Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Swarovski vs Zeiss |
Post Reply |
Author | ||
head hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: September/19/2008 Location: kentucky Status: Offline Points: 68 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: October/23/2008 at 16:24 |
|
At dusk will a 3x10x42 A Line give more shooting time then a 3x9x40 Conquest. If so how many more mintues will it add and is it worth twice as much. |
||
cyborg
Optics God Gaseous Clay Joined: August/24/2007 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 12288 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I'm unsure that you'll see any real appreciable extension in useable hunting time between the two. The Conquest will do the job all the way to the last legal second as it is. Chances are that if you are a healthy younger human, or a very gifted older one. You could easily do the same with a Monarch, Leupold VXIII or Bushnell elite as well.
|
||
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other
An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects. OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause. Cyborg |
||
Obi Wan Kenobi
Optics Apprentice Joined: December/21/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 188 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
It depends where you hunt at. If legal shooting time is half our past sunset their is hardly any difference in the 2.
|
||
Big Squeeze
Optics Master Extraordinaire GOOGLE NINJA Joined: August/30/2007 Location: Anaheim, Calif. Status: Offline Points: 3143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
||
head hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: September/19/2008 Location: kentucky Status: Offline Points: 68 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Thanks guys I know how good the conquest is. I just wanted to get some expert advice on the A Line because I have zero experience with them. I guess it's another conquest and the extra 500 buck's can go a long ways on a new rifle.
|
||
bricat
Optics Master Joined: April/24/2007 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 1881 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Good choice my friend!
|
||
|
||
ccoker
Optics Master Joined: February/13/2008 Location: Austin, TX Status: Offline Points: 2041 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I have a Conquest, a Kahles CL and had the Swarovski in question
the Kahles CL was the best in very low light if hunting in low light, reticle choice can't be overlooked |
||
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I have Conquest and Swaro AH, I am considering selling all the Conquests for Swaros; Conquest is a good scope, but the Swaro (with ballistic reticule for most circumstances) is simply amazing.
|
||
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14560 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
+1 on the Swaro, I know it's more expensive but there's a good reason, it's better. The Conquest is a very good scope and if money's an issue I would go this route. Edited by mike650 - October/24/2008 at 11:43 |
||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
||
lucytuma
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: November/25/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 5389 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The Swaro is the better scopes hands down, is it worth twice the price, only you can decide.
|
||
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson
|
||
Pooreyes-2
Optics Apprentice Joined: September/02/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 79 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I hate to jump in and change the point of this, however do you guys really think a 40 0r 42mm isgood at dust? I had a 40 and could make anything out but dark shaddows, Then i took a higher power scope with a 50mm bell and I saw alot better, both scope were the same brand name.
|
||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14560 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
No problem!! I don't think we were comparing 4(x)mm and 50mm, we were just answering the original question. |
||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
||
Tip69
Optics Master Extraordinaire Tip Stick Joined: September/27/2005 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 4155 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Pooreyes-2 No offense, but maybe it was your poor eyes that was the issue, not the size of the objective bell. The only difference you should see if (and this is a BIG if) both scopes are exactly the same, is that you will be able to use a higher power on the 50 compared to the 40. Otherwise, they should be the same. There can be a big difference in low light ability even with in the same brand! Which two scopes were you comparing?
|
||
take em!
|
||
300grains
Optics GrassHopper Joined: November/30/2007 Status: Offline Points: 46 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
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.
|
||
3_tens
Optics Jedi Master Joined: January/08/2007 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I beg to differ with you Tips. I have both the conquest 3-9 in a 40mm and a 50mm. In low light there is a very visible difference. The 50mm will out last the 40mm by 10-15 min. I also have the Leupold VX III in 40mm and 50mm. Both have the varmint reticle. The 50 will give you much more hunting time. The 50mm Zeiss is the best in low light of the 4. In bright light here is little difference. The 40 mm may have a slight edge with less flair in some conditions.
|
||
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. |
||
Obi Wan Kenobi
Optics Apprentice Joined: December/21/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 188 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
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.
|
||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14560 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The Z6 is Swaro's "top dog", not the PH, but even so the Zeiss Victory Diavari may still have a slight edge in the low light conditions. The Z6 will have better FOV and power range. It would be nice to hear from someone who owns both a Z6 and a Victory that could give us a better low light report between the two. Edited by mike650 - November/03/2008 at 00:09 |
||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
||
flashpoint
Optics Apprentice Joined: October/17/2008 Location: manresa Status: Offline Points: 105 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
good for Theodore Roosevelt |
||
yeah
|
||
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
For all the things he did wrong, this doesn't even the field. Now, back to optics talk. |
||
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
||
Tip69
Optics Master Extraordinaire Tip Stick Joined: September/27/2005 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 4155 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
3_tens, that is contrary to everything I've leaned here at the OT. If the coatings are the same and everything else for that matter are the same and the only difference is the size of the objective, since we can only see what our eyes allow, which is like 7mm or 8mm, the 50 wouldn't provide any more light at the lower power levels. Has to do with exit pupil I think. For example, if you are using 9x on both scopes, the 50 would be better, but at say 5x, they should be the same. Only difference would be the variance in the manufacturing process. Your 50 Conquest may have been made better just by chance.
|
||
take em!
|
||
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 |