox, the 2-10 would have been my pick. Interesting to note that the eye relief is critical.

Sounds like those in the market, the 3-9 is a better deal... and not just because it has a lower price tag.

I am thinking the OP is unaware of the focusing ring on the ocular lens... I just tried to get a 2-10 ZA5 to flare in the first sun we have had in months... I could not get it to flare.

The 10x eye relief was also quite long and non-critical. I have a 6x42 Leupold I was comparing it to as the reference because it is about the best out there in both areas. At 6x the Minox runs with the Leupold.

So I just grabbed a 3.5-10X VARI-X III and measured as best I could the length of the eyebox on each at both ends of the range. The Minox was almost a quarter-inch longer at both ends... However the image degraded slightly faster while maintaining a full view in the Minox. Both scopes could be used at any power anywhere in that range, IMO.

For noncritical use, even at 10x the Minox is outstanding to my eye... I have had a large number of people look at the scope and none have been anything but seriously impressed. And the eye relief is a big part of why they are impressed.
YMMV
art

I missed delivery on mine today but will get it tommorow! The OP review had me worried!

Art, your evaluation is what I'm seeing with the 3-9 as well. That eye relief on the Minox is as good if not better than the Leupold and that is one of the main reasons I buy Leupolds.

That is also the main reason I bought a 6x42 for my 338, eye relief, the Minox as you say runs with the Leupold.

I should be getting the 2-10 any day now and I can do further comparisons.

I have not run into any critical eye box problems with the 3x9 if anything it's more generous than the Leupold Mark 2 3x9 that i run on my son's 300 WSM.

Have also not had any flare problems in the 3x9.

This is a good post though, good to throw darts at the board and compare notes with what we are seeing.
Glad the OP got this going.

I have the 3-15x ZA5. Never had the flare issue at all. Optics are right on par with the Conquest. I do, however, have to make an ever so slight adjustment to the ocular to get it focused when shooting at 100 yds and then out to 300 yds. Not a big deal for me, but maybe for others.

Dirty lenses could explain the flare, but through new, clean glass I cannot make the Minox flare. I have lots of other glass here I can make flare...

You will like the 2-10, I am quite certain.

How is the knee doing?
art

I'm certain I'll be liking it.

The knee?

It needs another treatment.

35fan,

Thanks for the report. This is the type of info that calls me to the optics thread first.

Interesting.

Appreciate the additional feedback and observations.

Also, could someone please post up some pictures showing this scope (2-10x40) along with a couple other brands (Leupold and/or Conquest) to show size comparisons?

Obliged.

Doug,

Any word on when Minox may offer a German #4 reticle?

Sitka Deer, I know how to focus the ocular and I stated that in my original post.

I repeated the test again this evening with the same results. It appears the issue is more with having your head absolutely perfectly centered when looking through the scope at 10X. If you move your head even a slight amount, forward, backward, up, down the picture hazes over. It may not be the lighting at all but the super critical eye relief/box. My son said the same thing when he looked through the Minox. All my other scopes don't do this, even a cheap V10 Weaver is better at 10X. Maybe I have a bad scope, don't know, but the scope I have is unusable above 8x period.

Ed

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/4011542/1

First of all ,thanks for your review.

The problem you are describing is common on cheaper brands of variable scopes ,especially 10x+ models (4-16s 6-20s etc) the Eye postion gets very critical and the image washes /flares out easily.

I would have never expected that on any scope made to sell for $400-500 with a German name on it.

Scopes can vary a bit from sample to sample, and of course there is the individual pair of eyes looking through them.

FWIW, , the Weaver Scopes made in Japan have a solid rep, but there is at least one guy who posts on here from time to time who SWEARS the worst scope he ever looked though was a Jap Weaver V-2-10..

And so it goes.. Everyone's mileage may vary....

Clark,

Excellent post you have, thanks.

Thanks Clark!