Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Swarovski Z3...or keep Zeiss ? |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |||
Robster80
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/02/2012 Location: MS Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: November/03/2012 at 00:06 |
||
after many glowing reviews on the Conquest i purchased one recently..a 3-9x40......got it in and looked through it ..looks good....only thing im really annoyed with is if your eyes are not lined up perfect in the eyebox it blinks and goes black....very annoying...anyways ive got money saved up and i was told for better low light performance than the zeiss get a swaro z3.....i went to a gun shop recently and looked through it and it certainly is more pleasing to look through than my Conquest......of course it was indoors so i havent tested it for lowlight...but i just liked the look and feel of the z3...very light....sleek....great clarity...it was the 3-10x42
im highly tempted to purchase one of these ...BUT the tightwad in me is saying just use the zeiss and save the extra cash.......but i dont wanna cheap out if the Swaros perform a good bit better in low light conditions........any suggestions from Z3 or conquest owners ??? |
|||
bugsNbows
Optics God bowsNbugs Joined: March/10/2008 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 11200 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I own three of the Swaros and only one Conquest. I'll take the Swaros any day ... but my Conquest has been flawless too. I guess it comes down to personal preference and $ outlay. Good luck. I'm sure either will perform as expected. BTW, welcome to the forum!
|
|||
If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat?
Anomymous |
|||
Robster80
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/02/2012 Location: MS Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
which swaros do u own?? i was looking at the 3-10x42 Z3...just looked incredible when i looked through it....hows the eye relief on the swaro?? and is any extra lowlight they provide over the Zeiss Conquest worth the extra cash? cuz im real close to purchasing the Swaro
|
|||
338LAPUASLAP
Optics Master Scope Swapper Joined: October/17/2009 Status: Offline Points: 2596 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Tagged.
|
|||
No one
|
|||
helo18
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: December/02/2006 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 5620 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The Z3s and Conquests I have looked through, I like the Z3 a little better optically. But it is hard to beet the price of the Conquest for the optical performance you get. I do believe personally the Z3 is a step up, but it depends on your budget.
|
|||
To be prepared for War is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.
GEORGE WASHINGTON |
|||
Sparky
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: July/15/2007 Location: SD Status: Offline Points: 4569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
When you looked through it was it mounted on a rifle? |
|||
Robster80
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/02/2012 Location: MS Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
No it wasnt mounted on a rifle. Was just a display
|
|||
JGRaider
Optics Master Joined: February/06/2008 Status: Offline Points: 1540 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
You won't see that much difference in optical performance between the two, at least I didn't between my SwaroA (z3) and my Conquests.
|
|||
Sparky
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: July/15/2007 Location: SD Status: Offline Points: 4569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
This is what I thought maybe the case. Once you have it mounted on a rifle you should have no problems with it. I have experienced that same thing with a number of scopes and once they were mounted I had no issues what so ever. It is hard to keep the scope lined up with your eye by just holding it. |
|||
Robster80
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/02/2012 Location: MS Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
O u mean the cOnquest? I gotcha. I need to slap it on the rifle then and see. Was pretty annoyed when i looked through it
|
|||
bugsNbows
Optics God bowsNbugs Joined: March/10/2008 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 11200 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I have one 3-9 X 36 and two 3-10 X 42 Swaros. The 3-10 X 42 is my favorite all purpose scope. The ER is fine, and the low light usage great. I would highly recommend it. |
|||
If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat?
Anomymous |
|||
Bitterroot Bulls
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: May/07/2009 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 3416 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I have the 4-12X50 Z3 and love it. Very forgiving eyebox and sufficient 3 1/2 inches of eye relief.
I used to own the Conquest 3-9X40 and it was really easy to get behind, in my opinion. It also had a seemingly monsterous 4 inches of eye relief. If you can afford it, the z3 is a gem of a scope, but I think if you get the Conquest mounted, I think you won't have problems with blackouts. |
|||
-Matt
|
|||
BlackSox16
Optics GrassHopper Joined: October/14/2012 Location: WI Status: Offline Points: 32 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
FWIW-How the size/weight of a particular scope, fits with the rifle is something to consider...some scopes just seem made for certain rifles.
|
|||
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I have both the 3-9X40 Conquest as well as Swaro 3-9X36 and 3-10X42 Z3, and I concur with the above comments. In absolute terms, the Swaros are optically superior to the Conquest, but not by a huge margin. One other thing the Swaro Z3's have going for them is they are a couple oz lighter and about an inch shorter than Conquest -- comparing similar power models. Only you can decide if the optical performance and weight & size differences are worth the considerable price difference.
It's hard to beat the price to performance ratio the Conquest series offers. The guys are correct in saying once you mount your scope to a rifle, you shouldn't have any issues with the eyebox, because the rifle's buttstock forces your eye into proper alignment with the scope. My 3-9X40 Conquest is mounted on my most frequently used deer rifles, and I can assure you I wouldn't have that scope on that rifle if the eye box was unforgiving. |
|||
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|||
Robster80
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/02/2012 Location: MS Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The gun im using is a remington .270 Really loved the swaro after lookin thro it but if its not toooo much difference in lowlight then i guess theres no need to spend the extra cash.
|
|||
supertool73
Optics God Superstool Joined: January/03/2008 Status: Offline Points: 11814 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
What is low light to you? Are you talking legal hunting low light as in 1/2 hour before or after sunset? Or you are talking very low light hog or yote hunting? If you are using it for very low light, the Swaro very well might be a slight advantage. But for the typical legal big game hunting rules its not likely to much much difference.
Really any scope over $200 these days and probably many below that will offer enough in low light for the typical legal hunting rules. On the other hand nothing is at all wrong with just wanted a very good quality scope. I have a Swaro s6 and absolutely love using it. It is just a joy to look though. |
|||
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own." |
|||
Robster80
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/02/2012 Location: MS Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Mostly deer hunting. Half hour after sunset or so. Just want the best i can get. A buck came out last year and when he got into the field i lost him in my scope. Could see him in my monarch binoculars but my nikon prostaff scope i cldnt see him at all. Dont wanna b n that sitaution again. If the zeiss conquest 3-9x40 is good enough ill stick with it but if that swaro will be a decent noticeable difference id consider spending the extra cash for sure
|
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The determining factor for me was the light weight and compact size of the z3 for my purchase.
|
|||
Dyelynn
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/07/2011 Location: Washington Status: Offline Points: 231 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
based on this, you'll probably have no problems at all with the conquest. the one problem i have with my 3-9x40 was the eye relief was actually a little too long. one day, when i have a grand to blow, i'll replace my conquest with a z3, but not because of any shortcoming of the conquest, simply because i want one :D |
|||
Robster80
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/02/2012 Location: MS Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Yea i would say its a bit too much eye relief. I like getting a little closer to the eyebox than the conquest allows me.
|
|||
Post Reply | Page 12> |
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 |