zeiss v schmidt

SussexFallow

Well-Known Member
Hi
I am looking to buy an 8x56 scope for my 308. I have a choice between the 2 but can't decide. I have a zeiss variable which I like but have heard good reports about Schmidt scopes. The zeiss is a 25mm tube while the s+b is 30mm.
Anyone have views on either scope.


Atb Steve
 
Hmmmm I assume you mean the Zeiss is a 1" tube (25.4mm) and not 25mm? They did I beleive make 25mm tubes at one point in time.

As to chosing between the two :confused: well like you I would have to examine them and look through them and then decide which was best for me. Sorry cannot be more help as both are excellent makes so it's down to personal preference.
 
If You talking about new scopes, both scopes are great. Zeiss Diatal has 1'' tube, S&B Klassik 30mm and 1''.
On second-hand market there are 3 models of Zeiss Diatal - single coating, MC* coatings and the newest T* coatings.
 
If you're thinking new scopes of that quality you should also considder Swarovski, Kahles and IOR. (In descending price order).
I've heard that the new Zeiss cheapies aren't as good as the top price range models (poor quality image at the edge of the sight picture). Not seen it myself tho'.
IMO Swarovski just take it when comparing like models in very low light. The image just seems natural & easy to look at.
I've got a couple of Swarovski (8 x 50PF & 6 x 42), a Kahles Helia(4-12 x 56), a couple of old Pecar variables and a S&B (1" tube 8 x 56) and like them in that order. - Yes I do like the old Pecars more than my S&B! But that's just my personal preference.
It is very much down to what you feel most comfortable with and can afford. Not what anyone else tells you.
 
I have just fitted a new zeiss variable to my old boys .308.The glass is good ,but i still like my swaro z6 its just that bit clearer.

But you pay quite a bit more for the swaro
Before you buy drop me a pm and ill give you a price for some of the stock on the shelf .

steve
 
I have kahles zeiss and schmidt, have had swaro and docter. They are all great and close.
It comes down to personal preferences.
I am currently changing all to Zeiss I now have 3 scopes, binos and a rangefinder.
I have a spare s+b 3-12x50 on a 30mm at the right money it just needs a rifle.
 
I have owned schmidt in the past and at the moment I'm all zeiss. I personally don't think theres anything to choose between them .
Yorric I have a 3-12 duralight " cheapie " and a top range zeiss and it wouldn't want to say one was better than the other ,both excellent optics ,The Zeiss duralight range is fantastic value for money.
 
I have owned schmidt in the past and at the moment I'm all zeiss. I personally don't think theres anything to choose between them .
Yorric I have a 3-12 duralight " cheapie " and a top range zeiss and it wouldn't want to say one was better than the other ,both excellent optics ,The Zeiss duralight range is fantastic value for money.

Brough, I'm glad you're satisfied with the Zeiss - I'm sure the price is great for such high quality kit. I'm sure that Zeiss are critically aware that their name is their meal ticket and wouldn't want it sullied with poor quality - And we the punters can use all the benefits that price wars bring. As I said I was just reporting what I'd been told (by two totally independant people who sell loads of good scopes).
 
Two things to consider.

1) the shape of the two scopes - one may be a bit longer than the other and fit your rifle better. When I bought a scope for my 243, I went withe the meopta as it had a longer centre tube thus pushing the objective lense further down the barrel where barrel conour is narrower. I did want to change the fixed Apel mounts and anything else did n't have enough room to clear the barrel.

2) eye relief and sight picture - which when mounted is most comfortable and still gives you plenty of eye relief. A scope hitting you in the eye is uncomfortable and not condusive to good shooting.
 
Back
Top