Rifle Scopes IQ SWFA 10x42 vs Variable

[fancygunz]

I am extremely happy with my SWFA 10x42 (non-HD) scope. To my eyes the image is huge, clear, bright, sharp, and it has a forgiving eyebox. For a ~$250 scope it's fantastic.

Based on image quality ONLY, assuming similar magnification (10x - 16x) is used, will I be happy going to something like the Vortex PST II 5-25x or Bushnell Elite DMR II 3.5-21? Or will I be disappointed due to the compromises made by the variable optic? I want to "upgrade" to a variable for longer shots (300-600 yd) but don't want to downgrade IQ. I realize quality will drop at the upper end of the range.

I have only looked through the Vortex and only inside a store, so I am hoping for some real-life comparisons and maybe some suggestions. I don't want to pay triple the cost of the SWFA and feel like I am downgrading my scope.

 

[fdkay]

The quality of glass and coatings on those two scopes is superior to that found on the non-HD SWFA scopes.

 

[Gohring65]

The SWFA is solid, but a quality variable will be superior in every way, except elevation travel. There’s a few variables that have as much travel but not many.

 

[PBWalsh]

In comparing the 5-20 HD and the 10x classic model. The HD was definitely a better image at 10x. That being said, it was not 3x better than the classic. I would ask yourself if you are willing to pay 3x the price for a small bump in IQ.

Your paying 3x the price for variable power, good construction, slightly better glass, illumination, etc.

Just my opinion of course having owned both optics.

 

[spife7980]

In my experience basically anything will be better to look through than the ss10x, sold mine as quick as I could after looking through it.

Those you listed will make you hate the ss10x

 

[Fweedombypepe]

The SWFA is solid, but a quality variable will be superior in every way, except elevation travel. There’s a few variables that have as much travel but not many.

What he said. I too 'upgraded' from a standard 10x to an athlon ares btr on clearance for 400. Glass was a bit better, having variable power was nice. My groups stayed the same tho. Don't think you'll somehow shoot better with a variable. Now im using a 800 dollar Steiner p4xi 4-16. Glass is way better..eyebox is way better. My groups are staying the same. But what im missing most of all is the elevation travel in my Swfa. Im using it on a 22lr for 'precision' shooting. With 0MOA rail with the swfa i could poke out to 300 yards using just the turrets...closer to 370 with reticle. With my variable scopes i max out at 200yds...gotta start shopping for canted rails.

Recently looked thru a 10x swfa again and was surprised how small the field of view looked. When i first got mine it looked huge!
The SWFA 10X at 100 meters has 3.9 field of view. The Steiner 4-16 at 16X has a 6.9. The Bushnell your talking about has a 5 foot FOV at 21X. Something to consider.

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

I've always found the value of the SWFA10X to be in its mechanical precision. At that price point, you seldom get decent glass OR precise and repeatable dope changes. With the SWFA classics, you get precision and accuracy, and the glass ain't bad.

A pretty image is a good thing, I heartily agree - it's why my favorite gun wears a Tangent Theta - but if the turrets don't track true, it's just a pretty picture of a whole buncha misses.

For value, there isn't a better deal in precision marksmanship than the SWFA10X classic. For all around awesome scope, there are far better options; but you will need far more $$$.

 

[fancygunz]

Thanks for all the input. I guess I just have to decide whether or not I really need the extra mag.

 

[wade2big]

Thanks for all the input. I guess I just have to decide whether or not I really need the extra mag.

Have you missed something yet that you can say without a doubt it was the 10x. I posted a fun little video in case you haven't seen it. Remington’s and fixed power scopes suck

 

[oneforall]

I had ss 10x and bushnell DMR 35-21 Gen 1 at the same time, with both at 10x, the bushnell's image quality blow the ss10x out of water. both from clearty and contrast point of view, the SS10x was gone soon after.

 

[broncoaz]

I use a SS 10x on my CZ .22 trainer and a Razor gen 2 on my 6.5. I don’t have any complaints about the SS 10x for the price and application, my .22 at up to 200 yards. I ran a PST 6-24 on my .308, it got pretty dark over 21x mag, but up to that point it was better than the SS 10x, I shot the PST a bunch at 8-12x and it was always better than the SS 10x on the same day. I ran the 3-15x50 Bushnell on another rifle, also a very good scope and superior to the SS 10x. I don’t see where you wouldn’t be happy with either of the scopes you listed.

 

[spife7980]

I use a SS 10x on my CZ .22 trainer and a Razor gen 2 on my 6.5. I don’t have any complaints about the SS 10x for the price and application, my .22 at up to 200 yards. I ran a PST 6-24 on my .308, it got pretty dark over 21x mag, but up to that point it was better than the SS 10x, I shot the PST a bunch at 8-12x and it was always better than the SS 10x on the same day. I ran the 3-15x50 Bushnell on another rifle, also a very good scope and superior to the SS 10x. I don’t see where you wouldn’t be happy with either of the scopes you listed.

Put an Athlon talos btr for the same price or less. Paradigm shift with them side by side for a $250 scope

 

[Eoddave27]

The SS 10x scopes are bullet proof and have a ton of travel. A buddy of mine has one on one of his rifles. When I went from using my DMRii to shooting his rifle I felt like I was looking through a shot glass. The DMR and gen 2 PST’s are excellent scopes. Personally I would go with the DMRii. For the price Cameraland has the for right now it is hard to beat.