Rifle Scopes SB vs Zeiss

[gknittel]

Hi guys, today I was able to compare 2 scopes in a gunshop:
SB 5-25x56 PMII MilDot
vs.
Zeiss 6-24x56T Victory MilDot
I see the Zeiss is much more brighter and sharper than the SB.

After seing this huge difference (and since I recently bought a SB 5-25x56), I took random rifles from my dad's collection (hunting rifles, mostrly Swaro scopes, nothing tactical) and every single scope was brighter and sharper than my own SB 5-25x56 and the one I tested in the gunshop.

What do you think? Is it just me or the SB glass is not as good as Swarovski's and Zeiss'?

If the Hensoldt has the same bright and sharp glass as in the Zeiss or Swarovski, I think I will replace the never-mounted SB with a Hensoldt. But I don't have a way to test a Hensoldt... anyone compared Zeiss glass vs Hensoldt? Or Swarovski vs Hensoldt?

Please note I'm talking about image quality... I'm not talking about ruggedness or knobs' quality and feel or reticles or repeatability... I'm talking just about image being sharper and brighter in Zeiss and Swarovski.

I'm very anxious to hear your comments.. if any of you had similar experiences..

 

[Pete E]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

I have Swaro, Zeiss and S&B Scopes, and given similar size objectives, I notice very little difference between the three as far as brightness goes.

 

[BobinNC]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

gknittel,

I not going to say it was just you. Your eyes saw what they saw. Nor am I going to ask if the scopes were adjusted properly for your eye, or if the parallax was adjusted correctly. I will assume that they were.

But image quality is a term more appropriate to binoculars, than a rifle scope. Not that image quality is not important, but rather on a list of things that are important in a rifle scope; ruggedness, repeatability, reticles, knobs, adjustment range, are much more important. That's because a scope is used primarily as an aiming device, and not for reading the front page of the London Times at 1000 meters....

All of the better scopes use excellent glass IMHO: Hensoldt, Zeiss, S&B, USO, Premier, just to name a few. And all are excellent aiming devices. But some are better than others, as rifle scopes, and those differences have nothing to do with image quality.

YMMV,

Bob

 

[Magnumdood]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

Your S&B 5-25x56 is matched as a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">tactical</span></span> scope only by the Premier Heritage. Notice I said <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">tactical</span></span>. Those two are the Apex scopes. I've owned all the others except the Vortex. It looks to be a contender.

 

[M4guru]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

I'd add Hensoldt/Zeiss to that short list...

 

[steve123]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

The clearest brightest scope I've ever looked through was a Zeiss 6-24X72.It was noticeably superior to the S&B 5x25 to my eyes but not much better than the 5x25 PH.

Steve

 

[gknittel]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">gknittel,

I not going to say it was just you. Your eyes saw what they saw. Nor am I going to ask if the scopes were adjusted properly for your eye, or if the parallax was adjusted correctly. I will assume that they were.
<span style="font-weight: bold">I took the Zeiss from the box and since the image was so clear and sharp, I thought parallax and eyepiece was uncorrectly adjusted on the SB, so I took the extra time to try to achieve the same sharpness and image clarity by playing with the parallax knob and objective diopter ring, but the Zeiss was just better</span>

But image quality is a term more appropriate to binoculars, than a rifle scope. Not that image quality is not important, but rather on a list of things that are important in a rifle scope; ruggedness, repeatability, reticles, knobs, adjustment range, are much more important. That's because a scope is used primarily as an aiming device, and not for reading the front page of the London Times at 1000 meters....
<span style="font-weight: bold">Well, that's why I said that I was talking about sharpness only... because I don't have the knowledge to evaluate these scopes in a rough environment... just telling what my eyes told me: Zeiss and Swaro better optically than SB. I don't know if it's right what I'm gonna state here, but I guess I have to be able to see the headlines of that newspaper if I want to put a bullet through it... and not just a blurry grey splash... just a thought from someone who has never had to shoot to 1000meters nor read the newspaper that far</span>

All of the better scopes use excellent glass IMHO: Hensoldt, Zeiss, S&B, USO, Premier, just to name a few. And all are excellent aiming devices. But some are better than others, as rifle scopes, and those differences have nothing to do with image quality.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Do you think then that given a set of scopes manufactured by different brands (zeiss, sb, ph, hensold, uso) with the same fuctionality, you won't keep optics quality in mind when choosing one over the other? I put it in other way: if S&B or USO or PH starts puting china crap glass inside theyr scopes, then they will still be good choices for you to choose from?</span>

YMMV,

Bob





</div></div>

 

[gknittel]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">gknittel,

I not going to say it was just you.


</div></div>

Ha!! Believe me... I'm the first one to want to believe that my more than $4000 scope is the best of the best... but when I saw this cheaper scope with better glass... I just thought, well, you know....

 

[clmayfield]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

More than $4,000?

