S&L7x57
Well-Known Member
Some time back I posed the question: why does my scope give me a better, brighter image than my binos at last light? I was subsequently buried in answers that reflected the general belief that greater money spent equals better image. Having considered this advice I went out and bought a set of quality binos, Swaros SLC 8x42: virtually brand new and in their original packaging for less than 1/2 price. Result, I thought: here comes perfectly comparable scope (Z6i) and binos.
Anyway, I didn't get rid of my previous binos (Vortex Viper HD 10x40), as they would be good for day time stalking on the hill, nor any of my less worthy scopes and the other day I decided to do a little back to back comparison at last light.
It was a still night with about 50% cloud cover and normal humidity for an East Anglian summer evening.
Sunset was about 8.40.
I set out my various CF rifles and assorted binos on a table and placed two hen pheasant wings at the full extent on my garden (about 50 yds), one in full light from the sky and one in a shaded spot on top of my bullet trap.
From L-R:
Rem 700 270W with Z6i 2.5-15x56 30mm AO
Ruger No1 7x57 with Zeiss Terra 4-12x50 25mm
S&L Victory 7x57 with Zeiss Conquest DL 3-12x50 30mm
Rem 788 308W with Hawke Endurance 4-16x50 30mm AO
Tikka T3 223Rem with Hawke Endurance 6-18x50 25mm AO
Binos B-F:
Nikon 8x40 (ancient)
Vortex Viper HD 10x40
Swaro SLC 8x42
The pheasant wings were placed in 'full light' against fence boards to right of walnut tree and in the 'deep shade' just above the pink dahlia. This was taken at about 9pm, 20 mins after sunset.
Criteria:
SS 8.40, legal light to 9.40.
My eyes are those of a 63yo, long sighted but generally considered to be better than most of my contemporaries for spotting wildlife (FWIW).
My criteria was whether I could discern an image in both locations that would enable me to differentiate the object from its background and identify without movement.
My core purpose was to find out if my scopes out performed my binos (or visa versa) and if my 'quality' equipment out performed my 'value' equipment.
Initially, magnification was set on the scopes to give the same exit pupil as the SLC 8x42. This was then changed to give the same magnification.
Observations:
First optic to lose any quality of image was the Nikon binos soon after 9. No surprise then.
This was followed by the Hawke Endurance on the 223Rem at about 9.10.
The Zeiss Terra was retired at about 9.15.
The magnification on the scopes was moved to x8 as the images were fading fast on all three 30mm scopes. This improved the image a great deal.
The Zeiss CDL, Z6i and 30mm Hawke made it to legal light on the better lit wing but all had given up on the wing in the shaded area by 9.15-9.20.
There really wasn't much to choose between them except that the Hawke's image was noticeably 'grey', ie, lacking in any real colour while the Zeiss CDL and Z6i kept some colour differentiation for a bit longer.
The Swaro SLC's and Vortex were very similar in performance at last light even given that one was an 8x and the other 10x. I think the Swaro's had the edge but neither was really giving me a shootable, identifiable image at last legal light, maybe a little more colour with the Swaro's.
The Vortex were rather easier to focus at last light: it appeared that the relatively fast gearing on the focus made the difference more obvious allowing one to zero in on the best setting quickly. The Swaro's were much more difficult due to the large amount of turn required to get a perceptible difference.
What was particularly obvious was that the scopes performed badly compared with the binos mainly due to glare from the sky. With the binos up to your eye, the sky above you really doesn't get a look in but with 3-4" eye relief on a scope, I was needing to shade my eye to get a clear view on what the scope could 'see'. This was due to the fact that I was seated in an open area while both the targets were placed in a shaded area. If I had been in a shaded area, eg. up a high seat under a tree's canopy or shooting from within a wood toward open ground, the scopes' performance would have been much easier to measure.
The lack of AO in the Zeiss CDL and Terra was a particular problem as both are factory set at around 100m and the wings were at 50m. Obviously if your targets are going to 100m plus this is irrelevant but with much of lowland woodland stalking shots being taken under 100m, I feel it is relevant to the observations.
Conclusion:
All three 30mm scopes gave a similar performance in terms of possible shooting limits although the Zeiss and Swaro possibly gave another 5 mins of shootable image in the most shaded place.
The two 25mm scopes ran out of light considerably sooner and were much more finicky about eye relief and position as the light failed.
The Vortex and Swaro were only really separated by colour, which given their differing magnifications (and price), surprised me.
Lastly, I know that these observation are hugely subjective and others may experience quite a different result with their own eyes. However, given that I could have splashed out £1-2k on the advice given me by the cognoscenti, I think that people should be aware how little difference there is between the best glass available and that in the mid range. And I suspect it is even more border-line in the upper mid-range.
I have scratched the 'Euro Glass-itch' three times now, am happy I did but I doubt it will put a huge amount more venison in the larder. What it will do is reassure me that I didn't miss my chance for lack of spending piles of filthy lucre!
Anyway, I didn't get rid of my previous binos (Vortex Viper HD 10x40), as they would be good for day time stalking on the hill, nor any of my less worthy scopes and the other day I decided to do a little back to back comparison at last light.
It was a still night with about 50% cloud cover and normal humidity for an East Anglian summer evening.
Sunset was about 8.40.
I set out my various CF rifles and assorted binos on a table and placed two hen pheasant wings at the full extent on my garden (about 50 yds), one in full light from the sky and one in a shaded spot on top of my bullet trap.
From L-R:
Rem 700 270W with Z6i 2.5-15x56 30mm AO
Ruger No1 7x57 with Zeiss Terra 4-12x50 25mm
S&L Victory 7x57 with Zeiss Conquest DL 3-12x50 30mm
Rem 788 308W with Hawke Endurance 4-16x50 30mm AO
Tikka T3 223Rem with Hawke Endurance 6-18x50 25mm AO
Binos B-F:
Nikon 8x40 (ancient)
Vortex Viper HD 10x40
Swaro SLC 8x42
The pheasant wings were placed in 'full light' against fence boards to right of walnut tree and in the 'deep shade' just above the pink dahlia. This was taken at about 9pm, 20 mins after sunset.
Criteria:
SS 8.40, legal light to 9.40.
My eyes are those of a 63yo, long sighted but generally considered to be better than most of my contemporaries for spotting wildlife (FWIW).
My criteria was whether I could discern an image in both locations that would enable me to differentiate the object from its background and identify without movement.
My core purpose was to find out if my scopes out performed my binos (or visa versa) and if my 'quality' equipment out performed my 'value' equipment.
Initially, magnification was set on the scopes to give the same exit pupil as the SLC 8x42. This was then changed to give the same magnification.
Observations:
First optic to lose any quality of image was the Nikon binos soon after 9. No surprise then.
This was followed by the Hawke Endurance on the 223Rem at about 9.10.
The Zeiss Terra was retired at about 9.15.
The magnification on the scopes was moved to x8 as the images were fading fast on all three 30mm scopes. This improved the image a great deal.
The Zeiss CDL, Z6i and 30mm Hawke made it to legal light on the better lit wing but all had given up on the wing in the shaded area by 9.15-9.20.
There really wasn't much to choose between them except that the Hawke's image was noticeably 'grey', ie, lacking in any real colour while the Zeiss CDL and Z6i kept some colour differentiation for a bit longer.
The Swaro SLC's and Vortex were very similar in performance at last light even given that one was an 8x and the other 10x. I think the Swaro's had the edge but neither was really giving me a shootable, identifiable image at last legal light, maybe a little more colour with the Swaro's.
The Vortex were rather easier to focus at last light: it appeared that the relatively fast gearing on the focus made the difference more obvious allowing one to zero in on the best setting quickly. The Swaro's were much more difficult due to the large amount of turn required to get a perceptible difference.
What was particularly obvious was that the scopes performed badly compared with the binos mainly due to glare from the sky. With the binos up to your eye, the sky above you really doesn't get a look in but with 3-4" eye relief on a scope, I was needing to shade my eye to get a clear view on what the scope could 'see'. This was due to the fact that I was seated in an open area while both the targets were placed in a shaded area. If I had been in a shaded area, eg. up a high seat under a tree's canopy or shooting from within a wood toward open ground, the scopes' performance would have been much easier to measure.
The lack of AO in the Zeiss CDL and Terra was a particular problem as both are factory set at around 100m and the wings were at 50m. Obviously if your targets are going to 100m plus this is irrelevant but with much of lowland woodland stalking shots being taken under 100m, I feel it is relevant to the observations.
Conclusion:
All three 30mm scopes gave a similar performance in terms of possible shooting limits although the Zeiss and Swaro possibly gave another 5 mins of shootable image in the most shaded place.
The two 25mm scopes ran out of light considerably sooner and were much more finicky about eye relief and position as the light failed.
The Vortex and Swaro were only really separated by colour, which given their differing magnifications (and price), surprised me.
Lastly, I know that these observation are hugely subjective and others may experience quite a different result with their own eyes. However, given that I could have splashed out £1-2k on the advice given me by the cognoscenti, I think that people should be aware how little difference there is between the best glass available and that in the mid range. And I suspect it is even more border-line in the upper mid-range.
I have scratched the 'Euro Glass-itch' three times now, am happy I did but I doubt it will put a huge amount more venison in the larder. What it will do is reassure me that I didn't miss my chance for lack of spending piles of filthy lucre!
Last edited:
