Rifle Scopes Zeiss scopes...anyone using them?

[boisepaw]

I know NOTHING about high end scopes. I own 4 Vortex PST scopes and 1 Athlon Ares...all of which I like a lot. For $300 I picked up an Interarms Mark X rifle in 270...WITH A ZEISS DIAVARI C 3-9 SCOPE on it. The glass in that scope seems SO much better than my other scopes.

Why don't I see anyone discussing the Zeiss line when they talk about higher end scopes?

 

[Powder_Burns]

Zeiss doesn’t make any tactical scopes. They primarily market to hunters, scopes will be 1/4 moa clicks (probably 1/4” iphy) and they don’t have any mil reticles I am aware of.

 

[boisepaw]

Zeiss doesn’t make any tactical scopes. They primarily market to hunters, scopes will be 1/4 moa clicks (probably 1/4” iphy) and they don’t have any mil reticles I am aware of.

Now I'm going to showcase my ignorance. What, specifically, makes a scope "tactical"? I thought it was basically having target turrets instead of the capped turrets on my Diavari. The Zeiss Conquest V6 has target turrets but it looks like maybe only in SFP and MOA models. Are those things disqualifiers or is there something else I'm missing?

 

[Powder_Burns]

Target turrets and a mil reticle at the very least. Ideally, reticle and turret graduations are matched. Bonus features like a zero stop, illuminated reticle, first focal plane, magnification throw levers, etc make it more practical to employ in the field.

 

[Powder_Burns]

Zeiss does have a tactical line, it is sold under the Hensoldt brand. It is out of most people’s price range, which is why you don’t hear a lot about them.

 

[boisepaw]

Zeiss does have a tactical line, it is sold under the Hensoldt brand. It is out of most people’s price range, which is why you don’t hear a lot about them.

Very interesting.

Any clue as to how the glass compares to the Nightforces and Razors and Schmidt & Benders?

I guess when I see discussions of high end scopes I didn't know there was such a thing as "out of most people's price range".

 

[Powder_Burns]

Glass quality for the most part is subjective, nowdays pretty much all the big players have great glass. The performance benchmarks have to do with light transmission, lens coatings, and optical factors like edge to edge clarity, chromatic abberations, etc (again subjective). There are more scope gurus on here with more knowledge than me that will probably weigh in at some point. But on light transmission, what will set scopes apart is how late/early in the day your glass will work for you.

 

[Powder_Burns]

Very interesting.

Any clue as to how the glass compares to the Nightforces and Razors and Schmidt & Benders?

I guess when I see discussions of high end scopes I didn't know there was such a thing as "out of most people's price range".

The hensoldts are 3-4x the price of the ‘high end’ scopes on the market.
You could get an AI rifle with a ZCO in a Spuhr mount for the price of a henny. Most of us are more practical than frivolous.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

I know NOTHING about high end scopes. I own 4 Vortex PST scopes and 1 Athlon Ares...all of which I like a lot. For $300 I picked up an Interarms Mark X rifle in 270...WITH A ZEISS DIAVARI C 3-9 SCOPE on it. The glass in that scope seems SO much better than my other scopes.

Why don't I see anyone discussing the Zeiss line when they talk about higher end scopes?

As was mentioned, Zeiss scopes are marketed for the hunter. I think they are behind the times, or maybe the majority of hunters are behind the times. Either way, they do not make a scope to my knowledge that blends well with other "tactical" style scopes people might have, such as FFP, mil-based reticles, trustworthy target turrets, etc. So having one system of scope on a competition or tactical rifle and then another system on a hunting rifle doesn't do anyone any favors. I do not understand why most scope manufacturers do not understand this.

But times are changing and the long range hunters are leading the charge. I hope the scope companies begin to market towards folks like me who grew up buying a mid-priced Leupy for a hunting rifle, setting the zero, and then God forbid, never, ever moving the turrets again, but have since began shooting long range and made the switch to solid FFP/Mil scopes (S&B, Nightforce, Minox) and are looking to replace all their old SFP/MOA scopes on their hunting rifles to match their current competition rifles with lighter/shorter scopes with "tactical" features and turrets they can trust.

Saying that, I have owned several Zeiss over the years and they were solid for basic point-and-shoot scopes. The old Conquest 4-14x50 with target turrets had bright glass and a very forgiving eyebox and punched way above its weight class, even though it just had a basic plex reticle with no zero stop or locking turrets. And I still have a little Conquest V4 1-4 with a locking elevation turret on a 300 BLK that I enjoy, and a Zeiss Diavari on a 308 hunting rifle that is OK (but has fish eye on low power). However since making the switch from SSP/MOA to FFP/Mils on my target rifles, I will no longer buy these types of scopes again, and I can only assume most folks on the Hide feel the same way.

If you still rock SFP/MOA on your competition rifles, then it is not a big deal I suppose.

 

[Raffy]

The above reply seems accurate enough to describe my situation as well. Ive had some leupold 3x9 scopes that were for hunting, upgraded to a zeiss conquest vx4 that has glass much better than my old leupold scopes, but lacks basic function for long range accuracy. It gets it done for hunting, but with cocessions I no longer want to make now that I am getting in to the long range game and know better is out there for my wants/needs. All being fair my zeiss glass is really good. I havent looked through the legendary players' products, but zeiss glass gets me on target before and after legal light for hunting. My 44mm objective is easier to spot shots on paper than my dads leupold gold ring spotting scope. Its just a different game now for a lot of us.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

The above reply seems accurate enough to describe my situation as well. Ive had some leupold 3x9 scopes that were for hunting, upgraded to a zeiss conquest vx4 that has glass much better than my old leupold scopes, but lacks basic function for long range accuracy. It gets it done for hunting, but with cocessions I no longer want to make now that I am getting in to the long range game and know better is out there for my wants/needs. All being fair my zeiss glass is really good. I havent looked through the legendary players' products, but zeiss glass gets me on target before and after legal light for hunting. My 44mm objective is easier to spot shots on paper than my dads leupold gold ring spotting scope. Its just a different game now for a lot of us.

Yeah the glass is good on Zeiss, always has been. It's not about the glass anymore though, it's about the reticles, features, and to some extent, the durability.

 

[boisepaw]

So then...another related question...how much would I need to spend and what scopes would be the "entry-level" of the high end scopes that have glass the quality of my Zeiss Diavari?

 

[Raffy]

Yeah the glass is good on Zeiss, always has been. It's not about the glass anymore though, it's about the reticles, features, and to some extent, the durability.

And tracking on the turrets. If you dont have good tracking your basically buying an expensively innacurate scope.

 

[Iron Worker]

So then...another related question...how much would I need to spend and what scopes would be the "entry-level" of the high end scopes that have glass the quality of my Zeiss Diavari?

I have a Zeiss V6 that has awesome glass,buts its on my varmint rifles. Tactical I have a Athlon Cronus BTR (FFP)that's a great entry level scope,also a SWHD 5-20x50mm FFP that is awesome. Trijicon 5-50x56mm Accupower that is excellent. But the glass in the Zeiss is one step above. But I'm told a S&B pm11 easily tops my Zeiss

 

[Caveman0101]

I love my Zeiss scopes and binocs, the glass is awesome for the price, but my NF definitely has better turrets. I use mine for hunting so I have no issues with the choice of reticles.

 

[918v]

So then...another related question...how much would I need to spend and what scopes would be the "entry-level" of the high end scopes that have glass the quality of my Zeiss Diavari?

A lot.

The problem with comparing a high magnification tactical scope to a Zeiss 3-9x36 is exit pupil. The Zeiss for one has awesome glass and a 4.0 exit pupil. High magnification scopes can’t compare. They will always look dimmer and more bland unless you turn the magnification down to a lower level. Basically tactical scopes are limited by a max of 56mm diameter of the objective lens. To get an exit pupil of 4.0 you’d need to run them at 14x or lower. Even with the awesome new coatings.

I have a Hensoldt 4-16x56mm that at 16x does not render an image as nice as my friends 3-9x40 Zeiss Conquest he bought for $299. Let that sink in. Owned 3 of them. I have a good one.

 

[lennyo3034]

Got behind a Zeiss Conquest v4 6-24 recently and was thoroughly unimpressed.

Was on a “class gun” that a certain range used as a loaner for long range classes. I did not think SFP and MOA was a great combination for that use.

The glass was unimpressive as well. CA was horrendous, worse than any Kahles, Steiner, or Bushnell I’ve been behind and all of those have noticeable CA. I didn’t even bother looking at resolution and contrast, couldn’t get past the CA.

 

[Raffy]

Got behind a Zeiss Conquest v4 6-24 recently and was thoroughly unimpressed.

Was on a “class gun” that a certain range used as a loaner for long range classes. I did not think SFP and MOA was a great combination for that use.

The glass was unimpressive as well. CA was horrendous, worse than any Kahles, Steiner, or Bushnell I’ve been behind and all of those have noticeable CA. I didn’t even bother looking at resolution and contrast, couldn’t get past the CA.

My dad just upgraded to that same zeiss scope. I felt the same way. I felt like he actually downgraded from the same scope that I have on one rifle (we both bought the same model originally). The model I still have and he had was the 4.5-14x44 conquest v4. Got them from Doug at cameraland as open box items for a good deal (as always). My v4 looks good to me as a short to mid range hunting scope but I wouldn't want to hunt with his 6-24 due to CA issues. It was underwhelming after being used to mine. Having said all that, I am still moving away from them as sfp isnt my interest anymore

 

[ofelas]

Quite a difference in glass quality between the Conquest and the higher end Diavari/Victory/FL.

Last I checked, most game animals couldn’t tell the difference between an “old fashioned hunting scope” or a “mil/mil tactical scope”.

I personally can’t tell the low light difference in glass between a Hensoldt and a Diavari/Victory/FL but I do prefer the mil/mil and turrets/FFP of the Hensoldts, as they’re dual purpose scopes on my rigs.

And, by the way, it’s Cassidian and more recently Airbus who took over the Hensoldt brand from Zeiss. A pity, as any warranty process is handled directly by Europe now.

 

[boisepaw]

OK...dumb question here. What is CA...when you are referring to the problem with CA.

 

[Raffy]

Quite a difference in glass quality between the Conquest and the higher end Diavari/Victory/FL.

Last I checked, most game animals couldn’t tell the difference between an “old fashioned hunting scope” or a “mil/mil tactical scope”.

I personally can’t tell the low light difference in glass between a Hensoldt and a Diavari/Victory/FL but I do prefer the mil/mil and turrets/FFP of the Hensoldts, as they’re dual purpose scopes on my rigs.

And, by the way, it’s Cassidian and more recently Airbus who took over the Hensoldt brand from Zeiss. A pity, as any warranty process is handled directly by Europe now.

Ive not gotten behind such wonderful glass. Ya dont know what ya dont know. One day...sigh.... Pretty new to the long range sport, but hunted quite a bit.

 

[Raffy]

OK...dumb question here. What is CA...when you are referring to the problem with CA.

Chromatic Aberration

 

[Caveman0101]

The V4 is their lowest tier optic, would not be fair to compare them to the Vic/Diav line or Kahles. I mean you're talking at least $2000 less expensive.