ZEISS Presents All-New LRP S5 - FFP Riflescopes for Long-Range Precision Shooting and Hunting

A few of us have been able to not only look through this new optic, but also compare them side by side with other top tier optics.

We were also allowed to shoot quite a few rounds and help "zero" the rifle/optic.
Optically and mechanically speaking it was very nice and compared well with its direct competition.

As far as the side by side comparison, let's just say the ZCO and Razor had very noticeable issues that aren't, um, well, normal issues...

Prior to shooting the new Zeiss, I had just come off of two different ZCO and they sure as hell didn't have this "issue".

We weren't the only ones to notice it, nor mention it.

A final note when making side by side comparisons: I'll warn everyone to ensure that each scope is clearly focused and that the parallax is properly set.

It makes a huge difference.

The Zeiss is really nice and honestly, there was no need for them to intentionally set the other scopes up to where they looked inferior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nik H and Schütze
A few of us have been able to not only look through this new optic, but also compare them side by side with other top tier optics.

We were also allowed to shoot quite a few rounds and help "zero" the rifle/optic.
Optically and mechanically speaking it was very nice and compared well with its direct competition.

As far as the side by side comparison, let's just say the ZCO and Razor had very noticeable issues that aren't, um, well, normal issues...

Prior to shooting the new Zeiss, I had just come off of two different ZCO and they sure as hell didn't have this "issue".

We weren't the only ones to notice it, nor mention it.

A final note when making side by side comparisons: I'll warn everyone to ensure that each scope is clearly focused and that the parallax is properly set.

It makes a huge difference.

The Zeiss is really nice and honestly, there was no need for them to intentionally set the other scopes up to where they looked inferior.
So what were the "issues" you speak of?
 
The ZCO had a very noticeable yellowish haze to it. They aren't like that.

The Razor appeared milky, almost dirty looking. Again, they aren't like that.

The other optics on the rack had been purposely placed out of focus and the parallax knobs were set to their lowest settings.
Most were dialed to the edges of their travel.
It caused them to appear to have a lot of CA.

They (Zeiss) really didn't need to play games, but someone felt the need for it.
 
If that was done by Zeiss, then people need some serious discipline/firing. That's the kind of thing that gets you blacklisted as a company by everyone, and Zeiss is way too big with way too much invested to be playing those games. They have excellent glass, there's no need to cheat. Do you think it was just some local event organizers? Or Zeiss employees?
 
The ZCO had a very noticeable yellowish haze to it. They aren't like that.

The Razor appeared milky, almost dirty looking. Again, they aren't like that.

The other optics on the rack had been purposely placed out of focus and the parallax knobs were set to their lowest settings.
Most were dialed to the edges of their travel.
It caused them to appear to have a lot of CA.

They (Zeiss) really didn't need to play games, but someone felt the need for it.
Yes, very strange.
I presume the lenses were checked for smudges & etc?
Although I believe your version of events, it does seem strange that Zeiss would risk tampering with the scopes in order to make their scope seem better. In light of the probability that all or most of the participants had some considerable experience with other premium optics, it seems a stretch that Zeiss would be foolish enough to attempt such a stunt. My suspicion is that there are other forces at play.
Anyhow, what was your verdict on the optical performance?
 
Like I said, optically and mechanically they are great.

I looked through the scopes early Sunday morning for like the 3rd or 4th time.
They were fine except for the yellowish haze on the ZCO. Nothing out of the ordinary with the Razor first thing that morning.

After I got done shooting, they had been fucked with and it wasn't by a consumer. A buddy was nearby watching them being manipulated by the expo host.
After I shot, we looked through them once more and found them manipulated again.

Not cool.
 
Like I said, optically and mechanically they are great.

I looked through the scopes early Sunday morning for like the 3rd or 4th time.
They were fine except for the yellowish haze on the ZCO. Nothing out of the ordinary with the Razor first thing that morning.

After I got done shooting, they had been fucked with and it wasn't by a consumer. A buddy was nearby watching them being manipulated by the expo host.
After I shot, we looked through them once more and found them manipulated again.

Not cool.
I looked through them Saturday a few different times, it must have been when they weren't messed with. I adjusted some of the scopes slightly for parallax when I was looking and they were all basically set to the same power I believe. I tried to get as good of an idea as I could. I agree that zeiss didn't need to play any games, they have great glass and the reticle is actually Fantastic imo. Just the right amount of everything I want and not a bunch of crap I don't want.

I'm really surprised at this but if you say so then I will take your word for it. I'm curious which one did it? Pm if you don't want to say that part.

