Any views on the Ziess Duralyt 3-12x50 Illuminated ? (v's Swarovski Z3 4-12x50)

JMc

Member
Hi Guys,

I am looking for a new scope for my .270

Ziess are offering a very reasonably priced Duralyt 3-12x50 Illuminated which is significantly cheaper than the Swarovski Z3 4-12x50 (I have always used Swarovski previously).

I would appreciate any views on the quality and light gathering, as i haven't had the opportunity to trial the Ziess scope to date.

Kind regards,

JMc
 
Hi Guys,

I am looking for a new scope for my .270

Ziess are offering a very reasonably priced Duralyt 3-12x50 Illuminated which is significantly cheaper than the Swarovski Z3 4-12x50 (I have always used Swarovski previously).

I would appreciate any views on the quality and light gathering, as i haven't had the opportunity to trial the Ziess scope to date.

Kind regards,

JMc
I had a look at the Duralyt illuminated last Autumn and was able to compare it outdoors with the more expensive Victory range and also my existing S&B(fixed power,non-illuminated). I was most impressed by the Duralyt and I am saving up for one now. atb Tim
 
It's cheaper for a reason, you are comparing a Ford Anglia with a Lexus there mate! :rofl:
 
I was told by a ziess rep that thay dont have as many coating on the lenses and the blueing is not so deep that all he told me:!:
 
Zeiss make some tremendous scopes but their Duralyt range is their entry level range. Swarvorski don't have an entry level range of scopes. For the money Duralyt are O.K. but as with many things in life you only get what you pay for hence the difference in price.
 
I have a Duralyt, at the moment, as soon as I have the cash I will be changing to a Swarovski Z6.

As most others have said they are cheap for a reason but also they are damn good.
 
Yep
I also looked at the duralyt, for a long time and kept going back, nice piece of kit, I couldn't run to a z6 i at over 2k

Found a new 2.5 x 10 x 56 S&B zenith illuminated, really made up with the quality of build and the glass is phenomenal, probably saved 500 squidlys against a swaro I am over the moon with it.

+ 1 more - you only get what you pay for and scopes are no exception - I am very pleased with the S&B
 
I've got one, and I'm very happy with it. Eye relief is good, exit pupil is good, optics are clear, reticle suits me, seems well built. I've not missed with it yet, nor have I had to let a shot pass because I couldn't see the quarry. It does everything I need it to.
Purely my own opinion, and I know there are lots of Swaro fans out there, but personally I can't see what a Swaro has that is worth paying more than double for. :stir: <dons tin hat>
 
i have one and love it it is on my .308 witch i use for boar and i only shoot boar under the light of a full moon and it gives a cristal clear view and also have a ziess classic witch is good but know better and a swaro 3-9x36 witch i just dont like get one you wont regret it
 
I know there are lots of Swaro fans out there, but personally I can't see what a Swaro has that is worth paying more than double for. :stir: <dons tin hat>

Apart from the undisputed quality of the optics and superb design, it's things like this http://www.thestalkingdirectory.co....3-Swarovski-do-it-again....-and-again....-and . They've always been excellent at directly supplying things like lost objective covers, rainshields, spotting scope tripod handle whenever I've asked - all F.O.C. And as you can see on that thread, even major rebuilds of older kit is often F.O.C. - so I'm hoping my own 20 year old SL 8x56s with a chipped lens will receive the same treatment. ;)
 
I know this is a bit of a blast from the past but I thought I'd ask if anyone has any experience of the Z3 vs the zeiss conquest DL?

Im guessing the conquest is very similar to the duralyt in light transmission etc? (I have a duralyt so am familiar to them).

I'm currently changing scopes and rifles around and wondered about getting the z3, does it have a better picture at twilight? And is the ballistic turret better than the conquest one?
 
I know this is a bit of a blast from the past but I thought I'd ask if anyone has any experience of the Z3 vs the zeiss conquest DL?

Im guessing the conquest is very similar to the duralyt in light transmission etc? (I have a duralyt so am familiar to them).

I'm currently changing scopes and rifles around and wondered about getting the z3, does it have a better picture at twilight? And is the ballistic turret better than the conquest one?

Cant help,on comparison in light transmission but the ballistic turret on the Zeiss is an exposed 1cm per click at 100m so you need to draw up your own ballistic chart (but means you can be very accurate at any distance) whereas the Z3 I believe uses the rings to give you 3-4 different zero points at those different distances.
 
I have the conquest dl 3x12x50il and overall I am hugely impressed -the light gathering is very good and I love thereticule - can't compare it to a Z3 but have compared it to other Zeiss/Swaro/S&B and detect no notable cost cutting.
 
Duralyt are an excellent scope, all the swaro snobs will deny it of course. I just bought 3, 1 for my lads 308 1 for mine and 1 for the 243 so maybe I'm biased??
 
I've had one on my 7mm for about 15 months, and.......it's ok. As someone else said, it's entry level. Nuff said ;)
 
I agree with dragon uv - I have a duralyt and to my eyes it is better than the Swaro on my 308 for clarity and in low light
I also feel the conquest binoculars are outstanding - lens covers excluded
 
Had one then had the z6i out of the two the #60 ret is better i feel , than i got a swaro ill dot . still got one swaro z6i in BT ret and now gone back to the #60 zeiss but in V8
 
Back
Top