Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 80

Thread: schmidt and bender disappointment

  1. #1

    schmidt and bender disappointment

    Hi all

    i bought a 3-12x42 (FFP) schmidt Klassic at the midland game fair this year to replace the cheap redfield 4-12x40 hoping it would be better in low light conditions. Ive actually found the Redfield was marginally better. Considering the cost of these scopes, have i chosen the wrong one?


    Attachment 49672
    Attachment 49673

  2. #2
    How old is this scope ? Is it new ?

  3. #3
    Wrong one, depends on what you want it to do.
    But no matter how good a scope is 12 x with a 42mm objective isn't going to be great in the dark.
    I have always been happy with 6x42 S&B scopes in any light conditions, but if I wanted more mag
    I would just go with an 8x56.


  4. #4
    Sorry to hear of your problem. If 2 people look through the same scope each persons view is different. Also as we get older our eyes dont work as well as when we were younger. As has been said, if you need a scope for stalking in low light a fixed power 6x42, 7x50 or 8x56 would suit better. Even the 8x50 is worth a look. Also something to bear in mind is that Redfield scopes are not bad.
    Try to find a fixed power you can look through to see if it works for you in low light. I always try before I buy.

  5. #5
    Just screw it down to 6x and leave it there this scope should be as good in low light as any other as mentioned the higher the mag the less effective in low light but as it's a vari power keep it low...........

  6. #6
    The contrast and sharpness should be better but as the objective is similar then not a lot more light gathering

  7. #7
    These days there are a lot of scopes that are very close in low light conditions, and the gap between the bigger names and many other brands has well and truly closed.

    My eyes tell me that my 6x42 Meopta is better than my S&B, but they also tell me that my Nikon Monarch is as well, and the Prostaff's aren't too far behind, in low light terms at least.

    We are all different - a mate of mine swears that he can't see any benefit when peering through my scopes compared to his cheapie Hawke. That could be for other reasons or he might have squiffy eyesight.

    I've not found a zoom scope that was as good as a fixed same size objective lens from the same manufacturer in low light.

    Redfield are pretty decent overall IMHO.

    For the record, I tested some of my scopes as the light failed recently and found a 250 Bushnell Legend Ultra HD left my Leupold VX2 and VX3 for dust in low light.

    Leupold might have its brand name in its favour but, in pure low light performance, the much cheaper Bushnell Legend punched way above its weight. Loads of people wouldn't even look at one though, just because of the brand or country of origin.


    I think a lot of people overlook some serious performance bargains in favour of big brands on the assumption that they will always be better performers. Leupold in particular (just in my opinion of course) appears to be relying on a name made decades ago rather than producing scopes that drop any jaws, at east until you start spending thousands rather than hundreds.

    Your mileage may vary - I hope you find a resolution.

  8. #8
    The scope is usually used on 6 x. I have a variable because some of the stalking I do I have to crank it down to 3 x as it's in valleys no wider than 70 yards and there usually sat in the middle. I had a 42 mm objective to keep the scope low. I'm not saying the light gathering is bad I was just expecting more I guess? Fixed wasn't really an option or I would of had a 6 x 42 and saved a few quid

  9. #9
    I think the well known scopes like s/b,swar, leup,ziess, are becoming far to expensive for the hobby stalker. I have in the past saved my pennies for expensive scopes and still have them but recently sold a big swaro that I had on my 270 and bought a 12x56 Meopta second hand on here for 400 , its excellent value and the extra light gathering at night has impressed me.My mate swears by them and has 7x50 on one of his rifles.

  10. #10
    Another question is when was the optic calculation done on this scope... 20-25 years ago?
    Also big difference when comparing 3-12x50 classic and newer 3-12x50 Zenith especially against light.
    I had a few 8x56 and 6x42 and thought they were lousy at last light compared to Zenith and also a 4-16x50 S&B I had which seemed incredibly bright at low light.
    The best optics I looked through at the last IWA was a Helia 5 Kahles 2.4-12x56, things are moving along.

    ps, give it some time and get used to the scope. Sometimes it is actually better to crank up magnification at last light. One might loose a bit of brightness but one wins a bigger picture of what one actually wants to see.
    Last edited by ejg; 29-11-2014 at 21:34.

Similar Threads

  1. MGF quite a disappointment
    By Cyres in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22-09-2014, 13:25
  2. Schmidt and bender
    By the scudd in forum Equipment & Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 14-05-2014, 22:20
  3. schmidt and bender
    By mannlicher in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-06-2012, 08:56
  4. Wanted Schmidt and bender
    By wildfowler.250 in forum Optics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-04-2011, 20:57
  5. A disappointment.
    By Muir in forum Rifles & Calibres
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 03-08-2010, 20:08

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts