New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Burris vs Zeiss
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Burris vs Zeiss

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/01/2007 at 18:55
nope View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: December/30/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 6

.223 scope,  yotes, PD's and a little paper.  Really interested your opinions, have been all over the site, great spot.  

 

Been changing my mind 10 ways to sunday, and time to pull the trigger. 

 

Burris SS (or Black Diamond) 4x16 or Zeiss Conquest 4.5 x 14.   Leaving $ out of it, which would you buy?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/01/2007 at 23:35
www.technika.nu View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: August/02/2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 611

Zeiss conquest as the Burris feels like looking through an old aquarium.

 

Regards Technika

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 10:25
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309
Without a doubt, between those two, I'd get the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14X44.  Besides the fact it's a better scope IMO than the Burris SS, I find side focus to be very handy in a varmint scope.  Since you said PDs were on the menu, I'd get the mil dot reticle option.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 11:56
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20467

Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Without a doubt, between those two, I'd get the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14X44.    Since you said PDs were on the menu, I'd get the mil dot reticle option.

 

I concur.

 

Why don't more people use a Mil Dot for PD's?? Dots too big?

This comes up on here from time to time.

 

I never have hunted anything with a Mil Dot, but I think that reticle would be useful on small targets.

Lethal on coyotes, I assume too. 

Especially if you don't like to click. 



Edited by cheaptrick
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 14:02
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

Zeiss conquest has better glass but it is also priced higher that Burris. Burris euro and fullfield II do not have good glass quality. Signature Select and Black Diamond scopes have better glass than VX III,Monarch,and a few other similar priced items and better construction than even the conquest IMO. At the price of the conquest you may want to look at IOR valdadas offerings or Meopta Meostar scopes or wait a little for the new mid-priced Kahles that will be out soon. Right now is really not a good time to buy,there are a few new scopes on the way this year of intrest.

 

http://www.riflescopes.com/products/IOR2510X42TA/ior_2.5-10x 42_tactical_30mm_rifle_scope.htm



Edited by SVD666
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 14:14
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309

Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

Zeiss conquest has better glass but it is also priced higher that Burris. Burris euro and fullfield II do not have good glass quality. Signature Select and Black Diamond scopes have better glass than VX III,Monarch,and a few other similar priced items and better construction than even the conquest IMO. At the price of the conquest you may want to look at IOR valdadas offerings or Meopta Meostar scopes or wait a little for the new mid-priced Kahles that will be out soon. Right now is really not a good time to buy,there are a few new scopes on the way this year of intrest.

 

Agree, except for the part about the SS being better optically than VX-III.  VARI-X III, yes I agree, but I have 4 SS scopes and 2 VX-III LR series scopes, and comparing those two side by side, I couldn't disagree more.  To my eyes, and in the opinion of my 5 varmint shooting buddies, the new VX-IIIs are far superior optically to equivalent SS scopes.  I would like to take a look at some of the IORs and Meoptas.  I've only looked through them in stores and haven't ever seen them in actual field conditions, though I've heard good things about both.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 14:24
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Without a doubt, between those two, I'd get the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14X44.    Since you said PDs were on the menu, I'd get the mil dot reticle option.

 

I concur.

 

Why don't more people use a Mil Dot for PD's?? Dots too big?

This comes up on here from time to time.

 

I never have hunted anything with a Mil Dot, but I think that reticle would be useful on small targets.

Lethal on coyotes, I assume too. 

Especially if you don't like to click. 

 

It varies with the manufacturer.  Though the dot spacing in mils is the same from manufacturer to manufacturer, some use larger dots than others.  When you're holding off the vertical stadia for windage, aligning with those on the horizontal stadia, it doesn't matter, but yes, some mil dots can completely cover PDs at super long range.  I've used Nightforce's mil dot with great success, which is a very thin design.  I've also used the Burris Ballistic Mil Dot reticle with success and it works o.k., but when the range gets really long, it is a little thicker and can obscure the target more IMO.  I also like and use the Leupy Varmint Hunter and Swaro TDS reticles.  I've tried a bunch of different range compensating reticles on the little rats and have found all to be pretty effective at ranges exceeding 700 yards.  I've even tried cranking knobs, and abandoned that, as the distances vary so much in a typical PD shooting setting that I end up spending more time fooling with knobs than shooting -- definitely a bad thing.  In addition, if the scope doesn't have some sort of zero reference point markings on the turrets, you can quickly lose track of your original zero settings.  I've also found my hit % is greater with a reticle with reference points than when I try to dial in the W/E compensation.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 14:30
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

With IOR and Meopta the difference in glass quality is very noticible to me compared to the VX III and Burris SS.

Kahles AMV coated scopes are even better than IOR and Meopta and can be found at great bargains from time to time. If the new mid-priced Kahles have these same lenses and just minus the side focus these will make exellent hunting scopes at a bargain. I know which Leupolds you have Rifledude I had two similar exept in 4-14 LR and they were fine during the daytime but the quality in the coatings was apparent during low light and bad conditions. These Leupolds are somewhat sharp but very overpriced and do not have the best of coatings IMO. There is much better than Leupold for the price.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 14:36
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

Nightforce has very good glass and fine reticles but ounce again it is not a top choice for bad shooting conditiions.

The Coatings and reticles found on USO,S&B,Zeiss,Kahles and lets see what this year has in store make for exellent shooting under all conditions and add the advatage of a front focal scope and you are in buisness at any power setting. Nightforce and IOR are very good scopes IMO but not great. I have owned all of the above.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 15:18
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309
Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

With IOR and Meopta the difference in glass quality is very noticible to me compared to the VX III and Burris SS.

Kahles AMV coated scopes are even better than IOR and Meopta and can be found at great bargains from time to time. If the new mid-priced Kahles have these same lenses and just minus the side focus these will make exellent hunting scopes at a bargain. I know which Leupolds you have Rifledude I had two similar exept in 4-14 LR and they were fine during the daytime but the quality in the coatings was apparent during low light and bad conditions. These Leupolds are somewhat sharp but very overpriced and do not have the best of coatings IMO. There is much better than Leupold for the price.

 

For me, it comes down to the specific shooting application you're talking about, which is why I think blanket, across-the-board comparisons of any two series of quality scopes are hard to make.  We're talking varmint scopes here.  The primary varmint hunting I do is for PDs in extremely open country, where the primary atmospheric condition I'm dealing with is heat mirage.  I do very little shooting in low light in this environment, and even if I did, the super thin reticles I prefer for ultra precision would get lost in low light.  For long range PD sniping, I want side focus parallax adjustment and a range compensating reticle of some sort.  Again, I prefer a reticle with the thinnest dots/ stadia lines possible.  Although in many cases, I totally agree there is better optics available for the price than Leupold, when it comes to the criteria I just gave, there really isn't another option at a comparable price than the LR series VX-III w/ VH reticle.  Also, one thing Leupold does offer over any other scope manufacturer is options, options, and more options, especially if length and weight are a consideration.  I think in this class of scopes, with the features I just gave, the Bushnell Elite 4200 6-24X40, SF, mil-dot is an absolute steal, but I prefer the Leupold VH reticle over the standard mil-dot, and to me, the reticle alone is worth $200 more.  I find the Burris BMD reticle to be much thicker than I like, plus to me all the SS varmint scopes I've used were much dimmer and less sharp than the LR VX-IIIs.  Ditto for the dot size in the Zeiss mil-dots.  As spectacular optically as the new Kahles scopes are (and no doubt they are), except for the Multi-zero models, Kahles doesn't offer both a range compensating reticle AND SF in the same scope, the multi-zero CLs are more expensive than the VX-IIIs, I don't like cranking knobs to compensate for distance, and the reticles available with the multi-zero models don't have windage compensating reference marks.  The IOR and Meopta offerings are intriguing to me and I've heard great things about both, but the Meostar isn't available in SF (though there is an A/O model with mil dots at a similar price as a comparable LR VX-IIIs), and any IOR with both SF and MP8, mil-dot, etc. reticle is considerably more expensive than the VX-III LR scopes.  So, what does that leave?

 

In short, if I were buying a hunting scope for a deer rifle and size and weight didn't play into my decision, it wouldn't be a Leupold.  With the standard big game hunting scopes, I believe the CLs, 4200s, Monarchs, etc. offer more value for the money.  However, there are so many different criteria to consider when selecting a scope that I avoid making blanket proclamations about any brand, except for the cheap stuff.  With some combinations of magnification range, reticles, size and weight, and other features, sometimes I believe a Leupold is the best option.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 15:57
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309
Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

Nightforce has very good glass and fine reticles but ounce again it is not a top choice for bad shooting conditiions.

The Coatings and reticles found on USO,S&B,Zeiss,Kahles and lets see what this year has in store make for exellent shooting under all conditions and add the advatage of a front focal scope and you are in buisness at any power setting. Nightforce and IOR are very good scopes IMO but not great. I have owned all of the above.

 

Perhaps, but I'm simply not willing to pay the price tag on the first 3, no matter how good they are, and I don't like first focal plane reticles, though I will admit they're more visible in low light.  1st plane reticles obscure too much of the target for my liking at higher magnification/small targets/long range.  I do see a new Kahles or two in my immediate future, but not their hyper pricetag stuff.  For "bad shooting conditions," however you wish to define that, I've had excellent performance from my various Swaro, Nightforce, and Kahles scopes and a 2nd focal plane 4a reticle is plenty visible to me in low light.  Then again, if we're talking varmint scopes here, you have to define the type of varminting endeavor, as PD shooting generally doesn't involve low light.



Edited by RifleDude
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 17:40
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

Yes, RifleDude a RFP fine reticle quality scope would be the best way to go for the type of shooting you have described. I like to have my-setups slightly different to cover many types of shooting even self-defense. I would go with Kahles out of all the scopes you have mentioned. You make very good points for the situations you have described and I agree with alot of what you have posted. I do not agree on Leupold though, I feel they are a bad choice for a scope.



Edited by SVD666
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 19:17
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309

Thanks for your input, SVD666, and I absolutely love Kahles scopes, but they simply don't offer a reticle with windage compensation reference marks in the magnification range I'm looking for.  In the "below $800" category, I don't know of any other scope from any other manufacturer that provides the same combination of features the particular Leupold I'm talking about does, period.  Which speaks to my point -- when talking about decent quality scopes, it's difficult to say a particular brand / line of scopes is universally a bad choice because it all depends on the application and the individual rifle it's going on.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 19:26
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

We both have our opinions about Leupold and I respect yours. Have you ever considered a fixed power rifledude, for the type of shooting you have been decribing and your budget you might be better off with this scope?

 

http://www.riflescopes.com/products/IOR16X42T/ior_16x42_tact ical_30mm_rifle_scope.htm



Edited by SVD666
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 19:48
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309

Looks like a very nice scope, but I like to have the ability to dial up the magnification early in the morning before the mirage becomes an issue, then dial back the power to about 10X during midday, when there's a "mirage wall" out at around the 400 yard mark, and yet be able to use the upper magnification for group shooting on paper with the same scope.  Regardless of optical quality, mirage plays he!! on magnification much higher than about 12X in my experience.  Again, what other scope besides the LR VX-III offers SF, super thin W/E compensating reticle specifically designed for rough ranging PDs, variable power in the 4-16/ 6.5 - 20 power range, decently sharp, clear optics, all for less than $800?  I really like the 6-24X40 4200, but again, I just like the VH reticle better than the standard mil dot.

 

I don't have any specific budget, it's just that I don't want to spend extra if I feel like a particular scope offers a good value vs. performance within the application I'm looking for.



Edited by RifleDude
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 20:04
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

Good glass is not cheap and when searching for good glass sometimes you have to sacrifice minor things for the main ones on a budget. This scope here has a reticle thiner than the Burris and Elite not as thin as the Leupold one, front focus instead of side focus butt much better glass than the Leupold. 

 

http://www.riflescopes.com/products/32701MD/meopta_4-16x44_m eostar_r1_30mm_rifle_scope.htm



Edited by SVD666
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2007 at 23:17
never e nuff View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: September/09/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 50

Mr. Rifledude, Your observations of real world prarie dog shooting are very astute. I agree with most everything you posted. The bushnell 4200 6-24 mill-dot is also in my opionion the best buy for anyone shooting PD's. This scope is dependable solid and clear. I do love the varmint hunters reticle, but to my eye the Leupold's clarity or lack there of makes the scope unusable to me. My eye seems to constantly try to focus the image and it is the same through any leupold. This condition causes my eye to tire very quickly. unacceptable! The first PD scope I purchased was a Simmons White tail classic in 4.5x14x40. Go ahead and laugh if you must but I still have that scope on my first heavy barreled Savage, and if it had a mill-dot I would consider it perfect. That rifle has shot well over 15000 rounds had two stocks, three triggers, and two barrels, but only one scope and it is still the rifle that I would depend on, if my life was on the line. I know that most people on this forum click in a shooting solution on their scopes, but I see that as a absolute waste of time and a recipe for failure. If a rifle could shoot 1/2 MOA  and you could hold !/2 MOA  at 400 yards that would give you a two inch group. Now start screwing with the knobs and pray that everything zeros just perfectly so you can hit an animial the size of a grey squirrel. Lots of luck, and anyone that tells you that they do it all the time with one shot kills is full of it.      



Edited by never e nuff
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/03/2007 at 16:33
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309
Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

Good glass is not cheap and when searching for good glass sometimes you have to sacrifice minor things for the main ones on a budget.

