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

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

Zeiss or Swaro

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
bachekermooni View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: January/20/2010
Location: Minnesota
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bachekermooni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Zeiss or Swaro
    Posted: April/24/2011 at 19:04
I am looking to put a scope on my Ruger 77 MK II Varmit Target in .223.
I have narrowed my search to two scopes:
1. Swarovski Z5 5 - 25X with BRX
2. Zeiss Conquest 6.5 - 20X - with Rapid Z Varmint
 
Please comment on these two with your actual experiences.  Thanks.
Take your time. Do it right - the first time.
Back to Top
martin3175 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Points: 3773
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote martin3175 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/24/2011 at 19:27
Swaro by the slimmest of margins 
Back to Top
brodeur272 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: September/23/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 609
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brodeur272 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/25/2011 at 10:36
I would agree.  My Swaro glass is better than my Conquest. 
Back to Top
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9318
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rancid Coolaid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/25/2011 at 10:39
Swaro will be better glass.


Both will do what you want.
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.
Back to Top
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 3416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bitterroot Bulls Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/25/2011 at 10:42
I would also choose the Swaro, but more for the simpler, but more versatile BRX reticle system.
-Matt
Back to Top
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
EVIL OPPRESSOR

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 16337
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RifleDude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/25/2011 at 10:58

Glass:  advantage - Swaro.

Reticle:  advantage - Zeiss.
 
Flip a coin.
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.
Back to Top
WYcoyote View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: April/06/2010
Location: Kane,WY
Status: Offline
Points: 154
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote WYcoyote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/25/2011 at 17:58
 
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

Swaro will be better glass.


Both will do what you want.
 
+1 
Sorry for commenting with no experience with either of these exact models, but my first reaction on seeing the two choices was  WIN/WIN.
But with the NSTAAFL factor, The Swaro should edge the Conquest with the +$565 advantage.
Which brings us to the age old optics question:
 Is X amount of quality worth Y amount of money?
And the only one that can answer that is the guy coughing up the cash.


Edited by WYcoyote - April/25/2011 at 18:06
Back to Top
Tip69 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Tip Stick

Joined: September/27/2005
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 4155
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tip69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/25/2011 at 18:10
For whatever reason, I was thinking the Swaro glass would be much better than the Conquest.
take em!
Back to Top
Alan Robertson View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/31/2009
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 1763
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Alan Robertson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/26/2011 at 05:38
I only own Conquests with Z-600 reticles instead of the Varmint ret. (also Z-plex model) and I really like them.
Having said that, the Swarovski glass is better and it will be most apparent in low light conditions, although it is noticeable during regular light as well.
One does pay a price for the difference.
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"
Back to Top
Ar180shooter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: May/01/2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ar180shooter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 01:34
I don't have experience with the exact models described, but I do own a Swaro Z3 3-9x36 and used to own a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40.

The Swaro wins hands down.  Yes, I am comparing a $1200 CAN to $600 CAN scope, but I'd rather have one Swaro than 2 Zeiss.  The glass is clearer, adjustments crisper and the Swarovski just screams quality.  Mind you, when you move up to the higher end Zeiss scopes, they start to match the Swaro for glass quality (among other things), but you're talking $2500 scopes at that point.
Back to Top
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bricat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 09:32
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Glass:  advantage - Swaro.

Reticle:  advantage - Zeiss.
 
Flip a coin.

I could not have said that better. That is exactly right.


Back to Top
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 14569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mike650 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 09:54
Originally posted by bricat bricat wrote:

Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Glass:  advantage - Swaro.

Reticle:  advantage - Zeiss.
 
Flip a coin.

I could not have said that better. That is exactly right.




I would have thought so as well until Swaro came out with the new BRX reticle.
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
Back to Top
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
EVIL OPPRESSOR

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 16337
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RifleDude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 10:31
I still think Rapid Z is a superior LR reticle concept vs. BRX.
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.
Back to Top
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 9042
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tahqua Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 10:58
I don't use ranging reticles here in MI. But, here is what I see between the two.
The Swarovski BRX is a straight forward holdover reticle.