They have a very nice product, and compared directly to NF, ZCO, KAHLES,AND RAZOR.... the zeiss definitely wasn't lacking optically. I didn't particularly care for the feel of the turrets, but I did like the extra feel to the whole numbers and the ease of turning them. I like my kahles turrets and the Razor turrets better, but otherwise that zeise is super nice. If I was in charge and confirmed that one of them pulled a stunt like that, there at all places..... there would be major major heads rolling. That's a major no no, amongst A VERY HONEST AND STRAIGHT UP GROUP OF PROFFESSIONALS AND ATTENDEES ALIKE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jh2785
I looked through them Saturday a few different times, it must have been when they weren't messed with. I adjusted some of the scopes slightly for parallax when I was looking and they were all basically set to the same power I believe. I tried to get as good of an idea as I could. I agree that zeiss didn't need to play any games, they have great glass and the reticle is actually Fantastic imo. Just the right amount of everything I want and not a bunch of crap I don't want.

I'm really surprised at this but if you say so then I will take your word for it. I'm curious which one did it? Pm if you don't want to say that part.

They have a very nice product, and compared directly to NF, ZCO, KAHLES,AND RAZOR.... the zeiss definitely wasn't lacking optically. I didn't particularly care for the feel of the turrets, but I did like the extra feel to the whole numbers and the ease of turning them. I like my kahles turrets and the Razor turrets better, but otherwise that zeise is super nice. If I was in charge and confirmed that one of them pulled a stunt like that, there at all places..... there would be major major heads rolling. That's a major no no, amongst A VERY HONEST AND STRAIGHT UP GROUP OF PROFFESSIONALS AND ATTENDEES ALIKE.

Totally agree with you. It was unnecessary with the crowd and easily identifiable as a ruse.

I really liked the glass and the reticle also.

Spotting hits at 1k was really easy.
Seeing trace, really easy.
Did I mention that I liked the reticle? Simple and uncluttered.

I honestly didn't pay much attention to the turret clicks, but I didn't feel like I'd have any issues.

Disclaimer:
I don't shoot comps and therefore turret feel isn't as much of an issue for me. I have all the time in the world unless we're on a time crunch because the BBQ joint nearby might be ready to close...

All in all, it's a very nice scope.

And to answer your question, it wasn't Corbin or the younger guy.
I'll leave it at that.
 
This scope is friggin SWEET !

Ran it this weekend at Arena, man I like the feeling behind it, super comfortable

IMG_2188.JPG
 
Its built into their rings, so I stuck on the side I won't really see it

The Zeiss rings are nice, the whole rig is pretty darn easy to use, the eye box is very forgiving, it was a touch nicer than my ZCo actually, the 5-25x Zeiss was a bit more forgiving than my 4-20x, barely but I noticed it when it setting it up.

The reticle is straight forward, the picture was good.

At the PRE, Zeiss went pretty ballsy and had a ZCo, Kahles, NF, and Vortex alongside the LRP for anyone to compare. The beauty about it, there was some woods behind the berms, and the number plates that are white so you saw who had CA in their scopes because the white was either Purple or Yellowish. Then I was able to resolve the stuff in the woods to fine tune the picture in order to compare.

They also did a low light test the first night before when setting up, and it was interesting to see which scopes dropped off. I was surprise the NF dropped off as fast as it did, because during the day I thought it looked clean, and resolved well. The Kahles they had was definitely up there, but had a lot more CA that I would have expected given I think the Kahles is one of the best someone can buy. The ZCo and Zeiss was definitely the two best and I am sure based on the individual, you could trade off which one you liked better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rydah
Its built into their rings, so I stuck on the side I won't really see it

The Zeiss rings are nice, the whole rig is pretty darn easy to use, the eye box is very forgiving, it was a touch nicer than my ZCo actually, the 5-25x Zeiss was a bit more forgiving than my 4-20x, barely but I noticed it when it setting it up.

The reticle is straight forward, the picture was good.

At the PRE, Zeiss went pretty ballsy and had a ZCo, Kahles, NF, and Vortex alongside the LRP for anyone to compare. The beauty about it, there was some woods behind the berms, and the number plates that are white so you saw who had CA in their scopes because the white was either Purple or Yellowish. Then I was able to resolve the stuff in the woods to fine tune the picture in order to compare.

They also did a low light test the first night before when setting up, and it was interesting to see which scopes dropped off. I was surprise the NF dropped off as fast as it did, because during the day I thought it looked clean, and resolved well. The Kahles they had was definitely up there, but had a lot more CA that I would have expected given I think the Kahles is one of the best someone can buy. The ZCo and Zeiss was definitely the two best and I am sure based on the individual, you could trade off which one you liked better.
CA has always been a complaint of the Kahles. Ive never had any issue but maybe that just means ive learned to live with it. But its nice that given the price point that it is on par with the other optics at that price point and not just charging more because inflation and supply chain stuff.
 
The ZCO had a very noticeable yellowish haze to it. They aren't like that.

The Razor appeared milky, almost dirty looking. Again, they aren't like that.

The other optics on the rack had been purposely placed out of focus and the parallax knobs were set to their lowest settings.
Most were dialed to the edges of their travel.
It caused them to appear to have a lot of CA.

