OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Scopes > Rifle Scopes
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Swaro Z6
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

Swaro Z6

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
tbone1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: May/31/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 195
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tbone1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Swaro Z6
    Posted: February/01/2007 at 01:38

I went to the SCI show this past week and I thought I would post some info on the lastest optics.  I apologize that I didn't get to all of the booths and didn't do alot of testing because with the good indoor lighting it would have been useless anyway.  I will post each review in a separate category.

 

Swarovski

Well I got to spend a little time looking at the Z6.  Overall I did really like the scope.  As has been stated before, they got rid of all tunnel vision and the scopes had excellent field of view.  Overall they are priced about $100 more than a similar PH model.  The 2 downsides that I see are that they did not improve the glass or coatings.  They finally caught up to Zeiss (and maybe passed a little) in the field of view category but they didn't improve the glass.  With the field of view, it was more an improvement over the PH than over the VM/V.  The other negative is the 2nd plane reticle.  When I asked the rep about this, he somewhat admitted a 1st plane had more advantages but quoted that Americans want a 2nd plane so thats why they did it.

 

I like having as much range as I can get and I much prefer a 4x erector to a 3x. As far as the 6x erector goes, it does have some advantages but they are limited.  The Z6 went from a 1-4x24 to a 1-6x24.  This scope is an improvement.  The Z6 1.7-10x42 is in between a 1.5-6x42 and a 2.5-10x42.  It has a big advantage over the 1.5-6 in that it can go to 10x.  This would be useful on a 375 H&H in Africa if you only wanted to take 1 gun to Africa to do everything from large to small.  However it doesn't have alot of benefit over the 2.5-10.  I personally have never needed to go below 2.5x for big game.  The same can be said for the 2-12x50.  I don't think that it has a real benefit over the 3-12x50.  To me 3-12 is the perfect range for a big game scope (a big improvement over a 3-9).  They may should have done a 2.3-14x50 or a 2.5-15x50 instead.  This might give someone a real reason to buy it over the 3-12x50 PH.

Back to Top
www.technika.nu View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: August/02/2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 611
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote www.technika.nu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/01/2007 at 02:48

When it comes to magnification range I belive it's all about what kind of hunting you do.

I do a lot of driven game, but at the same hunt as I shoot something at 10 yards I can be placed somwhere where I get 200 yards shooting distance.

To me the 1,7-10 would be a great improvement over the 2,5-10.

Today I am switching betwen aimpoint for close range and 3-12x42 for longer ranges.

 

Regards Technika

Back to Top
tbone1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: May/31/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 195
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tbone1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/01/2007 at 04:26

That's why I said it had limited benefit.  I didn't say it had absolutely no benefit.  It's only 3/4 of a power less.  Limited benefit would mean that it would have an improvement or benefit in certain situations for certain people.  Just like the situation that you have or the one I described.  I am getting a 375.  I am considering a 1.7-10x42 for that very reason.  It would be good on very long shots on small game like duiker and also would be adequate in heavy cover facing a charging buffalo.  Very few people that really need a 1.5x scope will also really need 10x as well.  That's why a 1.5-6 is great.  To me 6x is fine until you are shooting at small animals at well over 200 yards.  Also people who need 10x probably will never really need less than 2.5 on the same rifle.  Rather than switching, would a 1.5-6 or a 2-8 not have worked?

Back to Top
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Trinidad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/01/2007 at 12:54
Great post Tbone1. I was seriously considering buying a Z6 before SHOT but I was turned off by the same reasons you have described. One,the same glass,two,rear focal plane, the 1.7 over the 2.5 is not a significant enough advantage of magnafication on my big game rifles. Dangerous game I will chose a 1-4x24. Z6 does not offer what  l prefer, so this scope is not for me.
Back to Top
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 13182
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote koshkin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/01/2007 at 16:06
The only Z6 model that is truly appealing to me is a 1-6x24 (in the same way as a IOR 1.5-8x26 is appealing to me).  Unless varminting or hunting in complete darkness, I do not see a situation where I need anything more than 6x or 8x.  In that regard, overall I like IOR's selection of magnification ranges on their 6x erector scopes: 1.5-8x26, 2-12x32, 3-18x42.

I do have a slight preference for 1-6x over 1.5-8x.  With a small (24-26mm) objective lens, I would rather have the field of view of a true 1x at the bottom end than 8x (vs 6x) top end.  Interestingly though, IOR at 8x seems to have about the same field of view as the new Swaro at 6x.  Perhaps it is attributable to the 1/4" eye relief difference.

My impression are perhaps biased by the fact that I do not like huge objective lenses a whole lot and by the fact that I generally tend to use fairly low magnifications.  I also like to use both eye open whenever possible and while I can typically do it on scopes of up to 3x magnification (with reasonably thick reticles), it is sure more natural with a true 1x.

Still, to me the best of the new Swaro Z6 models is a 1-6x24 with #4 reticle and extended eye relief.  I think that makes it a perfect companion for a 375 of some sort.

ILya
Back to Top
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Trinidad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/06/2007 at 14:54

Here is a link to the newly updated swarovski website and a interactive ad for the Z6.

 

http://z6.swarovskioptik.com/?l=EN

Back to Top
ceylonc View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: September/13/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 514
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ceylonc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/06/2007 at 17:45

I looked through the 1.7x10 42mm model today at a local retailer.  I have to say that I really like the design and ergonomics.  The glass (from what Swaro and others who are in the know) is supposedly the same as that used in the PH series.  However, my eyes told me that the image was showed a little more clarity over the PH.  I wonder if the glass is the same but they haven't maybe tweeked the coatings used for the better???

 

I think Swarovski is on to something here.  Now, if they'd just introduce a 3x18 I'd really have to give it a hard look! 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 1.066 seconds.