New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Bushnell 6500 or Zeiss
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Bushnell 6500 or 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: July/22/2010 at 15:35
Toy4Two View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: July/19/2010
Location: Norfolk Ne
Status: Offline
Points: 10
Bushnell 6500 2.5-16x40 or Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x40

How is the clarity/resolution of the 6500 at x16?   How is the clarity/resolution of the Zeiss at x14?

Is the Zeiss worth the extra cost?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 15:52
shooter07 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Shooting Sprout

Joined: June/12/2010
Location: PA
Status: Offline
Points: 4843
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 16:05
Lennyo3034 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/01/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 45
That has things other than just glass taken into account though. I'd be interested to know as well on how the glass compares.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 16:09
shooter07 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Shooting Sprout

Joined: June/12/2010
Location: PA
Status: Offline
Points: 4843
I'd like to hear Ilya's take on this if he checks this thread out. Tons of people will push the Zeiss name but i don't if it's better than the 2.5-16x42 version of the 6500 series. That's a DAMN fine scope in the $700ish range. Optically they're very close but i'd give the durability advantage to the Bushnell which comes with rainguard.

Wouldn't be a bad choice either way.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 16:15
shooter07 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Shooting Sprout

Joined: June/12/2010
Location: PA
Status: Offline
Points: 4843
Originally posted by Lennyo3034 Lennyo3034 wrote:

That has things other than just glass taken into account though. I'd be interested to know as well on how the glass compares.


I'll leave the glass comparison to Ilya or somebody who has more experience with both scopes. I've been behind the Elite 6500 and a smaller version of the Conquest 3-9x which money wise is slightly cheaper than the mentioned 6500. The glass on those 2 are so close it's hard to distinguish a clear advantage. The reason i like the 6500 more is the greater mag ratio's and to me its a tougher scope and the tactical version had tremendous turrets.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 17:44
stickbow46 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/07/2009
Location: Benton, Pa
Status: Offline
Points: 4673
This is where it's all in the eye of the beholder.I have the 6500-2-16x 42 & conquest 3.5-10x50,I guess apples & oranges but sunrise /sunset Zeiss hands down in clarity,it has that pop out at you feeling.Resolution,toss of the coin.A plus for the Bushnell is the rainguard also I like the fire fly option.
 Both excellent scopes,can't go wrong with either,but I do like the Zeiss,but ever so slightly!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 17:46
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
if zeiss would put loutec on the conquest's, oh man you would just about have it all.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 19:37
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7180

I would go with the Zeiss even though the 2.5-16 is a lot more versatile. I have watched the customer satisfaction with the CS at Bushnell, seriously deteriorate over the 1 1/2 years.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 20:36
shooter07 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Shooting Sprout

Joined: June/12/2010
Location: PA
Status: Offline
Points: 4843
This is what bothers me. I'm all about CS and hold it highly on the importance scale but really it boils down to the product. I will ALWAYS take the better product over the better CS company. It's not to slight places like SWFA or Vortex (to name a few great CS companies) but Bushnell while you can have some bad experiences with the CS, is not as bad as a few other big companies out there in my experience.

I think EVERYONE should model what SWFA does or Vortex, but they have an advantage of being smaller outfits (at this point, its a fact). The smaller the business the easier it is to control who you bring in and who you retain in any department.

Now with that being said, i feel like people push the Conquest line because it's a Zeiss. To me it's hard to wrap my head around taking the lower end line of Zeiss over the higher end of Bushnell when really the only advantage (and to me it's not a big one) is the brightness at sun up and sun down, like stickbow mentioned. The Bushnell is just the more versatile scope hands down. It's glass is just as good, at least the scopes i've been behind. Next to SWFA's SS line, Bushnell has arguably the toughest scopes out there (4200 and 6500 line) that i've ever handled personally. You can take it into heavy fog, monsoon, or desert weather and not blink.

Again CS is an important factor but i will never purchases a scope/product that i feel is inferior no matter how small or big the gap is. If i can't find a clear winner, then i'd let CS put one or the other over the top but in this case the 6500 is the more versatile product and even though the CS has slipped of late (admittedly) it wouldn't keep me from getting what i feel is a superior product.

http://swfa.com/Bushnell-25-16x42-Elite-6500-30mm-Rifle-Scope-P13139.aspx

http://swfa.com/Zeiss-45-14x44-Conquest-Rifle-Scope-P5409.aspx

Bushnell's got a bigger tube 30mm to 1"

It's eye relief is better at 4" to 3.5"

And of course you have more range going from 2.5 to 16x meaning you have more FOV at the low end if you use it for thick type hunting.


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 21:01
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
Originally posted by shooter07 shooter07 wrote:

This is what bothers me. I'm all about CS and hold it highly on the importance scale but really it boils down to the product. I will ALWAYS take the better product over the better CS company. It's not to slight places like SWFA or Vortex (to name a few great CS companies) but Bushnell while you can have some bad experiences with the CS, is not as bad as a few other big companies out there in my experience.

I think EVERYONE should model what SWFA does or Vortex, but they have an advantage of being smaller outfits (at this point, its a fact). The smaller the business the easier it is to control who you bring in and who you retain in any department.

Now with that being said, i feel like people push the Conquest line because it's a Zeiss. To me it's hard to wrap my head around taking the lower end line of Zeiss over the higher end of Bushnell when really the only advantage (and to me it's not a big one) is the brightness at sun up and sun down, like stickbow mentioned. The Bushnell is just the more versatile scope hands down. It's glass is just as good, at least the scopes i've been behind. Next to SWFA's SS line, Bushnell has arguably the toughest scopes out there (4200 and 6500 line) that i've ever handled personally. You can take it into heavy fog, monsoon, or desert weather and not blink.

Again CS is an important factor but i will never purchases a scope/product that i feel is inferior no matter how small or big the gap is. If i can't find a clear winner, then i'd let CS put one or the other over the top but in this case the 6500 is the more versatile product and even though the CS has slipped of late (admittedly) it wouldn't keep me from getting what i feel is a superior product.

http://swfa.com/Bushnell-25-16x42-Elite-6500-30mm-Rifle-Scope-P13139.aspx

http://swfa.com/Zeiss-45-14x44-Conquest-Rifle-Scope-P5409.aspx

Bushnell's got a bigger tube 30mm to 1"

It's eye relief is better at 4" to 3.5"

And of course you have more range going from 2.5 to 16x meaning you have more FOV at the low end if you use it for thick type hunting.



while i agree with a lot of what you said, i will disagree with some of it. the 30mm tube on the 6500 doesnt do anything optically, and the eye relief isnt a big issue either. i have a 4200 elite with 3.3 inches of relief, its sat on a .375H&H mag and now a .300wby. i have yet to get smacked by that scope while on either rifle. i do agree that the 2.5x16 is a nice broad spectrum to use in the field, or on the range. i think its somewhat a knock on bushnell that the "top of the line" scope only competes with zeiss's bottom line scopes. if this was a conversation about the bushnell or the zeiss vs. a leupold vx3, things would be totally different.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 21:03
DAVE44 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 652
My opinion... Bushnell needs to offer different reticles (etched) or (coated) to prevent them from turning silver and a little more eye relief. If they offered that and maybe some fixed power models then I wouldnt need to look at other scopes.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 21:08
shooter07 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Shooting Sprout

Joined: June/12/2010
Location: PA
Status: Offline
Points: 4843
Hunter, the tube size doesn't do anything optically but it does help with durability. You've got a stronger tube with the extra size.

Bushnell isn't in Zeiss' league, not even close when you look at the whole product range. Let me be clear about that. 

With that being said, people associate Zeiss with $2000 scopes but the Conquest line is in the same league with the 6500. It's unfair to Bushnell in that respect. Bushnell's 6500 total package is superior to the Conquest scope talked about in this thread imo.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 21:19
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
Originally posted by shooter07 shooter07 wrote:

Hunter, the tube size doesn't do anything optically but it does help with durability. You've got a stronger tube with the extra size.

