Scopes

[bewsher500]

This morning I took a look at both of them , the leupold is lighter and shorter , and feels better built than the zeiss duralyt . The zeiss glass is great , but at dawn this morning the leupold with the firedot reticle was really outstanding . Neither are as good as my Schmidt 8x56 for light gathering . I couldn't tell the difference between the two as far as clarity went . What got me with the zeiss were little things , there are no grooves in the the mag adjustment , the turret caps where plastic and felt cheap and the finish was not as hard .
Anyway I walked away with the leupold , so well see how it goes . .

Now that is very interesting.
I have had 4 or 5 leupolds over the years and despite having used Zeiss scopes I have never owned one
I like the Leupolds but would still probably have said Zeiss was a better choice.

interesting to hear of the build quality
I do like a decent IR with lots of settings though. (I find some too bright)

 

[Acm]

Now that is very interesting.
I have had 4 or 5 leupolds over the years and despite having used Zeiss scopes I have never owned one
I like the Leupolds but would still probably have said Zeiss was a better choice.

interesting to hear of the build quality
I do like a decent IR with lots of settings though. (I find some too bright)

i couldn't deny the zeiss glass was good , but what's the good of having a great bit of glass in shoddy tube , the glass is only half the scope right ? I'm sure the duralyt would have been fine , to me it just felt a bit cheap , and the more I played with both , the better the leupold looked . Not only that the zeiss warranty is 30 years , compared to the leupolds lifetime .

 

[trxnav]

I am surprised mate but having owned a few leupolds no that you will not regret going with your choice and if it feels right to you and gives you the confidence that's all that matters