| 300grains wrote:|
The comparison isn´t quite objective. A Swaro AV/PH/Z6 should be compared to Zeiss Diavari, then at least I would choose Zeiss ( and have done so). No matter what tubediameter difference there is between them.
Conquest is best compared to similarly priced scopes like VX-III.
Yes very very true. This is how people get confused.
The Zeiss Conquest line is for the American hunter where legal shooting time is half hour to 45 minutes past sunset. The Conquest line has multiple coatings but the scopes in the Conquest line do NOT get the multi T coatings. The Conquest line of scopes are assembeled here in the USA & don't get the multi T coatings because Zeiss wanted to keep the price down. Thats why you get more magnification such as 4.5-14. If they put their best coatings on the Conquest glass you'd be looking at starting around 800-900 bucks.
The Swarovski A line is made in Austria and those scopes get Swarovski's best coating on the glass, same coatings as the Swaro PH line of scopes. Thats why the price is higher & thats why you will get better low light usesage in the Swaro A line.
Now going head to head for the top dog, Swarovski's PH line doesn't quite measure up to the Zeiss Diavari models. The Zeiss 2-10x50 and the Zeiss 3-12x56 are incredible low light scopes.