They (Zeiss) really didn't need to play games, but someone felt the need for it.
@Mike Casselton

Seriously you think they manipulated it, you could have it adjusted them anyway you like...

This is absolute BS, and honestly the CA appeared because you were looking at White Placard board which highlighted it

To imply this is absolutely bullshit from every standpoint do you think they took the scopes apart, replaced the glass and put them back together ?

Honestly you are troublemaker for posting this, you could have spoken directly to them while there, as well there were plenty of other scopes (SAME BRANDS) around that range you could have used to compare.

Totally bullshit on your part to imply this, and highlight the problem with people who THINK they know what they are looking at.

Nothing said you couldn't adjust something, I adjusted one when I got up there, I moved an Ocular adjustment for ME which also changes certain things

you had tons of people with hands one, turning everything available on the scopes,

manipulated the outcome, just shows your ignorance
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: JAS-SH and Rh0dz
As a PS side note to say the Vortex isn't like that, several years ago I shot the SHC in Colville with Pete Howell from Sig. I was using a Vortex Gen 2 and was having issues with it. So every morning I had too rezero the scope and by noon it was off again so come Sunday on the last stage I ran out of Ammo.

Pete offered me his AT with Sig 5-30x on it, for the last stage. During the competition we had several stages were the targets were placed in the woods, differing light conditions for certain, and each time I had a hard time Finding the actual Target location with the Vortex. (To my surprise)

When I got on the Sig which was also a hidden target stage I was amazed how the Sig let me see the target better, so much better I was like WTF ... Vortex aren't like this, but they are, we just don't see it until it's too late.

If you take a Vortex and dial up the elevation you can see it physically DIM and get muddy depending on the amount of elevation dialed on the scope.

So your contention because you didn't see it, it doesn't happens is complete crap ... end of rant
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAS-SH
Frank
Please tell us you are going to throw a quick video up on this optic. Very interested to get a feel for how this optic looks/feels on a rifle while in actual use. Always enjoy your reviews.
 
Oh, PPS,

I was just talking to Laura who was with me at the Expo and this, "Zeiss manipulated the results" BS was started by a competitor and then repeated by a few fanboys and girls, cause it was told to them.

Their chosen optic was not looking as good and they took the charge and ran with it. She even told them it was complete BS as anyone was able to adjust the scopes, and when a group of "reporters" for lack of a better word repeated it to her too she told them to confront them on the spot which never happened.

I honestly didn't see any Yellow in the ZCO and found no fault in that optic, the others did have it, a bit of yellow in the Vortex and Purple in the Kahles, the NF looked clean to me but a touch dim, especially trying to resolve in the shadows, but outside of the ZCO I felt the order of appearance was the ZCO - NF - Kahles (because of the purple) Vortex, and when I spoke to Corbin who asked me, he said he liked the Kahles over the NF, but I dinged it on the CA.

It was fair, easily to have one out of adjustment and like I said above, I adjusted the ZCO Ocular because I felt it was off for me and I retuned it. I made some small changes the Kahles but the purple was there, I did not touch the NF which I thought was a nice picture and I did not touch the Vortex as it matched my experience

To come on and say it was skewed, is just wrong, and if you honestly felt that you should have confronted them. But I missed the buzz that people felt it was skewed. Apparently Laura didn't but we never spoke about it, until I told her about the conversation here.

Too easy to fall into that trap, a competitor makes a charge, and the fanboys run with it. Also the Zeiss is $1200 more than the Vortex, and while Vortex goes to great lengths to make their scopes mechanically sound if you honestly believe their glass is up to par against Zeiss, Houston you just lost the Series
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hkmiller
Interesting observations.
I will hopefully have the 3-18x50 Zeiss here next month and I have a 4-20x50 ZCO, 5-20x50 S&B, 3-15x50 Tangent and couple of other scopes on hand. I'll have them all side-by-side on my tripod fixture, all adjusted to my eyes. It will not get any more direct than that.
If any of you are within reasonable reach of Albuquerque, I am sure we can arrange some place to meet and look at them together.
I really would not mind having a few different people look carefully and give me their impressions.

ILya
 
Interesting observations.
I will hopefully have the 3-18x50 Zeiss here next month and I have a 4-20x50 ZCO, 5-20x50 S&B, 3-15x50 Tangent and couple of other scopes on hand. I'll have them all side-by-side on my tripod fixture, all adjusted to my eyes. It will not get any more direct than that.
If any of you are within reasonable reach of Albuquerque, I am sure we can arrange some place to meet and look at them together.
I really would not mind having a few different people look carefully and give me their impressions.

ILya
I’d be interested in that. I have an ABQ layover on the 20th. I can bring a kahles if you don’t have one
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lowlight
I’d be interested in that. I have an ABQ layover on the 20th

I do not want to plan an exact date until the Zeiss scope gets here. I'll post once it does.
Generally, 20th should be doable. I am out elk hunting 11th through 15th. On the 21st, I leave for a family trip to Idaho. 16th through 20th, I'll be here. My best guess is that I'll set everything up on my tripod fixture and first spend a little time looking through all the scopes side by side just paying attention to the optics and the feel of the controls.
When I come back from Idaho on the 28th, I'll do the tracking tests and stuff like that.
I have to wrap up with everything before SHOT, so it will be a little quicker than I like, but such is life. Generally, I spend more time with these.

ILya
 
I do not want to plan an exact date until the Zeiss scope gets here. I'll post once it does.
Generally, 20th should be doable. I am out elk hunting 11th through 15th. On the 21st, I leave for a family trip to Idaho. 16th through 20th, I'll be here. My best guess is that I'll set everything up on my tripod fixture and first spend a little time looking through all the scopes side by side just paying attention to the optics and the feel of the controls.
When I come back from Idaho on the 28th, I'll do the tracking tests and stuff like that.
I have to wrap up with everything before SHOT, so it will be a little quicker than I like, but such is life. Generally, I spend more time with these.

ILya
I guess it wont work. i get in late on the 20th. will be there all day the 21st then fly out that night.
 
For those that don’t have a money stake in the discussion and care, I know Mike Casselton personally and he is nobody’s shill nor fanboy and it saddens me to see Frank calling him such when he should know better. I guess that’s what you get when you make the mistake of mentioning something you saw, that bears mentioning, on a forum where there are many who have a stake in the answers.

I haven’t been on SH for a couple/few months as I needed a social media break. It was great, but I heard about this and don’t want a good man’s name dragged through the mud for no reason.

That is all.
 
I’m a nobody on here with the least experience in judging optics professionally.
I own a razor and a zco, both where mounted there to compare to the zeiss. I looked through all of them numerous times on both days, the zeiss was always adjusted perfectly even for my eye. All others were always far of with the exception of the kahles on Saturday morning. I was really disappointed since the zco is my personal treasure.

On Sunday morning I adjusted the zco only, to compare to the zeiss that was perfectly set to a 1k target.
I had to turn about 20 mils up and 10 mils left to get on the same target, I set ocular and focus and both scopes were equal to my eye.

Question, why would somebody adjust all competitors differently?

Frank, as to Mike Casselton I find it disappointing that you make him look like a fool.
I clearly understand that I’m in your house here but the truth is the truth no matter what.

My experience matches Mike’s to the point.

Sincerely, Torsten
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
Man... I like discussing an optics features and technical specifications but optical quality is the worst. IQ is such a subjective topic and it's almost impossible to accurately discuss without the optics in front of you. I typically buy multiples of a brand at one time and there's also usually overlap between brands. One thing I've noticed is that there is a NOTICABLE difference in optical quality within the same brand and model. First noticed this the first Bushnell elites but the differences were very minor.

When I bought a few Kahles K624s and compared to my friends K624 his had a very slight better IQ and less CA. I got a K525 awhile after they were released and I immediately compared it my K624 and the K525 was noticeably worse all around. Took the K525 to the range and compared it to my friends K624 and was stunned how much worse the K525 was compared to his.

Got rid of all the Kahles over time(for various reasons) and bought a S&B PM 5-25 and soon after a NF 7-35. They were optically very similar with my S&B having a very tight eye box vs the NF. Sold the S&B and picked up 3 more NF 7-35s over time (1st a Mil-C, then a H-59, then 2 Mil-XTs). When comparing 3 of the 7-35s side by side for some reason the one with the H-59 has the best glass in everyway. The difference is minor yet noticeable...

So if you are looking to buy the "lastest and greatest" try to go to a match and hope someone has it so you can check it out and even then consider buying from a retailer that has an excellent return policy because you might not get the same IQ you saw previously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ma smith
I’m a nobody on here with the least experience in judging optics professionally.
I own a razor and a zco, both where mounted there to compare to the zeiss. I looked through all of them numerous times on both days, the zeiss was always adjusted perfectly even for my eye. All others were always far of with the exception of the kahles on Saturday morning. I was really disappointed since the zco is my personal treasure.

On Sunday morning I adjusted the zco only, to compare to the zeiss that was perfectly set to a 1k target.
I had to turn about 20 mils up and 10 mils left to get on the same target, I set ocular and focus and both scopes were equal to my eye.

Question, why would somebody adjust all competitors differently?

Frank, as to Mike Casselton I find it disappointing that you make him look like a fool.
I clearly understand that I’m in your house here but the truth is the truth no matter what.

My experience matches Mike’s to the point.

Sincerely, Torsten
For those of us that weren't there at the (event, promo, whatever it was) could you please give some details of the event/situation to give us some idea as to the general situation.
Kind regards...........Barelstroker.
 
