Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics High end rifle scope clarity......

Surely you you're not serious, putting Tasco and Barska ahead of some of the greatest names in the industry...

I read it several times, looking for the humor...

DF

I find it humorous you read it several times.... Yes, DirtFarmer its a joke.

Honestly, looking thru the S&B, Z6 & Davari it's very difficult which one has better optics. All have fantastic glass. My decision to primarily buy Swaro came down to weight, FFP/SFP & CS.

EXACTLY.

So who do you think gets the best of the best glass? That would be Zeiss. The Diavaris and Hensoldts have better glass than S&B, Swaro, or any of the others IMO. It only makes sense, don't it? Do you think Zeiss/Schott provides better glass to their competitors than they use themselves? I think not......

I thought I read somewhere that S&B has their own optics plant. I could be wrong on that one.

Wheeew... That makes me feel a heap better.

Was wondering about you there for a minute...

IMHO, Swaro is hard to beat. Are you into turning elevation dials? The BT system is pretty neat, although I ended up with Outdoorsmans turret covers, etched for the specific load I'm using. I wish Zeiss had a zero stop, CDS type set up on their scopes. I am a Conquest fan, thinking those are about the most quality for the buck. I also like the VX-3, 3.5-10x40 CDS. I have one set up on a BPCR 45-70, calibrated for my deer load. I can pop a pie plate all day long at 300 yds. with my "primitive" (not so primitive) deer rifle.

DF

Its not the glass qua glass..its the coatings and the grinding. having had the glory of going to watch them make Zeiss scopes in Wetzlar, I was truly impressed.

WildthecoatingmachinesareatripAlaska ��2002-2011

I understand. By "glass" I mean coatings and all. Zeiss/Schott has the best, most advanced lens coatings of all(except maybe March), also. When they come up with a new, better coating, it goes on a Zeiss first.

Not sure how many here have peered through a March, but they are something to behold. The only glass I've seen that may be better than top of the line Zeiss offerings......

Is this like the East Coast vs. West Coast rapper thingy??

300MAG,

You notice the weights on those things?! I looked at several websites before I settled on z5 Swarovski. (In fact at one time I ordered the Zeiss 3-12X56 only to cancel when the supply called to tell me it did not have A.O. or side focus.) For only 17.5 ounces I get great low light performance and very good day light performance. The one I ordered is a BT model. I will give you guys a comparison against the Bushnell 6500 hopefully soon.

This will be the third try. It took three tries to get a Bushnell 6500 that is crystral clear from 4 1/2X all the way through 30X. And as anyone can see it is just as clear as the z5 5-25X52. Don't get me wrong. Both of the z5's were clear from 5X through 25X. Both are better in low light than the 6500, but not better in day light. Maybe third times the charm.

Does that mean you had to send back 2 of those Bushnells to get one that would focus all the way through?

I would not be happy with that result. I am assuming the Swaro. is good from the start. I suppose it
was you expect and the dollar paid.

I took this pic at about 400 yards from the antelope. I don't think any glass could have cleaned up this image.



I get it, that some glass is better than others. Conditions can wreck an image regardless (mirage, haze, low light, sun angle, etc).

I'm happy with good-enough glass, good durability/weather resistance, and repeatable turrets.

Farmboy1 asks,



I have posted this info before, but don't mind doing it again for a .com friend.

When the 6500 came out I ordered the 4 1/2-30X50. It was blury about 25X and up. I sent it in for warentee. Whether I recieved the same one back I don't know. The first thing I did was pull out my Nightforce 12-42X56 and compare them on 30X. It appeared just as good when looking at a tree about 150 yards away. (When compared on an optics chart the Bushnell or the Swarovski is not in the same league as the Nightforce.) When I turned it down to 4 1/2X it was very blury. I returned it for a full refund according to Bushnell's "satisfaction garentee" for a full year if you have your reciept. Bushnell even paid for the insurance because it was on the reciept.

Several months later I figured the first run was out of the store pipeline. I oredered another: The fantistic sample I now have.

About the Swarovski. As you can see it is not quite as good as the Bushnell in the lower magnifications. For a grand more, I expected more so I retuned it to Doug for a full refund. Thank you, sir. After a few weeks I order one from someone here at 24hour for a couple hundred less. It was not as good as the first one in low light but better than the Bushnell. Neither were as good as the Bushnell during regular day light.

The only reason I ordered another is because the magnification range and weight are what I want. (I always say, "Ain't nothin' too good for the saints!" By accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior in June 1976, I beleive I am one of the saints.) Therefore to get the magnification and weight I will pay the extra grand over the Bushnell. None of the other high dollar scopes in the magnification range are in the Swarovski z5 5-25X52's weight range.


P.S.
For those who think a few ounces don't matter, hold out your rifle with the sling detached put hanging on your hand. About the time you are ready to put your hand down have someone take off the sling. What a wake up call about a few ounces! I don't carry my rifle on my shoulder. Almost all the time I am in the woods or fields, it is in my hand dangling at the end of my arm.

Weight no matta to me - Cowboy up!!!

When you send in your scope, take down the serial number before it ships. This will ensure you get back what you're sending in.

Also, check this out. Safari slings are a great option for all day carrying.

2muchgun,

Schott glass was founded by Otto Schott in the 1880's, with backing from Carl Zeiss and Ernst Abbe (the inventor of the Abbe roof prism, still used today) in Jena, Germany. The Prussian government also provided some money. The company never was totally owned by Zeiss, though the two companies cooperated on many projects over the decades. Schott has been an international, multi-faceted company since it's reorganization after WWII.

Any company can buy Schott glass, which comes in many forms (not just optical) from the company's factories around the world. For instance, there's been a Schott glass factory in Pennsylvania since 1969, and in China since 2002. In fact, many Asian companies use Schott optical glass in their products, including cameras and microscopes along with binoculars and riflescopes.

kcTbear, that sling looks good.

300MAG,



My cowboy upin' days are over. But I enjoy the woods and fields as much as ever. Check out the following illustration.

How 'bout taking a 1/4" metal tape measure and measure your bicepts. Then move the tape out 21% and wrap that around your bicepts. That huge gapping difference is what one sees if I set the tape measure on the size my arms used to be and the size they are now.

Not only that I bet most men's strength, even if their muscles are the same size, has deminished after they are sixty. I am sixty-seven and will opt to pay for a lighter scope and a lighter rifle for a carry gun.

5-6 ounces is just 2 twinkies less in your pack!!

I really can't undertsand how 5 or 6 ounces can make you decide not to use some of the best glass in the world?? (no matter what brand)

Not being a smartazz - just trying to understand???

^^ What he said!

Also, if it doesn't show up well enough in a Loopy or Burris, the shot is too marginal.

300MAG,

Re-read my post about arm mass loss. I don't carry the pack on the end of my arms. That is where the total weight of the rifle hangs.

Tell me if the glass on the Swarovski z5 is all that shabby. It is only 17 1/2 ounces. Some of the higher dollar scopes are another ten ounces. For get that.

Heavier scopes make light rifles top-heavy. Annoying when carrying with one hand...