Swarovski v Zeiss - Ease of sight picture

Cawdor118

Well-Known Member
I was out today with my 2.5-15x56 Z6i and my mates Zeiss Victory HT 3-12x56 - with both scopes set at 8 power neither of us could see a discernable difference in picture quality or contrast. The Swarovski did seem to have a better (finer) reticle however both of us agree that the Zeiss is far easier to bring to the eye. The picture just pops and you have a full ocular picture. Both of us felt that the Swarovski took longer to "get right" having to move the head to get the ocular to show a complete picture. Have any of you guys had similar experiences?

I nearly bought a Zeiss years ago and this has me thinking of the V8 again...
 
I was out today with my 2.5-15x56 Z6i and my mates Zeiss Victory HT 3-12x56 - with both scopes set at 8 power neither of us could see a discernable difference in picture quality or contrast. The Swarovski did seem to have a better (finer) reticle however both of us agree that the Zeiss is far easier to bring to the eye. The picture just pops and you have a full ocular picture. Both of us felt that the Swarovski took longer to "get right" having to move the head to get the ocular to show a complete picture. Have any of you guys had similar experiences?

I nearly bought a Zeiss years ago and this has me thinking of the V8 again...

Same physical eye relief to the mm ?

Stan
 
I have spent a bit of time comparing the two. If you were splitting hairs and getting really fussy I thought the Zeiss was slightly sharper, better colour definition and was easier to get the picture with as you say - but it was very marginal. I did however end up buying the Swarovski based on the service, weight and ballistic turret options.
 
Eye relief,
Fit of stock to cheek, height of eye relative to reticle ?

I use a Swarovski on most of my rifles, including for driven boar. It takes some effort to set the scope up, but once set, I don't recall ever having to adjust my head, to get a full, clear picture. You just don't have the time with running boar.
 
I've got both a Z8I and a V8.
In my eyes i find the Zeiss better , and like you said, it comes straight to my eyes. I would swap the Swarovski for another V8 all day , everyday.
 
Ive tried numerous times to buy a Swarovski........ great technology, brilliant ballistic turret, lovely fine reticles, side parallax, backup and customer service second to none, all at a great price point and good value retention.

So why do i have 4 Zeiss scopes? Fixed,Duralyt,V6 and V8...... they just work for me and my eyes, as others have said, the image just seems more vivid. I find i am able to distinguish and get on the target at first/last light instantly with the Zeiss. The one exception i will make is the older fixed mag Swaros were incredible, one i do regret selling.

Horses for courses i suppose. :cuckoo:
 
So it appears our initial perceptions may be correct regarding the clear picture instantly. I wonder why this is the case... Strengthens the case for the Zeiss.
 
I've just swapped a Duralyt 3-12 x 50 for a Habicht 8 x 50 and find the latter much clearer. So it probably depends on your eyes....
 
Were not on about clarify of picture (we couldn't see a discerable* difference). We are on about how quick the full sight picture comes to eye. For me and others here the Zeiss is a lot quicker.
I've just swapped a Duralyt 3-12 x 50 for a Habicht 8 x 50 and find the latter much clearer. So it probably depends on your eyes....
 
Last edited:
I recommend the Zeiss HT, yet to see better low light glass although my Meopta R2 comes very close and great value for the money. Unless on targets, don't see the need for all this high mag and the V8 although lovely is a lump.
 
That is smart! Being a tech lover I was looking at the 2 bigger scopes... I'm just not sure how they would look aesthetically on a R8.

Swaro is on the rail as well, the biggest of the Z8i’s , not so good as the Zeiss in my eyes...

9511A830-EAAB-449D-B3E8-9F6F874B4420.jpg
 
Back
Top