For those of us that weren't there at the (event, promo, whatever it was) could you please give some details of the event/situation to give us some idea as to the general situation.
Kind regards...........Barelstroker.
They had all 5 scopes set up on one tripod next to each other. The scopes weren't aimed at the same target though. I know at least that there wasn't an intention to aim them at the same target because the rep mentioned in our discussion that "you really need to have them all looking at exactly the same target to see those kinds of differences " , when I said that I couldn't tell about some specific differences in anything except the Razor without spending some time adjusting them all a little more. Obviously, we were all aware that they weren't aimed at the same target and it was clear that they weren't supposed to be, but rather basically all just pointing straight ahead.. .. I could have taken the time to point them all at the same target if I wanted to, and I was encouraged to do whatever I liked to check and compare. Another guy Sunday did take the time to do several things because I was going to look again and got tired of waiting for him to finish. This was after Frank's morning class btw to give an idea of the timeline.

I sat there and adjusted a few and didn't bother with a few others. I was interested in how the zco,kahlez,and zeiss compared so that's what I played with. I run kahles which I told the rep, but as I said before, I liked that zeiss and it didn't give up anything to any scope there. I'd have to have spent a lot more time with comparing them to tell much differences other than that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Barelstroker
I know both of the guys who handled these Zeiss scopes @Mike Casselton and @Schütze. To clarify I was not there nor am I a scope maven, but I do know these men well who described the aforementioned events above. Both are men of outstanding character and neither has ever given me one second of pause about their trustworthiness. Which makes me scratch my head about the blow up over whether or not this should have been shared publicly vs privately. To me there is no question this should have been shared publicly and I have zero interest in any of the scopes mentioned.
 
It was started by a competitor who then spread the rumor to others

The scopes were there for anyone to adjust

They were just pointed straight ahead

He was being a useful idiot to say that Zeiss manipulated the results, as such took that ball and ran with it as if that was the reality. Do you honestly think they threw the others off when anyone could walk up and adjust them ?

They prevented no one from making any adjustments needed to focus anything to the individual

These are eye tests more than scope tests, it’s like me say the dealer made a car look bad for me because the seat was too far back.

As far as hurt feelings go, before you go blasting a company on the internet you should know what you are saying and where it came from in the first place.

They accused Zeiss of skewing the results based on a rumor.

I have every scope they tested if you want to do a side by side and can get to Denver I will make it available to show any and all then you can see what different scopes compare like.

They told the same thing to Laura and she straight up said to confront them at which point all those saying it slinked away, sounds like a clue to me.
 
PS if he wants to retract his public statement I would do the same just to keep the hurt feelings report down.

But it was a bad decision in my book to post it, it’s friggin Zeiss, do you really think the Vortex glass is on par ? It’s a scope a sold for a lot less money, they put there because it’s popular. That was an easy win if you are looking through the scopes

Not to mention Kyle worked for NF, S&B and now Zeiss to say he was doing something underhanded is to not know Kyle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 308pirate
It was started by a competitor who then spread the rumor to others

The scopes were there for anyone to adjust

They were just pointed straight ahead

He was being a useful idiot to say that Zeiss manipulated the results, as such took that ball and ran with it as if that was the reality. Do you honestly think they threw the others off when anyone could walk up and adjust them ?

They prevented no one from making any adjustments needed to focus anything to the individual

These are eye tests more than scope tests, it’s like me say the dealer made a car look bad for me because the seat was too far back.

As far as hurt feelings go, before you go blasting a company on the internet you should know what you are saying and where it came from in the first place.

They accused Zeiss of skewing the results based on a rumor.

I have every scope they tested if you want to do a side by side and can get to Denver I will make it available to show any and all then you can see what different scopes compare like.

They told the same thing to Laura and she straight up said to confront them at which point all those saying it slinked away, sounds like a clue to me.
If you know who started a lie then why not call them out? You don't have a problem calling out the forum members here so why not the person/company you claim is lying?
 
My guess is that they will compare very closely. Why reinvent the wheel when you've got all the drawings, manufacturing & technical data locked away in a draw somewhere.
When looking at the scope, I don't see that Zeiss have gone in balls & all on this one either. Looks to me like they're testing the waters to see how hard the bite is then maybe they'll bring out that Hensoldt, Schmidt & TT slayer they've had tucked away for ten years.
I agree, however it does look like a very different design from those scopes. Hopefully it retains and improves on the elements of those older scopes that made them great. Hensoldt just discontinued their entire line up of variable power scopes so maybe Zeiss will pick up where they left off and do it at a price that's not 2x the going rate of a TT or S&B.
Zeiss despite all their capital, engineering prowess, and brand recognition has completely failed to comprehend the US scope market and maybe even the euro market for years. They keep trying to push mid to high end hunting optics while completely ignoring the tactical/PRS community, i.e the majority of people who spend $2k + on optics. Preferring to leave that sort of thing to Hensoldt, which unsurprisingly cares even less because 98% of their profits are from military radar & electro optical systems.

