Zeiss LRP S3 or Leica PRS? (For PRS)

[SquarePizza]

Foggy matches are obscuring steel after they get the paint beat off of them. Its time for an upgrade and my two highest priorities are clarity/contrast of the image and accurate turret tracking.

I have known a few bird watchers that swear by Zeiss and Leica for optical clarity so I have been seriously thinking about these two scopes. The zeiss seems to get good reviews and is cheaper MSRP, but the Leica can be had around the same price if I'm patient.

Has anyone had any tracking or durability issues with either? Anyone have direct experience with both and want to weigh in on which one they like more?

I am coming off of a vortex pst II that I think is giving me tracking issues, so either scope would be an upgrade. Whichever option I buy is going to be with me for a long time so I want to make sure that I select the best scope for PRS style matches and abuse.

 

[b6graham]

comparing the Zeiss S3 to the S5 (and their other top of line glass binos) might not be the most fair.

the S3 seems to be in XTR Pro/Razor Gen 3 range from the reviews/comments on here (paging @Rob01 )

compared to a pst gen 2 any of the three above would be a solid upgrade, and the leica as well.

i'd look at XTR Pro, Razor g3, S3, and the Leica if you want and see what you like for reticle and features and decide from there

also...MDs need to stop painting targets

 

[Precision Underground]

We’ve got a Leica and an S3. Assuming they both track(haven’t tested them yet), optical quality goes to Leica IMO. I do like the s3 but I really feel like it should be in the price bracket with the xtr3 vs a tier up.

 

[spife7980]

also...MDs need to stop painting targets

 

[FuhQ]

Zeiss

 

[Budrichard]

I have both, Leica PRS and 636 Zeiss.
ALL my other than scopes, optical/camera is Leica M both analog and digital.
Well to be honest, A NIKON FM and many lenses survive from my Nikon F era.
But my binoc’s and Asph 82mm are Leica.
It’s a toss up between the two for me except the Leica is 25X and the Zeiss can be had in 36X.
-Richard

 

[Rob01]

No experience with the Leica but I would take the S3 4-25 for a PRS style rifle without hesitation. You can go 6-36 if you like but for centerfire PRS I doubt you would use up over 25x much and you will save a little money with the 4-25. Glass is great and what you would expect and it will not hold you back at all. Look at the features and reticle and pick the one that will work for you.

 

[mi650]

I have both, Leica PRS and 636 Zeiss.
ALL my other than scopes, optical/camera is Leica M both analog and digital.
Well to be honest, A NIKON FM and many lenses survive from my Nikon F era.
But my binoc’s and Asph 82mm are Leica.
It’s a toss up between the two for me except the Leica is 25X 30x and the Zeiss can be had in 36X.
-Richard

FIFY.

 

[Franko]

In your shoes I would also look at the Razer G3 6-36. It's optically better than the Zeiss S3 4-25 (and I'm going to assume that the Zeiss S3 6-36 shares glass so will be in the same optical performance category) and can be had for 2400ish if you look in the right spots.

You should also consider the March 4.5-28 as the old model is being blown out by Europtic at a big discount right now. March makes top tier glass and rightfully competes against ZCO, TT, and S&B.

 

[Rob01]

In your shoes I would also look at the Razer G3 6-36. It's optically better than the Zeiss S3 4-25 (and I'm going to assume that the Zeiss S3 6-36 shares glass so will be in the same optical performance category) and can be had for 2400ish if you look in the right spots.

Not from the examples I have seen and had multiple people look through. The Gen 3 glass and S3 are basically the same and I actually think the S3 is a hair better.

 

[SquarePizza]

I considered a razor but they are heavy and I have two vortex optics that will be going back to the mothership so I wanted to take a break from buying more of them.

The deal on the older march is very tempting, that is a great price. I do hear that they have pretty tight eyeboxes though.

 

[Franko]

I considered a razor but they are heavy and I have two vortex optics that will be going back to the mothership so I wanted to take a break from buying more of them.

The deal on the older march is very tempting, that is a great price. I do hear that they have pretty tight eyeboxes though.

The eyebox on the 4.5-28 is decent. It's a 6ish erector ratio rather than the usual march 8x so it's not as tight as some of March's other FFP optics.

 

[SquarePizza]

I went with the march. It was more than I wanted to spend, so hopefully I am happy with it.

 

[Metzger]

@SquarePizza How do you like it?

 

[SquarePizza]

Sorry, just saw the tag.

I like it, but I had very heavy mirage in the spring and it felt like the march did slightly worse than my PST 2. If I had time when I sighted it in I would have compared the mirage and image quality to my other scopes.

I did run the march at a PRS match with heavy rain and fog and felt that it held more visible and usable image quality than any of my past scopes. I was only shooting with one buddy, and the march held a useable image longer than his arken. Every time that I go to that field it seems like we get hit with heavy fog, and my PST 2 seemed to take a shit very early when the fog rolled in.