New vs used Euro Glass…educate me please

[TheCornishman]

Hey everyone, so I am thinking of upgrading my rifle scope.

I’ve been beat at last light on no fewer than 3x occasions by some pesky Reds recently. Until now my stalking was almost exclusively Roe and I’ve not had this problem. The roe seem to oblige me by getting up later in the Am and popping out earlier in the pm

So I’ve decided to upgrade perhaps to a larger lens and better glass but am baffled by the choices and models.

I’ve never owned Euro glass but am keen to scratch the itch

I have been trying to research Zeiss & S&B models. The more I learn the more confused I get. Some of the older used top end kit seems very similarly priced to some
of the newer models. Some models
Seem to have gone out of fashion and be compatibly cheap

I’m uncertain of the differences especially with the latest greatest marketing jargon always spouting newer is better but the cynic in me suspects some of the older Kit is better made?…

I like a zoom scope as my stalking flips between dense woodland to open moor. I also prefer a fine red dot myself. Last light is my primary consideration. ASV style Dialable elevation would be a bonus as I like to practice on steel in the summer though the feature is not essential

Ive been looking at older Diavari scopes (seems that name was applied liberally to many models though. Reminds me of Triumph motorcycles and their 101 Daytonas Diavari classic, Victory Diavari

Some of the Diavaris I’ve seen have been 10-15yr old scopes marketed at similar prices to some of the used Victory HT a later model same kinda $….then there’s the whole Fl, T, MC?? ABC?…123?

I know the V4 Zeiss is entry level but comes with a fresh warranty of course… ASV is an option but is the Japanese glass as good as the authentic Zeiss lines?… (spotted Macleods deal)

So….With all of this In mind what would you buy for yourselves if you were to buy one of the big three?….

Is Older top of the range premium better than the current entry level premium offerings

Has modern tech closed the gap or is oldschool the way fwd

Key priorities for me …low light performance, decent zoom range, illuminated ret

Ideally <£1k

 

[tarponhead]

Hi, Delta Titanium works for me - polish and euro glass but it depends on what it looks like to you, when you look through them. Steiner also in budget and good low light. I’m looking for a stalking outing in Cornwall this year, so any advice on guides gratefully received. I’m down again in Liskeard in the next few weeks, so I’ll bring a Delta with me if you’re still looking by then and want to have a look through?

 

[TheCornishman]

Hi, Delta Titanium works for me - polish and euro glass but it depends on what it looks like to you, when you look through them. Steiner also in budget and good low light. I’m looking for a stalking outing in Cornwall this year, so any advice on guides gratefully received. I’m down again in Liskeard in the next few weeks, so I’ll bring a Delta with me if you’re still looking by then and want to have a look through?

Thanks for the input…I am set on S&B, Zeiss etc though as I want to see what the fuss is about

I can probably hook you up with Roe and possibly red stalking via a pal

 

[Apthorpe]

The simplest or cheapest option may be to try an S&B 8x56 for perhaps 250-350ish which you can always sell on for what you paid for it.

 

[nun_hunter]

I'd expect the difference between 10 year old top European glass and new European glass is marginal. If you were comparing 10 year old glass in an American or Japanese scope to modern offerings from them then there would be a big difference. Same as the difference between a 10 year old American scope and a 10 year old European scope would be massive but today the differences are a lot less but the price certainly is.

I know you're set on one of the "top three" but as mentioned the Delta scopes are so close in performance to the top European makes for low light ability but a fraction of the cost.

A bit like comparing a Skoda and VW from 30 years ago and the difference now.

 

[fizzbangwhallop]

Those 6-24x56 Diavari's are brilliant scopes..... after using various S&B and Swarovski fixed and variable scopes over the years, my first 6-24x56 (which had a 63 Ret) was the first scope nearest the light gathering of my Swaro 8.5 x 42 bins for last light performance on foxes.

As a result, I have more than one......

That 63 Ret in the Sales section isn't the later Flouride glass but I've never noticed the difference.... not that I ever compared them. And it has the finer 5mm clicks as opposed to the later 1cm click adjustment.

Edit.... I'm sure there was a 63 in the sales, perhaps I didn't go back far enough but came across this 43 mildot at a good price.

Sold: - Zeiss diavari 6-24x56

Hi I have a Zeiss diavari 6-24x56 for sale. Lovely scope 9/10 condition just few surface marks to body, can send more pics on request. £1150 posted insured

www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk

But there is a 63 on eBay... the first place to show signs of use is the Zeiss label on the parallax dial and its only showing the around the edges of the label where it rubs in and out of slips, so it looks like it's not had a hard life (Compare those to the turrets on the 43 for an example but that doesn't mean to say that the 43 has had a hard life or been abused). The turrets can get a bit loose but if the clicks are positive and the spring is decent that nothing to worry about. It's priced at £1400 but I put it in my watch list and got an offer for £1300

Zeiss Victory Diavari Rifle Scope | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Zeiss Victory Diavari Rifle Scope at the best online prices at eBay! Free delivery for many products.

www.ebay.co.uk

Cheers

Fizz

 

[Stalker-of-the-deer]

I had a 40 year old s&b 6x42 and put a zeiss victory diavari 3-12×56 on my rifle.

Is it clearer and brighter - absolutely

However in terms of actual image quality not as much as you would think. It just appears brighter with alot more colour in newer scope.

Personally I'd hunt for a 8×56 s&b I've still got mine on the 22lr for bunny bashing it's a great do it all scope.

 

[paulbshooting]

Zeiss HT is the best in low light. Have the V8 too and tried all the others except the S&B polar, which I have used in daylight only and on paper it should also be great in low light.

 

[Polar Lynx]

In daylight almost all decent scopes will do. The last 10 min in evening i.e. when deer may come out is another story. The larger the front lins the more light in. The fewer the linses inside scope the more light o and image will reach shoters eye.
Fixed scopes with large front not very expensive second hand. If one lean's to big names then S#B, Zeiss, Kahles may be found. One solution is QRW which takes a rail on rifle. One medium day scope and one for the last minutes ...

 

[Miki]

The Delta Titanium HD 2.5-15x56 would be my choice - they are an excellent scope which also works well with NV addons.

For Sale: - Delta titanium 2.5-15x56 titanium hd

 

[jall55]

The simplest or cheapest option may be to try an S&B 8x56 for perhaps 250-350ish which you can always sell on for what you paid for it.

I was just going to say get an 8 x 56 Swaro - now about about 350-500 quid

 

[Dunwaters]

Theres a common misconception that a large objective lens lets in more light, thats just not necessarily so.
It used to be the case but modern scopes have lens coatings that transmit virtually all the available light to your beady little eye.
The difference between top end scopes and the middle ground has been steadily eroded by better quality glass and coatings over the last 15-20 years or so, so the advantage of a having a premium quality scope isn’t what it once was
My advice would be to select a scope that suits your pocket, weight and size requirements, then check out the light transmission figures for that model, the closer that percentage figure is to 100 the brighter it will be, but no purely optical scope will enhance the light. I’d also have a look at an illuminated reticule, they're well worth it in my experience when it comes to last knockings and dark targets.
I used a Swarovski 3-9x36 with a number 4 reticule for years with total satisfaction, including pigs at night, it actually shocked my host how little difference there was between my little scope and his Schmidt and Bender with a 56mm objective in the dark.
Size definitely matters, but bigger isn’t necessarily always better.

 

[Bowland blades]

Theres a common misconception that a large objective lens lets in more light, thats just not necessarily so.
It used to be the case but modern scopes have lens coatings that transmit virtually all the available light to your beady little eye.
The difference between top end scopes and the middle ground has been steadily eroded by better quality glass and coatings over the last 15-20 years or so, so the advantage of a having a premium quality scope isn’t what it once was
My advice would be to select a scope that suits your pocket, weight and size requirements, then check out the light transmission figures for that model, the closer that percentage figure is to 100 the brighter it will be, but no purely optical scope will enhance the light. I’d also have a look at an illuminated reticule, they're well worth it in my experience when it comes to last knockings and dark targets.
I used a Swarovski 3-9x36 with a number 4 reticule for years with total satisfaction, including pigs at night, it actually shocked my host how little difference there was between my little scope and his Schmidt and Bender with a 56mm objective in the dark.
Size definitely matters, but bigger isn’t necessarily always better.

Yes cheaper glass has gotten better , so has top end glass though . Of course a goodly amount of this " leveling up" is the fact that China is the biggest player making the great " cheaper " and the not so great " better" . It cannot fully meet though due to competitive forces.
I tested my daughters hawke Binos against mw Swarvoski . Now i am in my mid fifties now and my vision has declined a bit but i got 20-30 mins more useable light with the swaroski and that's a fair amount of extra time when we think of when the best shooting time is . In bright sunlight though there aint any real difference , Other than if we slip into scopes When mechanicals become important ( i just love S&B scopes ) not just the glass but their ability to really hold set zero .

 

[kripton]

If you want a fine illuminated reticle then the Zeiss 60 should be on your list. I have Zeiss Conquest V6 2.5-15x56 and a Zeiss Conquest DL 3-12x50 both with the Zeiss 60 reticle. The V6 was a direct (i.e. no cost) demo replacement from Zeiss for a Zeiss Conquest V4 which was unsatisfactory (aberrations when looking into darker woodland from a brighter clearing).
The Conquest V6 has the ASV turret and is so much better than was the Conquest V4. I have difficulty in noticing the light gathering difference (probably my old eyes) between the Conquest DL and the Conquest V6 notwithstanding that they were made many years apart - the V6 value was around £1,650 when I acquired it virtually new and the Conquest DL cost me less than £500

 

[JockStalk]

In your case I’d go used snd well looked after Swaro Z6i all the way.

 

[User00040]

Hey everyone, so I am thinking of upgrading my rifle scope.

I’ve been beat at last light on no fewer than 3x occasions by some pesky Reds recently. Until now my stalking was almost exclusively Roe and I’ve not had this problem. The roe seem to oblige me by getting up later in the Am and popping out earlier in the pm

So I’ve decided to upgrade perhaps to a larger lens and better glass but am baffled by the choices and models.

I’ve never owned Euro glass but am keen to scratch the itch

I have been trying to research Zeiss & S&B models. The more I learn the more confused I get. Some of the older used top end kit seems very similarly priced to some
of the newer models. Some models
Seem to have gone out of fashion and be compatibly cheap

I’m uncertain of the differences especially with the latest greatest marketing jargon always spouting newer is better but the cynic in me suspects some of the older Kit is better made?…

I like a zoom scope as my stalking flips between dense woodland to open moor. I also prefer a fine red dot myself. Last light is my primary consideration. ASV style Dialable elevation would be a bonus as I like to practice on steel in the summer though the feature is not essential

Ive been looking at older Diavari scopes (seems that name was applied liberally to many models though. Reminds me of Triumph motorcycles and their 101 Daytonas Diavari classic, Victory Diavari

Some of the Diavaris I’ve seen have been 10-15yr old scopes marketed at similar prices to some of the used Victory HT a later model same kinda $….then there’s the whole Fl, T, MC?? ABC?…123?

I know the V4 Zeiss is entry level but comes with a fresh warranty of course… ASV is an option but is the Japanese glass as good as the authentic Zeiss lines?… (spotted Macleods deal)

So….With all of this In mind what would you buy for yourselves if you were to buy one of the big three?….

Is Older top of the range premium better than the current entry level premium offerings

Has modern tech closed the gap or is oldschool the way fwd

Key priorities for me …low light performance, decent zoom range, illuminated ret

Ideally <£1k

Just stick a torch on your existing scope, even the best Euro glass won't be able to beat it at 'last light'...

 

[Heym SR20]

My 7x65r has a Zeiss 6x42 on claw mounts. It dates from 1974 when rifle was built. I have compared it against modern day Zeiss, Leica and S&B scopes in low light. Difficult to see any difference whatsoever. Certainly not enough to be the difference between taking a safe shot and not. I have shot Sika, Reds and Roe at very last light with it, and Boar under moonlight.

But there is a big difference between an old scope that has been well cared for and one that has been cleaned every day with a cloth that has been in a stalkers pocket for the last 20 years!!

There is a little difference in the image quality. Modern coatings are less yellow with more of a blue tinge and different brands also are different. To my eye S&B have a brighter sparkly glossy image, whereas Swarovski are more of matt image. Does it affect ability to put a bullet in the target - not at all.

What has happened over the last 20 odd years is that the cheaper brands of optics now have very good lenses. Where they fall down is probably on build quality and strength of the internals.

By contrast the likes of Leupold have always had a reputation of toughness, but their image quality is not as bright as the European brands. And I have always found them to be fussy with eye position. Fine once you have it set up properly but when changing position your head is not always in exactly the same position.

 

[Heym SR20]

Theres a common misconception that a large objective lens lets in more light, thats just not necessarily so.
It used to be the case but modern scopes have lens coatings that transmit virtually all the available light to your beady little eye.
The difference between top end scopes and the middle ground has been steadily eroded by better quality glass and coatings over the last 15-20 years or so, so the advantage of a having a premium quality scope isn’t what it once was
My advice would be to select a scope that suits your pocket, weight and size requirements, then check out the light transmission figures for that model, the closer that percentage figure is to 100 the brighter it will be, but no purely optical scope will enhance the light. I’d also have a look at an illuminated reticule, they're well worth it in my experience when it comes to last knockings and dark targets.
I used a Swarovski 3-9x36 with a number 4 reticule for years with total satisfaction, including pigs at night, it actually shocked my host how little difference there was between my little scope and his Schmidt and Bender with a 56mm objective in the dark.
Size definitely matters, but bigger isn’t necessarily always better.

I have a 3-9x36 Swarovski on my 243. It did have a 4-12x50 swaro but that took a knock so sent it back for repair - which has been done. The 3-9x36 mounts much lower - the rifle was originally fitted with a 4x32. The bigger scope needs to be 5mm higher. I keep thinking I should swap them back. But 9 months later I still haven’t.

I have red dots in two of my scopes. I don’t like them as I reckon it ruins my night vision. I prefer a thick out cross hair like the German 4A reticle. They are also bulky with the extra turret. And the Swarovski looks like it has a growth on its ocular bell.

 

[Bavarianbrit]

I have two of these, the only top quality scope Tasco ever had made for them. 30mm tubes though.

Tasco Euro Class 3-12x52 1 Made in Japan​

 

[User00040]

I have two of these, the only top quality scope Tasco ever had made for them. 30mm tubes though.

Tasco Euro Class 3-12x52 1 Made in Japan​

Will make many of the SD 'old guard' sore, but the truth is that Japanese made optics are often better scopes than the equivalent Euro items, at a much lower price and equal or higher build quality.

Zero retention in Swarovski scopes is often very poor.