In any case this seems like the first real step in the right direct we've seen them take in a while lets hope it's not another flop.
 
I agree, however it does look like a very different design from those scopes. Hopefully it retains and improves on the elements of those older scopes that made them great. Hensoldt just discontinued their entire line up of variable power scopes so maybe Zeiss will pick up where they left off and do it at a price that's not 2x the going rate of a TT or S&B.
Zeiss despite all their capital, engineering prowess, and brand recognition has completely failed to comprehend the US scope market and maybe even the euro market for years. They keep trying to push mid to high end hunting optics while completely ignoring the tactical/PRS community, i.e the majority of people who spend $2k + on optics. Preferring to leave that sort of thing to Hensoldt, which unsurprisingly cares even less because 98% of their profits are from military radar & electro optical systems.

In any case this seems like the first real step in the right direct we've seen them take in a while lets hope it's not another flop.
I have the same opinion on Zeiss & other companies miss-reading the market. Whether or not we like it, the shooting sports will continue to move away from hunting & toward PRS & the like. It seems to me that both Zeiss & Swarovski are sticking it out in the Euro hunting scene to see who's the last man standing &, it will cost them both dearly. I really appreciate a high end hunting scope but, I can get away with a military style reticle for hunting but not really the other way around, at least not without messing with turrets every time.
As far as I can see, the future lies with range & competition shooting as hunting slowly fades. I think most guys are realizing that they can do way more range shooting at far less expense & easier access so, why spend the big money on something you're going to use a couple times a year as opposed to a rig you could be using most weekends with far better access, ease & comfort.
I too am glad to see Zeiss start making inroads into the PRS scene. Considering the excellent optics Zeiss design & build, its about bloody time.
 
You are incorrect, ZCO makes their own riflescopes and are not affiliated with any other brand.

this is very unlikely. ZCO does not make their own riflescopes, and you cant just open a work shop where you make riflescopes. so if they are from austria, there is noone else to make those scopes other than swarovski/kahles.
 
this is very unlikely. ZCO does not make their own riflescopes, and you cant just open a work shop where you make riflescopes. so if they are from austria, there is noone else to make those scopes other than swarovski/kahles.
As far as I have read ZCO manufacture their scopes in their own plant.
Here are the particulars off the ZCO website.
There is a email address so drop em a line & see what they say.

ADRESS

HEADQUARTER & PRODUCTION

ZCO - ZERO COMPROMISE OPTIC GMBH

BÄCKERSTRASSE

2433 MARGARETHEN AM MOOS

 +43 2230 20 270 134

[email protected]
 
At ZCO we manufacture are own scopes. We are not affiliated with any other scope manufacture. Other scope manufactures are our competitors not partners.
ZCO scopes sold in North America are assembled in Idaho. ZCO scopes made and assembled in Austria are sold in Europe.
You are correct saying it is not just as easy as opening a work shop where you make riflescopes...…. it takes a hell of a lot more work than that ;)
 
I agree, however it does look like a very different design from those scopes. Hopefully it retains and improves on the elements of those older scopes that made them great. Hensoldt just discontinued their entire line up of variable power scopes so maybe Zeiss will pick up where they left off and do it at a price that's not 2x the going rate of a TT or S&B.
Zeiss despite all their capital, engineering prowess, and brand recognition has completely failed to comprehend the US scope market and maybe even the euro market for years. They keep trying to push mid to high end hunting optics while completely ignoring the tactical/PRS community, i.e the majority of people who spend $2k + on optics. Preferring to leave that sort of thing to Hensoldt, which unsurprisingly cares even less because 98% of their profits are from military radar & electro optical systems.

In any case this seems like the first real step in the right direct we've seen them take in a while lets hope it's not another flop.
It may have been mentioned before that Zeiss was an investor in Hensoldt since 1928 and fully owns them since 1968. Since then, Zeiss used the Hensoldt brand name for the military side of their business.

Another poster mentioned that the optical quality of their older scopes was unreal compared to even more modern offerings. On this topic we have to keep in mind that you can hunt fox and boar in Germany for the entire 24 hours of a day but night vision and thermal is still verboten for aiming devices. Unsurprisingly, Zeiss and other European manufacturers used glass-less reticles (fine wires and posts) for as long as they could afford the higher labor costs. That cuts out two air to glass surfaces and -together with their already excellent coatings on the other elements- was impossible to match with a cheaper etched reticle designs.

Once Zeiss changed to etched reticles they had to introduce the T* coatings which IMO could barely compensate for the losses due to the additional optical surfaces. I would love to have a glass-less reticle scope with the T* coatings. But a lot of what we consider optical clarity, color fidelity, etc. is subjective. Similar to tube amplifiers being preferred by some audiophiles there are still folks who prefer the older optical designs.

Anyways, there is no question that Zeiss with their broad experience and vast research and engineering resources can blow anybody else out of the water - if they decide to do so. They design and build optical instruments from microscopes to telescopes, including eye glasses, comparators, and specialty optics that approach the physical limits of visible light. Their slogan "We make it visible" is no joke.

However, the quality and usefulness of the products you and I will handle is determined by their marketing department and these folks are often operating in a dense fog. In other words, Zeiss' consumer products are repeatedly far from the best they could deliver. I suggested to Zeiss Sport Optics USA for decades that they should augment their excellent 'traditional' Victory scope line with 'tactical' offerings that they could easily derive from existing optical designs. Well, it looks that someone with more pull finally convinced them.

ETA: I hope you gamers and .mil studs are happy with the changing times at Zeiss because they dropped the simple Rapid-Z BDC reticles that were great for us meat-hunting fudds, which pisses me off.
rz6.jpg
Now, I have to memorize the ornament's location on a Christmas tree or waste precious time with dialing. I remember that there is a rough but close enough way to get from range and wind to mills through simple multiplication with a factor for standard calibers. Please PM me a link if you know what I mean.
 
Last edited:
It may have been mentioned before that Zeiss was an investor in Hensoldt since 1928 and fully owns them since 1968. Since then, Zeiss used the Hensoldt brand name for the military side of their business.

Another poster mentioned that the optical quality of their older scopes was unreal compared to even more modern offerings. On this topic we have to keep in mind that you can hunt fox and boar in Germany for the entire 24 hours of a day but night vision and thermal is still verboten for aiming devices. Unsurprisingly, Zeiss and other European manufacturers used glass-less reticles (fine wires and posts) for as long as they could afford the higher labor costs. That cuts out two air to glass surfaces and -together with their already excellent coatings on the other elements- was impossible to match with a cheaper etched reticle designs.

Once Zeiss changed to etched reticles they had to introduce the T* coatings which IMO could barely compensate for the losses due to the additional optical surfaces. I would love to have a glass-less reticle scope with the T* coatings. But a lot of what we consider optical clarity, color fidelity, etc. is subjective. Similar to tube amplifiers being preferred by some audiophiles there are still folks who prefer the older optical designs.

Anyways, there is no question that Zeiss with their broad experience and vast research and engineering resources can blow anybody else out of the water - if they decide to do so. They design and build optical instruments from microscopes to telescopes, including eye glasses, comparators, and specialty optics that approach the physical limits of visible light. Their slogan "We make it visible" is no joke.

However, the quality and usefulness of the products you and I will handle is determined by their marketing department and these folks are often operating in a dense fog. In other words, Zeiss' consumer products are repeatedly far from the best they could deliver. I suggested to Zeiss Sport Optics USA for decades that they should augment their excellent 'traditional' Victory scope line with 'tactical' offerings that they could easily derive from existing optical designs. Well, it looks that someone with more pull finally convinced them.

Zeiss sold Hensoldt quite a while back. It is a completely separate company now. Hensoldt had not had any interest in the civilian sporting optics market for quite some time now. For Zeiss, it is also a trivially small part of what they do. It is a huge company and sport optics is really not a big part of it. They like it for legacy reasons, but it is not exactly top priority. That's probably why all Zeiss Sport Optics products but the highest end stuff has been built by OEMs for a while now.

With modern coatings, extra two air-to-glass surfaces are absolutely insignificant. Your eye can not detect the miniscule difference in light transmission. This nonsense has been circulating for decades and somehow never dies. Modern scopes have quite a few more lenses than older ones, for example, simply because the optical systems are more sophisticated and the perceived brightness is better than with many older designs that have fewer lenses even when the coatings are essentially the same.

These LRP scopes appear to be new design that are not related to any of the existing or legacy Zeiss and Hensoldt scopes, simply because of the 5x erector systems. Hensoldt scopes were built on 4x erectors as were the somewhat related Victory FL, Diavari, etc.

Zeiss website flat out states they are made in Germany, presumably alongside the V8 scopes. All the other currently made Zeiss scopes appear to be outsourced to OEMs.
 
At ZCO we manufacture are own scopes. We are not affiliated with any other scope manufacture. Other scope manufactures are our competitors not partners.
ZCO scopes sold in North America are assembled in Idaho. ZCO scopes made and assembled in Austria are sold in Europe.
You are correct saying it is not just as easy as opening a work shop where you make riflescopes...…. it takes a hell of a lot more work than that ;)
Thank you for the comment.
By all accounts I have ever read, ZCO scopes are one of the worlds best scopes so I have a question for you.
What is the main reason why top tier scopes perform the way they do over that of say the Japanese made scopes?
It's a puzzle to me & others as to why some companies can & some seem not to be able to design & or build the best of the best. I can only presume that with all the secrecy that, there is more or less "A way" of design in the scopes that most other companies are not aware of.
Just trying to get my head around what the major reason is that separates the men from the boys, so to speak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuildingConceptsllc
Zeiss sold Hensoldt quite a while back. It is a completely separate company now. Hensoldt had not had any interest in the civilian sporting optics market for quite some time now. For Zeiss, it is also a trivially small part of what they do. It is a huge company and sport optics is really not a big part of it. They like it for legacy reasons, but it is not exactly top priority. That's probably why all Zeiss Sport Optics products but the highest end stuff has been built by OEMs for a while now.

