Advice

deerstalker39

Well-Known Member
Like some advice please
S&B 8x56 klassic
Or ziess terra 3-12 × 50 which is best please
For stalking and lamping
 
I must admit that I have never used the Zeiss terra but I can tell you that it would be very hard to beat a schmidt and Bender 8x56 classic for quality of glass and value. I would pick the 8x56.
 
I've had neither, but, the Zeiss has more flexibility and if HILL stalking you can put it at 6x and if WOODLAND stalking 3x would be ideal. I've handled an 8x56 but personally I'm not into "big" 'scopes and use two Zeiss 3-9x36 and a Zeiss 1.5-4.5x24.

Before that I used Zeiss 4x32 and 6x32 on my rifles. And a 6x42 Leupold on a .22LR for magpies and rabbits.

To my mind it's no contest save: Cost v the S & B; weight and length v the S & B; type of reticule.

And what cost premium you put on that flexibily. For low light, in theory 7x50 is equal to 8x56, but if you crank down a "power" 6x50 will be better...depends on if you need 8x or can make do with 7x or even 6x?

Twenty years plus ago we considered 6x42, fixed power, as the "ideal", "ultimate", foxing 'scope! No doubt the same "resident cretin" will be along shortly wanting to ask how many foxes I've shot this year.
 
Last edited:
Lesser magnification, if the front end remains same diameter, gives more light gathering and wider field of view and greater depth of things being in focus.

If you divide the "x" figure into the lense diameter figure the nearer you can equal or exceed "7" the better the light gathering. Divide 56 by 8 = 7.

But if you must have 8x then an 8x56 is better than an 8x50. Or 7x or 6x. I sold my Leica 8x42 as, for low light, my Leica 7x42 performed better and in daylight I saw no practical advantage, but some disadvantage, in the 8x42 set. So I sold them.

Continental boar stand glass always seems to have this "7" factor...like Optolyth's 9x63 binoculars...or the now seldom seen 7x50 size.
 
Last edited:
Lesser magnification, if the front end remains same diameter, gives more light gathering and
Sorry but that's not so. The average human eye has an exit pupil of 7mm. Therefore, any figure greater than 7 is wasted as far as light gathering is concerned. That is why we have 8x56 scopes. ie 56/8=7mm or back in the day 6x42. a 6x50 will obviously give you a greater field of view but not greater light gathering.
 
.... more light gathering and........

none of it makes any difference unless you have eyes the size of a cow (they have big eyes BTW!)

exit pupil diameter is the key indicator on "brightness"

56 / 8 = 7mm
50 / 7 = 7,14mm
6 / 44 = 7.33mm

average size of adult pupil? 7-8mm in total darkness
In low light? - 4-6mm

6x50 = 8.3mm in theory

anything bigger than your pupil is wasted as you can't physically get any more coverage

also the effects of the internal mechanism of a variable will never match a fixed mag on the same power
 
BG and BEWSHER thank you both for expressing in a more cogent manner what I was trying to say re light gathering and depth of field and this human eye 7-8 capability.

What you both said. I agree. Save that what I was also trying to advise the OP that for depth of field and focus 6x50, or 7x50 on his variable 3-12x50 will be better than 8x56 on his S & B.

For binoculars I now have just Leica Trinovid BA 7x42 and Optolyth Royal 8x56. I get a wider field of vision, and greater depth of focus with the Leica 7x than the Optolyth 8x.
 
Last edited:
anything bigger than your pupil is wasted as you can't physically get any more coverage

It is also the case that more magnification, assuming the same sized exit etc, give you more detail in the object you are looking at.

It is easy to demonstrate this - magnification is, in effect, the same as getting closer to something so at dusk walk towards something and watch how it becomes clearer as you get closer. The size of your eyes haven't changed, nor has their light gathering capability, but the amount of light reaching them from the object of interest has as it fills more of the field of view plus you can discern more detail.

So, providing you can keep that (approx) 7mm exit pupil then magnification can help in low light situations.

I use an 8X56 S&B and shoot sika, which tend to move only in the last few minutes of light, in dark commercial forestry plantations. I've shot deer from approx 20 yards to around 250 yards and have yet to find the scope a limiting factor. If you gave me a top notch, big money, variable I'd sell it, buy a fixed mag 8X56 (or similar as some like the 6X or 7X better) and spend the left over cash on stalking. Spending the money on stalking greatly increases the chances of shooting more deer, spending it on gadgets greatly increases the profits of some gun shop :)
 
I would avoid the terra range.....not ziess's finest hour in my opinion. They are budget priced for a reason. Made in China I believe!
 
I saw them, the Chinese made Zeiss, at the shooting show at Stoneleigh. I don't know if the Terra are those. The Chinese made ones are marled "Designed by Zeiss" As I say I don't knoe if these are the Terra ones
 
Even in absolute last light I would often turn up the mag on my Zeiss Conquest or Kahles to over 16 or so to make out details. With higher mag you see much more of what you are trying to look at. A higher percentage of your picture is of what interests you. At a certain point the picture does get darker but the resolution rises. Described as Twilight Factor.
Apparently the new S&B polar and pmii scopes with 96% transmission seem to work and are a good step ahead of Zeiss in low light. Any fixed scopes with that light transmission available?
I just bought an older 8x56 S&B as a back up and had several years ago. I wanted to try it on a 22 but this scope only has a clear picture from about 50 yards onwards so a no go. Fixed scopes do have disadvantages.
I always find with very good light a lower mag works and one can get away with it, when it gets hazy, overcast, dusk is where one needs to find details.

For stalking I'd always take a 3-12x50 over a 8x56.
edi
 
Forgetting about the merits of fixed or variable on which you have had plenty of advice already you are not comparing like with like.the Terra is a budget scope whereas the S&B is European quality with Schott glass.Richard.
 
I say the residual value on the 8x56 S & B will stay "there or thereabouts". On the Chinese Zeiss stuff it'll be like a lead balloon. I think Zeiss, like Hardy of fishing tackle, have made an error. If I want Chinese stuff, good quality Chinese stuff I'll buy it without the extra cost of Zeiss's name on it!

But returning to the OP's question, as EJG responded, the 3x12-50 would be my choice of the two. Although as said with real choice I'd take a 3-9x36 and leave it at 5x, maybe, for the hill and 3x for woodland. I like to not lose my sight picture of what I'm aiming at as I fire.
 
I would avoid the terra range.....not ziess's finest hour in my opinion. They are budget priced for a reason. Made in China I believe!
Can't comment on the Terra but I love how "made in China" is still perceived as a sign of poor quality.
What isn't made in China?
The PC, Laptop, Tablet, Phone you're using to post on this forum along with every conceivable piece of network cable and kit certainly are....

I have an 8x56 Schmidt Klassik. Good bit of kit, fence posts are a little thick for my liking though.
I also have a Swaro Z6 mk2 variable. Different animals but the swaro reticle is much finer.
 
Last edited:
Deerstalker39,

I have a S&B 8x56 that I bought a good few years ago, it's as good now as it was then and wouldn't be far short of giving a good return if I ever sold it.

ATB 243 Stalker.
 
Buy the S+B 8x56. Amazing in low light. I have shot foxes in the moon light with mine, no lamp. Will last your whole stalking life if looked after and still be worth the £300 you paid in 20 years. (everything else will have gone up and £300 wont buy so much, but you'll still get your money back).
Now put in on rifle and go shoot some deer. Happy hunting.
 
Back
Top