Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Sightron S2 Big Sky vs Zeiss Conquest |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Randall45
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Status: Offline Points: 284 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: March/15/2010 at 16:50 |
I own a Sightron S2 3-9x40 BS and a Zeiss 3-9x40 Conquest and find that both scopes are very close in optical performance.Both scopes have been very good values so now heres the question to all the forum members which scope is better over all.
|
|
icon308
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/15/2012 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 103 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
curious to know also
|
|
Stan
|
|
bugsNbows
Optics God bowsNbugs Joined: March/10/2008 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 11200 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That's a hard question as the terms "better" or "best" mean different things to different people. I've had both and, as you stated, they both were fine. I do like the hydrophobic coating on the BS...very helpful in foul weather. I like the Zeiss reticles better. Some folks with high gloss bluing on rifles want gloss scopes to match. The Sightron offers such where-as the Zeiss does not. Guess it depends on the individual situation.
|
|
If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat?
Anomymous |
|
trigger29
Optics Master Extraordinaire X = 180 Y = 90 (X+Pyro)+(Y-Pyro) = ? Joined: September/29/2007 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 4353 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I give the nod to the Zeiss, because I'm also a fan of the reticles, and how amazingly black they ALWAYS are.......... But I wish they would add a hydrophobic coating on them. Especially now with a price increase.
|
|
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." |
|
Alan Robertson
Optics Master Joined: October/31/2009 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 1763 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I've owned Big Sky and Conquest.
In side- side comparisons, the Big Sky had a slightly better low- light resolution than the Conquest and it came with a free lens hood, which was really nice and also had metal turrets, unlike Conquest. The only thing I didn't like about the Big Sky was that it had a more critical eyebox, where the image would suddenly go black when moving my eye off axis, especially at higher powers. I would have kept the Big Sky, but it's magnification range wasn't what I needed at the time. |
|
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"
|
|
DAVE44
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/11/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 652 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have had Sightron SII and Big Sky and sold both due to VERY CRITICAL eye position problems. The Optics are very good however but the blinking out of the image was a definate negative to me.
|
|
icon308
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/15/2012 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 103 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
so the Big Sky is equal optically to the Conquest ? I had a Prior Big Sky was crystal clear
|
|
Stan
|
|
Urimaginaryfrnd
MODERATOR Resident Redneck Joined: June/20/2005 Location: Iowa Status: Offline Points: 14964 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sightron may be good but it is NOT as good as the Conquest.
|
|
"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do". Bobby Paul Doherty Texas Ranger |
|
Randall45
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Status: Offline Points: 284 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |