Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
THE VX-7 still doesnt measure up |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
SAKO75
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/29/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 246 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: February/17/2007 at 08:10 |
I
Edited by SAKO75 - February/17/2009 at 12:24 |
|
outdoorAg
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/16/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 65 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Why does the FOV decrease with the objective size?
|
|
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I believe it has to do with focal length. Longer the scope usually decreases FOV.
Edited by Roy Finn |
|
Urimaginaryfrnd
MODERATOR Resident Redneck Joined: June/20/2005 Location: Iowa Status: Offline Points: 14964 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Dam the bad luck. Guess I'll have to spend half the money and buy a Nikon.
|
|
"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do". Bobby Paul Doherty Texas Ranger |
|
1stscope
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/14/2007 Status: Offline Points: 66 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The Zeiss has shorter eye relief, which is common with wider angle eyepieces. Wider angle eyepieces, unless large and heavy, also tend to have softer edges. Weight would be a lower point of comparison for me, and I'd tend to take the heavier one with no other information available, especially since Leupold seems to provide scopes for military. That being the case for me the differences are moot, as I'd prefer to see what the resolution and contrast are between them.
|
|
SAKO75
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/29/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 246 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The
Edited by SAKO75 - February/17/2009 at 12:24 |
|
ceylonc
Optics Journeyman Joined: September/13/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 514 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I think you're being kind with "at least as good" optics comment . I'd say that the new Diavari is a bit better... |
|
www.technika.nu
Optics Journeyman Joined: August/02/2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The heart of any optical system is actually the ocular, so it's the ocular that makes the FOV bigger. The objective has nothing to do with FOV as the objetive main purpose it to collect light.
FOV stands in direct relationship with eyerelief and the longer eyerelief the less FOV.
I am surprised to see that Leupold still have severe problems with moving eyerelief, Zeiss have produced fixed eyerelief variable scopes since 1922 and 85 years later Leupold can't do the same thing. Embarrasing........
Regards Technika |
|
1stscope
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/14/2007 Status: Offline Points: 66 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
"I am surprised to see that Leupold still have severe problems with moving eyerelief, Zeiss have produced fixed eyerelief variable scopes since 1922 and 85 years later Leupold can't do the same thing. Embarrasing........"
"I would say that across the 2-5-10 range of my zeiss, its anywhere from 4 to 3.5". "
Enbarrasing for both apparently. |
|
www.technika.nu
Optics Journeyman Joined: August/02/2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Not at all, cause on my Zeiss scopes I can hold my head at the same spot over all magnifications. On the Leupolds I had but now is sold, i couldnt.
I can't agree that Zeiss has a problem with moving eyerelief.
Regards Technika
|
|
SAKO75
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/29/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 246 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I went back tonight and set the scope down in a fixed position and adjusted the power from low to high. I barely had to move my eye. SO i'll agree with technika. The variation is almost non-existent, drastically less than the Leupolds
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If that's the criteria for "coming up short," then doesn't it stand to reason that the Schmidt & Bender 2.5-10X50 likewise "comes up short" to the Zeiss in terms of FOV and weight?
S&B 2.5-10X50 Variable FOV: 39.6/12 Weight: 22oz. Length: 14.8 |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
SAKO75
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/29/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 246 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
S&B
Edited by SAKO75 - February/17/2009 at 12:25 |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sorry, meant 2.5-10X56 S&B -- typo. However, their 1.5-6X42 Zenith still weighs 21oz. if weight is a criteria for judging whether a 30mm main tube scope in this class is inferior to another and objective dia doesn't have a direct influence on FOV. All their variable scopes weigh within 3-4 oz of each other, and all are way heavier than either the Zeiss or Swaro scopes you mention. My point is, depending on the intended use and the merits of a scope's other qualities, individual specs by themselves don't necessarily mean a given scope doesn't stack up well against its competitors.
Now, if several aspects of a scope are inferior compared to another -- i.e., optical quality, FOV, eye relief, weight, mechanics, build quality -- then yes, I think it's safe to conclude it falls short of its competition.
Just like most of us here, I haven't seen a VX-7, so I don't know whether this scope compares favorably to others in its price bracket or not, but I certainly don't think we can conclude based solely on a couple specs. |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
www.technika.nu
Optics Journeyman Joined: August/02/2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Rifledude In a way you are right that mostly of us not have seen it yet, but still: I would never buy a scope with varible eyerelief, regardless of make and price.
Regards Technika |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Given the option, I wouldn't choose variable eye relief over a decent amount of fixed eye relief either. That is one thing I don't like about Leupolds, but have to admit, it has never been a problem for me on the ones I've used.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Trinidad
Optics Master Joined: May/04/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1555 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well my opinion on the VX7 is posted on other VX7 threads but to sum it up, bottom line:pathetic waste of money. |
|
1stscope
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/14/2007 Status: Offline Points: 66 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
"I can assure you that this zeiss has no soft edges. I promise you on that."
Some night point your rifle and scope towards a clear sky, steady the rifle, and look carefully at the stars in the center of the field and the edge of the field. It's a simple but tough test for any low to moderate power optic, very few have edges as good as the center, and Zeiss is no exception. Good optics will have a tight images to maybe 2/3rds of the field, very good to 3/4ths of the field. |
|
1stscope
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/14/2007 Status: Offline Points: 66 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
"As far as the military and their scopes, zeiss makes Hensoldt which is used extensively by many sniper teams throughout Europe. Schmidt & Bender is used over there as well and by our own USMC (S&B 3-12x50) here in the USA, word is the US Army is switching to the S&B 4-16x42 PMII for their next scope. Where does that leave Leupold?"
Doing well, as the Zeiss sniper scopes seem to have some problems. S&B is a 'crummy scope' though isn't it, as like the Leupold they're heavier than a similar AOS Zeiss.
http://snipersparadise.com/sniperchat/index.php?showtopic=31 06
I have a Zeiss in my current set: Sako TRG-42 in .338 Lapua with AU Jet-Z silencer and sako bipod. Good tube, bit pricey though. It has a reticle called Finndot( a mildot with a stadia lines for 1m high target in the bottom.) Mine got a BDC for our armys .338 ammo, and I load my ammo to those specs . Got some troubles around 200 rounds. One shattered lense inside the tube. The reason for the "stardust" was most likely the negative recoil while using muzzlebrake or silencer. A little bit loose lense wich get pounded so much that started to brake down. The scope was sent to Germany to repairs and was good as new when returned after 3 weeks. No problems after that...
(a reply in the thread)
The Finnish Defence Forces uses .338 Lapua Magnum caliber green stock Sako TRG-42s with Zeiss 3-12x56mm SSG-P "FinnDot" scopes as their official primary sniper rifles/sniper weapons system. The Finnish Armed Forces use the military name of .338 LM Sako TRG-42, which is Tarkka-ampujakivääri 2000 or in short Tkiv 2000 (direct translation in English is simply Sniper Rifle 2000). |
|
jonbravado
Optics Master Joined: October/05/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1131 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
the m995 action on those TRG's is amazing. wish i had one in every caliber.
338 lapua is a brutal kicker. but spot on for long range.
i will live vicariously through you. and stick to my 308 and 284 calibers.
J |
|
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 |