 

[gknittel]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magnumdood</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your S&B 5-25x56 is matched as a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">tactical</span></span> scope only by the Premier Heritage. Notice I said <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">tactical</span></span>. Those two are the Apex scopes. I've owned all the others except the Vortex. It looks to be a contender. </div></div>

I read this forum since a couple of years ago... I posted very little because this forum is HUGE and has a lot of information and I find no way to contribute here... you're in another world, lots of people with great skills post here and I can't do anything but ask a couple of simple questions from time to time to get some help to solve my problems... also, I learn alot and I can't be grateful enough..

However, in all the time I've read this forum, I've seen what it looks like some kind of pattern to me.
In my very first visits here, most people were amazed by the USO scopes (and SB, as always). A log is kept about this in the Zak Smith articles "practical long range shootig".. the 2 scopes he recommends: the USO and the SB.

Within the next months other choices were added: Hensoldt and premiere for instance.
And since these choices joined the club, then everybody is amazed by these ones.

What I'm trying to say is that your list is that one NOW, but what was it when PH wasn't on the scene?
Maybe in a couple of months when people get used to the good quality of Hensoldt and they learn that these scopes will hold up then the list will be "Hensoldt and PH"... and maybe in a year the list will be "new brand XXXX and Vortex".

This brings something that keeps me scratching my head: I've seen several posts of people having weird experiences with PH (some models with knobs turning or unscrewing from the base and others simply turning like a regular knob... the "mushy" click trouble)... I just wonder why you consider PH as a good choice if it seems to have that issues.
This doesn't happen with SB (I've never seen anybody complaining about SB's knobs or anything else).
I also haven't seen anyone with problems with a Hensoldt.
But lots of people complain about USO (1/4 of the USO scopes seems to have to be sent back for repair).
Just wonder how you rank scopes.

Please, let me tell you that all this comments are just from someone with little to none experience with this kind of scopes. Also, please don't take this comments to the wrong side. Is just curiosity what leads me to ask this. I don't want to speak bad about PH, USO, SB, and anyone (in fact, I'm waiting my USO scope in a couple of weeks and I've a 3 week old S&B).

Just a friendly comment... don't let my bad english make you think I want to speak bad things about people or companies. It's hard to put my thoughts on words and it's harder to me to do that in another language.

 

[gknittel]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More than $4,000? </div></div>

Yes, more than $4800 actually.
I payed lots of paperwork and taxes to get it.

 

[BobinNC]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

gknittle,

You said:
<span style="font-style: italic">Well, that's why I said that I was talking about sharpness only... because I don't have the knowledge to evaluate these scopes in a rough environment... just telling what my eyes told me: Zeiss and Swaro better optically than SB. I don't know if it's right what I'm gonna state here, but I guess I have to be able to see the headlines of that newspaper if I want to put a bullet through it... and not just a blurry grey splash... just a thought from someone who has never had to shoot to 1000meters nor read the newspaper that far grin </span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">My point was: Don't get fixated on optic qualities alone. Image quality is important yes, but it is not the most important concern in a Tactical scope. Yes, you do need to SEE your target. But if for example your scopes adjustments are not repeatable and robust, then you cannot hit what you can clearly SEE....

Considering we are taking about the best of the best, in tactical scopes, any of them will do very nicely. But again for example, the Zeiss that you are so impressed with has only 146 cm (57.6 MOA) of adjustment. Your S&B has 273cm (93 MOA) of adjustment. If you need that much adjustment in a tactical scope, then the S&B is clearly better (pun intended) even if it is not as clear as the Zeiss.</span>

<span style="font-style: italic">Do you think then that given a set of scopes manufactured by different brands (zeiss, sb, ph, hensold, uso) with the same fuctionality, you won't keep optics quality in mind when choosing one over the other? I put it in other way: if S&B or USO or PH starts puting china crap glass inside theyr scopes, then they will still be good choices for you to choose from?
</span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">Answer: Sure I keep optics quality in mind, it is one of the deciding factors in choosing a scope. It is just not the ONLY deciding factor.

And your english is fine. Better than most around here.</span>

Bob

 

[clmayfield]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gknittel</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More than $4,000? </div></div>

Yes, more than $4800 actually.
I payed lots of paperwork and taxes to get it.</div></div>

Sorry. I didn't realize you were outside of the US. I see them running around $3,000 here and less on occasion for a used one.

 

[gknittel]

Re: SB vs Zeiss

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Considering we are taking about the best of the best, in tactical scopes, any of them will do very nicely. But again for example, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Zeiss that you are so impressed with has only 146 cm (57.6 MOA) of adjustment</span>. Your S&B has 273cm (93 MOA) of adjustment. If you need that much adjustment in a tactical scope, then the S&B is clearly better (pun intended) even if it is not as clear as the Zeiss.

</div></div>

Didn't know that... also, the Zeiss is SFP (I like FFP like in my SB). But I'm still impressed by the image on the Zeiss and on my dad's Swarovskis (mostly 15-20 years old scopes... no parallax). I wish S&B uses glass like that

Thanks for commenting on this