|
|
|
Discussion Forums
Forum Index
> Optics
> Scopes
Scopes
@ 11:38 pm (GMT) |
Jill HaynesI have to disagree with Nathan about his view of the best scopes mentioned in Basic Rifle Accuracy and Ballistics - The Scope."Cheap Chinese produced scopes are prone to field breakages, Japanese scopes tend to be clear and reliable while the very best have to be the U.S made scopes." While American scopes such as the Nightforce and U.S. Optics brand are very high quality and utterly reliable in my experience. Also, they are as good as any mechanically however, they're not as good optically as the Schmidt & Bender PMII brand and several other very high quality European scopes such as the top of the range Zeiss Victory, Swarovski z6 and Z8, many of the Kahles scopes and several other brands. These top of the range European brands are far superior optically and mechanically to lower tier U.S. scopes such as Leupold, Burris, Sightron (Japanese) and others. |
Replies
@ 08:46 am (GMT) |
Nathan FosterRe: ScopesHi Jill, you are of course correct. Your comment about top European brands being superior to low tier U.S scopes is true, it is common sense. But by the same token, many low tier U.S scopes are not actually U.S made and are instead now made in the Philippines such as Burris and Sightron.Nevertheless, I banned both Swaro and Zeiss from our tutorials many years ago and continue to stand by this decision. Eye relief is one of my primary concerns. Evidence: 1. Swaro, displays a dark image and very short eye relief. I had to bring the camera lens extremely close to obtain the image. On a magnum, this will generally lead to poor shooting habits such as flinching and may cause a cut eyebrow. 
A basic Sightron (Japanese), same power setting as the Swaro, photo taken at the same time. The image is brighter and the eye relief is longer. 
There is much more to this subject however this will most likely be the only response I give to this post. I hope this helps to offer a partial explanation of my position on this matter. Many folk do not understand my reasoning until we are at the coal face, acid testing kit in the field. I do not expect you or others to agree with me in any way, especially without having spent time with me in the field. |
|
@ 10:49 pm (GMT) |
Jill HaynesRe: ScopesThanks for your reply Nathan. I can see why you've come to your conclusions looking at those pictures.I've never had a problem with the Swarovski Z6 scopes (except some of the reticle wires are a little thin) and have always found them better than most in low light. I've found the Zeiss victory scopes overall best in low light and their eye relief is acceptable, at least to me. You may of had a defective Swaro sample. I don't consider the lower tier Swaro Z3 to be any better than a Leupold VX3 though. The Leupold VX-5HD is superior to both and I particularly like that model in 2-10x40 CDS that I have on my 6.5 Creedmoor. I don't rate my Nightforce scopes at all in low light. The Sightron II & III scopes I've tried have the annoying (to me) tyre effect at the eyepiece. They do have a clear bright picture though and a friend swears by them. |
Please wait
ABOUT USWe are a small, family run business, based out of Taranaki, New Zealand, who specialize in cartridge research and testing, and rifle accurizing.
|
KNOWLEDGEBASE |
KNOWLEDGEBASE |