Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Bushnell 6500 or Zeiss |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Toy4Two
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/19/2010 Location: Norfolk Ne Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: July/22/2010 at 15:35 |
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?
|
|
shooter07
Optics Jedi Knight Shooting Sprout Joined: June/12/2010 Location: PA Status: Offline Points: 5120 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
"Issac Newton invented gravity because some asshole hit him with an apple" -Chris Moltisanti |
|
Lennyo3034
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/01/2010 Status: Offline Points: 59 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That has things other than just glass taken into account though. I'd be interested to know as well on how the glass compares.
|
|
shooter07
Optics Jedi Knight Shooting Sprout Joined: June/12/2010 Location: PA Status: Offline Points: 5120 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
"Issac Newton invented gravity because some asshole hit him with an apple" -Chris Moltisanti |
|
shooter07
Optics Jedi Knight Shooting Sprout Joined: June/12/2010 Location: PA Status: Offline Points: 5120 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
"Issac Newton invented gravity because some asshole hit him with an apple" -Chris Moltisanti |
|
stickbow46
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: January/07/2009 Location: Benton, Pa Status: Offline Points: 4678 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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!
|
|
Pearls of Wisdom are Heard not Spoken
|
|
pyro6999
Optics Retard OT TITAN Joined: December/22/2006 Location: North Dakota Status: Offline Points: 22034 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
if zeiss would put loutec on the conquest's, oh man you would just about have it all.
|
|
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead" 343 we will never forget God Bless Chris Ledoux "good ride cowboy" |
|
3_tens
Optics Jedi Master Joined: January/08/2007 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
Folks ain't got a sense of humor no more. They don't laugh they just get sore.
Need to follow the rules. Just hard to determine which set of rules to follow Now the rules have changed again. |
|
shooter07
Optics Jedi Knight Shooting Sprout Joined: June/12/2010 Location: PA Status: Offline Points: 5120 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
"Issac Newton invented gravity because some asshole hit him with an apple" -Chris Moltisanti |
|
pyro6999
Optics Retard OT TITAN Joined: December/22/2006 Location: North Dakota Status: Offline Points: 22034 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead" 343 we will never forget God Bless Chris Ledoux "good ride cowboy" |
|
DAVE44
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/11/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 652 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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.
|
|
shooter07
Optics Jedi Knight Shooting Sprout Joined: June/12/2010 Location: PA Status: Offline Points: 5120 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
"Issac Newton invented gravity because some asshole hit him with an apple" -Chris Moltisanti |
|
pyro6999
Optics Retard OT TITAN Joined: December/22/2006 Location: North Dakota Status: Offline Points: 22034 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead" 343 we will never forget God Bless Chris Ledoux "good ride cowboy" |
|
shooter07
Optics Jedi Knight Shooting Sprout Joined: June/12/2010 Location: PA Status: Offline Points: 5120 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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 |
|
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
"Issac Newton invented gravity because some asshole hit him with an apple" -Chris Moltisanti |
|
Lennyo3034
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/01/2010 Status: Offline Points: 59 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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.
|
|
jay 22/250
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/20/2010 Location: england Status: Offline Points: 43 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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
|
|
winchester 22/250 stealth,zeiss victory 6x24x56 scope,ase mod,jewell trigger
tikka m595 222,ase mod,ziess conquest 6.5x24x50 scope. annie 1417 22lr,logun mod,4x24 fixed mag scope |
|
stickbow46
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: January/07/2009 Location: Benton, Pa Status: Offline Points: 4678 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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.
|
|
Pearls of Wisdom are Heard not Spoken
|
|
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 |