I look at the Zeiss and see the added feature of windage.



I can see where someone shooting in large open areas would like the Z- Varmint. Is that what you are talking about RD? I wonder because I have only used mil-dot and was thinking about one of these types myself.



Doug
Back to Top
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 14569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mike650 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 11:03
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

I still think Rapid Z is a superior LR reticle concept vs. BRX.



Definitely superior to the Swaro BR reticle that's for sure but I think they did a pretty good job with the BRX and BRH reticles.
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
Back to Top
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 9042
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tahqua Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 11:18
Okay, I now see some windage tics on the BRX that I missed. Would the Zeiss still be better for a first PD hunt, then?
Doug
Back to Top
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
EVIL OPPRESSOR

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 16337
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RifleDude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2011 at 12:20
Originally posted by tahqua tahqua wrote:

I can see where someone shooting in large open areas would like the Z- Varmint. Is that what you are talking about RD? I wonder because I have only used mil-dot and was thinking about one of these types myself.
 
BRX has evenly spaced horizontal holdover stadia.  Rapid Z has increasingly wider spaced holdovers that more accurately reflect the affects of gravity to get you close to "even yardage" drop values (with the aid of the Rapid Z calculator).  BRX is a "one size fits all" reticle, whereas Rapid Z comes in multiple versions designed to closely approximate the ballistic curve of different cartridge families.  The BRX is certainly simpler and less cluttered, and that fact may make it more desirable for a big game scope.  It's greater simplicity and thicker outer bars probably makes it faster and easier to pick up.  But I'm not a fan of ranging reticles for big game anyway, so I would only select these reticles for varmint or field tactical use.  For a prairie dog type varminting, which would be my primary use for a reticle of this type, having additional windage reference marks is invaluable.  A strong, ever changing wind is a constant factor in PD country. 
 
As with anything else, a lot depends on how you plan to use it, but the simple fact that Rapid Z is available in multiple versions tailored to different uses and includes additional ranging and wind compensating marks I think makes it a better LR tool.  Rapid Z also includes some extra reference hash marks for ranging, corresponding to roughly 2MOA spacing on all 4 corners.
 
As with any of these reticles, you still have to verify POI at actual distances by actually shooting at those distances.
 
I don't dislike BRX; I just like Rapid Z better and think it's a better thought out design.
 
With few exceptions, I like Zeiss's reticles better than Swaro's across the board.  In 1" tube scopes, I like the AV, Z3, and Z5 scopes better than Conquest in terms of optics, weight, length, and design, but not directly proportional to the price differential.
 
To me, Swaro is nicer to look through and behold on the rifle and Conquest has reticles and better price in its corner while still offering optics that ain't shabby.
 
This is why I say "flip a coin."


Edited by RifleDude - May/01/2011 at 12:26
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.
Back to Top
tjtjwdad View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: December/11/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tjtjwdad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/03/2011 at 22:33
On the Swarovski reticle (BRX), from the pictures, I don't see where they differ a whole lot from the BR model excepting the wind tick marks that the BR doesn't have.
 
One thing that is being over looked is the software tool that both companies provide for these reticles.  For the Swarovski, their software provides drops for every line & dot at every power rabge of the scope.  The same for the BRX model.  The Zeiss only provides the drops based on a certain power.  IMO, this makes for a big difference between the two.
 
As far as the reticles themselves, it just comes down to which you prefer.  Either way, one would be happy.  I have both the Zeiss Rapid Z Varmint reticle and the Swarovski BR reticle and IMO, as far as comparing the glass of a Conquest vs an AV, in broad daylight shooting varmints, I don't see a lot of differences.  In the dark, the light transmission favors the Swarovski.  On the other hand, those Zeiss dark/black plex reticles really show up well in low light.
 
I like both of these scopes as well as my Leupold VX3.
 
HTH,
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 0.359 seconds.