 

SVD666, you just helped prove my point.  I simply disagree with your assessment of VX-III optics, and also with your overall premise that under no conceivable circumstance is any Leupold of any configuration ever a good choice, period, end of story.  I just donít paint with such a broad brush.  Therefore, if Iím pleased with the VX-III's optics and I really like the VH reticle, I donít feel like Iím ďsacrificingĒ anything with the VX-III LR 6.5-20X40 SF w/ VH reticle I already have Ė for its intended application (long range precision PD shooting in good light).  Who knows, maybe Iím just lucky and managed to get a few cherry Leupolds and most of the rest of them suck, or maybe my eyes just see things differently than yours.  However, I base my conclusions about the suitability of this scope for the given task based not on any lack of experience with competing optics, but from having shot many 1,000s of rounds behind it head to head with other rifles wearing other scopes that some here would proclaim as being light years better than the VX-III.  Mine doesnít have the fuzzy image quality often cited as plaguing all Leupolds that I found common to the previous Vari-X III series.  Sensible gentlemen can in good faith agree to disagree. 

 

The other options you reference in this thread at similar price point very well may have better optical performance Ė Iíll just have to take your word for it.  But, with each one you presented, Iíd have to give up one or more of the main qualities I really like about this scope for the given application.  If I have ample resolution to make long range precision shots and a reticle that works well to help me do it, plus SF and a good, usable magnification range, really what else do I want in a PD shooting scope?  Even if I had better optical performance, the reticle style is so important to me that Iím simply not willing to sacrifice it for the sake of marginally better optics that might demonstrate itself only during light conditions where I wouldnít be shooting this particular rifle anyway.  Itís not as if Iím blissfully unaware of how to recognize good glass either, as I own several Swaro PH and AH, Nightforce, Kahles, Zeiss, and Leica scopes, as well as a couple of super high-end binos.  One of my hunting buddies owns a Zeiss VM/V 3-12X56, and while itís a great scope, Iíve used it on a variety of occasions in various light conditions, and I honestly canít say its optics are $500 better than my Nightforce NXS 3.5-15X50, at least not to me.  No, I don't own anything from USO and S&B, but I just can't justify $2500+ on a scope, even if I owned a money tree.  For that kind of cash, Iíd just buy another rifle and still have enough $ left over for a $1000-class scope!  Plus, Iíd rather spend $1000+ on a great binocular rather than having the finest riflescope in the known world, because on a hunt, Iíll spend much more time looking through the bino than any riflescope.  I never claimed the Leupold VX-III was equal in optical performance to the uber-priced European scopes, nor do I expect it to be.  I have many rifles with many different scopes, most of which are brands other than Leupold.  Iím hardly a worshipper of the Gold Ring cult.  I buy Ďem where it makes sense to do so, and donít where it doesnít.  Each and every scope I own was selected for a specific reason.  As a certified rifle fanatic, I donít own any one rifle intended for multiple purpose use.  The way my twisted little mind works, that would limit my justification for buying/building more guns Ė definitely a bad thing.   I totally agree that in many cases, I can get a better scope for the money than Leupold and my scope collection fully demonstates that.  But again, for niche applications where a particular reticle/magnification combination works extremely well, or where weight and length are a factor, I think Leupolds can make sense.  I can give you a couple more examples of my point, but Iíve rambled on long enough and donít want to bore you further.

 

I very much respect your opinion, I guess I just see things differently, and my point was and is that though there are often much better choices, sometimes Leupold has a scope that meets a particular application perfectly, if for no other reason than they offer so many options.

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/03/2007 at 16:35
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14309
Originally posted by never e nuff never e nuff wrote:

... click in a shooting solution on their scopes, but I see that as a absolute waste of time and a recipe for failure. If a rifle could shoot 1/2 MOA  and you could hold !/2 MOA  at 400 yards that would give you a two inch group. Now start screwing with the knobs and pray that everything zeros just perfectly so you can hit an animial the size of a grey squirrel. Lots of luck, and anyone that tells you that they do it all the time with one shot kills is full of it.      

 

AMEN!

 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Burris vs Zeiss"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Burris VS Zeiss CoyoteCaller Rifle Scopes 5 10/17/2006 12:40:45 AM
Burris fullfield 6.5-20x50 vs Zeiss Terra 4-12X42 Paul Heydenreich Rifle Scopes 7
Burris Signature Select vs Zeiss Conquest horsesandhorns Rifle Scopes 1 11/21/2006 3:33:18 PM
burris vs. zeiss jimpenny Rifle Scopes 13 1/22/2007 2:56:06 PM
Burris, Nikon, Zeiss??? Savage Rifle Scopes 11 9/21/2006 1:04:59 PM
Zeiss vs Burris dirt01 Rifle Scopes 6 6/27/2006 6:38:30 PM
Burris/Zeiss/Swarovski/Kahles? steadyshot Rifle Scopes 61 8/21/2007 3:35:45 PM
Burris Black Diamond or Zeiss? greywolf Rifle Scopes 7 5/18/2005 2:13:03 PM
burris or leup. or zeiss Coach Rifle Scopes 4 9/28/2005 2:40:14 PM
Burris Euro vs Zeiss Conquest Alan Robertson Rifle Scopes 4


This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.