With modern coatings, extra two air-to-glass surfaces are absolutely insignificant. Your eye can not detect the miniscule difference in light transmission. This nonsense has been circulating for decades and somehow never dies. Modern scopes have quite a few more lenses than older ones, for example, simply because the optical systems are more sophisticated and the perceived brightness is better than with many older designs that have fewer lenses even when the coatings are essentially the same.

These LRP scopes appear to be new design that are not related to any of the existing or legacy Zeiss and Hensoldt scopes, simply because of the 5x erector systems. Hensoldt scopes were built on 4x erectors as were the somewhat related Victory FL, Diavari, etc.

Zeiss website flat out states they are made in Germany, presumably alongside the V8 scopes. All the other currently made Zeiss scopes appear to be outsourced to OEMs.
Thanks for the update on the Zeiss-Hensoldt relationship. I missed that because either Hensoldt did not offer anything of interest or it was unaffordium. Today's Hensoldt obviously focusses on very different markets.

I have to disagree though on the effects of an etched reticle. You stated: "With modern coatings, extra two air-to-glass surfaces are absolutely insignificant. Your eye can not detect the miniscule difference in light transmission." That is not incorrect but also not the whole story.

Rather than throwing around some fancy terms and formulae, let's just apply simple logic. If we take the reticle plate out of the scope and hold it in front of us, will we see the glass or will the reticle just float in space like a hologram? If we see the glass, that means the glass absorbs, reflects, or refracts the light coming from the background to our eyes. Otherwise, the glass would be as invisible as the air around it. Fair enough?

Our eye cannot detect the miniscule quantitative attenuation and the glass certainly does not appear like a grey filter but the glass clearly influences the light transmission in a noticeable, qualitative way because we see it. Now we introduce this glass in one of the two worst places in the system - the focal planes. Any diffraction or distortion there is bad news - magnified. No matter how good we polish the glass and how great the coating is, it still scatters light and introduces noise. That's the best case with a clean, new optic.

The worst case is for example the two Conquest scopes I had to send back to Zeiss due to a clearly visible haze of tiny droplets on the reticle plate. This was most likely caused by volatile fractions of the lubricant evaporating in the intense summer heat and then condensing on the glass surfaces. Obviously, they also condensed on some of the internal lens surfaces but there they were out of focus and much less detrimental. Zeiss fixed one scope at no cost and upgraded the other one to a newer model with a higher zoom ratio.

The argument about the optical effects of reticles is somewhat pointless today since few people will be satisfied with anything other than a Christmas tree. Even a duplex would be a serious pain to craft from gold wire. But they did not put the etched reticles in there to increase performance. Cost savings were the motivations and after they sold the benefits of more complex reticle patterns, there was no going back. They definitely had the choice to use glass when they preferred the more labor intensive gold wires. I still have my grandfather's WWI "Dienstglass" (duty glass) and that has an etched, horizontal reticle, called "Strichplatte" (hash plate).

On the last point, I agree that a big issues with recent Zeiss consumer products is that they are someone else's stuff with a Zeiss logo slapped on.
So the competitors are not really competing with Zeiss on a technical level. I have used 'real' Zeiss products in the science realm for decades and can guarantee you that Zeiss knows how to bend light like few others in the business. Leica can hold a candle to them in some areas but the rest of the field is a lap behind.

If Zeiss builds the LRP scopes in house under similar conditions than their commercial, scientific products, I would not hesitate one second to shell out the coin if that scope fits my needs. Even with their rebranded products you never had to worry about flawless, no-hassle support as stated above. I also let a 'real' Zeiss 10x40 BGA bino tumble down a mountain face a while ago and sent in the sad looking remains for a repair estimate. It came back like new, free of charge. They warrantied my fuck-up. There is no better example for "Buy once, cry once".
 
Last edited:
I'm not so sure. If it were R & D only, I would imagine that at least one of the Japanese manufacturers would have the necessary resources & knowledge base.
No, I think it has to be some secret ingredient like the semen of a pure German man rubbed out of him by 2 German princesses on the full moon of every month. These men would be secretly known as "die Männer, die nie aufhören zu grinsen or translated....."the men who never stop grinning".
 

Would you say the durability of this optic is on par with other "tactical" optics? Kahles, ATACR, etc etc? My only interaction with Zeiss is of their older hunting scopes. i like optics that can get beat up a little and keep going.

Obviously this is really new and we dont have any long term usage to equate to that. just asking your opinion based on experience and what you saw first hand.