Bushnell isn't in Zeiss' league, not even close when you look at the whole product range. Let me be clear about that. 

With that being said, people associate Zeiss with $2000 scopes but the Conquest line is in the same league with the 6500. It's unfair to Bushnell in that respect. Bushnell's 6500 total package is superior to the Conquest scope talked about in this thread imo.

i realize that, but i dont feel that a 30mm tube is what i consider a deal maker or breaker. when i think zeiss, the diavari or hensoldt is the last thing on my mind, because i will never be able to afford one. while i really like my 4200, i dont feel its any better than the zeiss optically, and the 6500 uses the same glass as the 4200. really your paying extra for a 6.5x erector and a 30mm tube, neither have anything to do with optical quality. are they nice features to have?? well sure, but i certainly wouldnt give bushnell any extra credit points for those two items. rainguard on the other hand makes the decision a little more interesting, because the zeiss obviously doesnt have anything like that. dont get me wrong i totally understand your views and i certainly wont discredit them. we just see things differently a touch. its all good though.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 21:28
shooter07 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Shooting Sprout

Joined: June/12/2010
Location: PA
Status: Offline
Points: 4843
Actually the Bushnell is cheaper than the Conquest mentioned (4.5-14x) per SWFA so really it this case you're not paying extra. 799 for the Zeiss and 749 for the 2.5-16x as sold on SWFA. As Ilya mentioned in a review, you are also getting 80 MOA internal adjustment (6500) to the 4200 line of 50 (i believe) so that is a major upgrade.

But again, it does come down to personal preference. This is no different, no worries Big Smile


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/22/2010 at 21:40
Lennyo3034 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/01/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 45
Just as a wild card since these are two scopes I'm considering, how would the Sightron SIII compare with these in terms of durability and optically? Specifically the 6-24X50mm version. I wish they made a 4-16 as I really do not need 24X magnification, but 16 would be nice against varmints.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2010 at 09:01
jay 22/250 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: July/20/2010
Location: england
Status: Offline
Points: 43
have you looked at the ior range of somes in the lower mag. there glass is very clear.
 
i like bushnelss had a couple of the 4200 elites. my friend i go shooting with sometimes has the 6500 on a hmr and is getting one for his sako 222 soon.
 
its different for me as most of our shooting is at night so we g for the best optics under the lamp. if you cant hunt at nights in some states of the usa.
 
i guess it dont matter on that front to you as much
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2010 at 12:10
stickbow46 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/07/2009
Location: Benton, Pa
Status: Offline
Points: 4673
Another to seek out would be the Meopta[meostar]this the same company that makes the conquest glass .I also use a Minox Z5 4-20x50 which I feel is right up there with all the above mentioned scopes,they also make a Z5 3-15x42 which I think is a super bang for the buck. Minox CS is as good as anybody out there.Nice thing is SWFA sells all the mentioned scopes........Good luck you won't go wrong with any of these scopes.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Bushnell 6500 or Zeiss"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Zeiss Conquest vs Bushnell Elite 6500 YakAk Rifle Scopes 5
Bushnell 6500 vs. Zeiss Conquest sse Rifle Scopes 3
Bushnell Elite 6500 Vs Zeiss Conquest flashpoint Tactical Scopes 1
Bushnell Elite 6500 vs Zeiss Conquest jakeb Varmint Scopes 4
Bushnell 6500 2.5-16x50 info needed? M77 Rifle Scopes 2
Bushnell 6500 elite 2.5x16 Fotis Optics For Sale 2
Bushnell 2.5-16x42 Elite 6500 Marine24 Rimfire / Airgun 20
Bushnell Elite Tactical or 6500 2.5-16x42 Boomholzer Tactical Scopes 3
Bushnell 2.5-16x42 Elite 6500 30mm Blueboy Rifle Scopes 9
Bushnell 6500 Elite Tactical 2.5-16 x 42 MD fireroad Optics For Sale 1


This page was generated in 0.625 seconds.