Swarovski vs S&B - best low light scope

tom_o_m

Well-Known Member
#1
Hi All

I'm trying to work out which decent second hand scope to get. I was thinking that top German glass was the way to go, and had been favouring a swaro. I'm on a tight budget but there appear to be some that drop into my price range with 50mm objective lenses.

However, a friend has advised that I look at the S&B classic (German) 56mm which he claims would be even better in low light.

Any thoughts?

Thanks

Tom
 
#2
Hi All

I'm trying to work out which decent second hand scope to get. I was thinking that top German glass was the way to go, and had been favouring a swaro. I'm on a tight budget but there appear to be some that drop into my price range with 50mm objective lenses.

However, a friend has advised that I look at the S&B classic (German) 56mm which he claims would be even better in low light.

Any thoughts?

Thanks

Tom
Swaro, S&B or Zeiss they are all good to give extra 10 mins in low light, main criteria for me would be 30mm tube, 56mm obj, variable mag to wind down at dusk( ie not 8X56 fixed) and illum ret,

Peeps will say illum ret not that important but if you want perfect low light shot placement against a dark target its a must imo.

Dont forget to get best binos you can afford, you will be looking thru these far more than the scope to pos ID that buck lol.

All the best WB
 
#3
Nice S&B 8x56 for sale on here now - a no brainer as a stalking scope on a budget...... BTW, 25 or 30mm tube will make no odds to light gathering.....
 
Last edited:

Woodlander

Well-Known Member
#4
I would always consider a variable power scope for versatility.Zeiss has the brightest glass,to my eyes,but Swaro are a close second and don't forget Meopta.
 

philip

Well-Known Member
#5
I have S&B. Zenith on all mine. 2.5 - 10 x 56 flash dot 7 reticule.

Cannot fault them, perfect for dawn and twilight, fantastic glass, good all round scope

I would get a scope with a illuminated reticule, it does help for that more accurate shot at dusk, it takes out any guess work, it doesn't give you any longer time, just pin point accuracy which is want you want at dusk to ensure a good shot placement
 

Markfox

Well-Known Member
#6
Eigher will be just as good as each other personally I'd choose Swarovski for the easy to use quality after service

and illumination everytime for me as stated when your looking into a wood if you don't no where your cross hairs are how can you take a humane shot just flick the illum on the almost lowest setting perfect you know where u are and it won't effect your natural night vision
 

teyhan1

Well-Known Member
#7
My biggest problem with illuminated reticules is that they may encourage you to take a shot when it is too dark.
Ten your left to grope around in the dark trying to find where you shot the animal and of course it might have run 100m.
Binoculars have the wonderful effect of making you believe it is lighter than it is. This then is not transferred in to your scope.
Not saying don't get an IR scope, just if your on a budget then you really don't need it.
 

tom_o_m

Well-Known Member
#8
Thanks for the thoughts all. I guess that top glass is top glass; and I should perhaps focus more on the spec.

I think illuminated reticles are unlikely on my budget, but I will certainly be after a variable mag scope if I can afford it.

Cheers

Tom
 
Last edited:

Yorric

Well-Known Member
#9
Before making your final decision about which scope to get, think about the fact that big diameter scopes weigh more than smaller ones, they spoil the rifle ballance (variables are heavier too) and they make it necessary to raise the stock comb for correct eye alingnment & cheek weld.
Also big lenses collect more dirt & raindrops than small ones. - sun shades help keep things cleaner.
I think that 50mm diameter objectives are the max as a working compromise, even with the scope set low against the rifle. 56mm being a bit OTT.
I started with small diameter - started with 32mm - went big gradually up to 56mm - now going back the other way.

Ian
 

Cadex

Well-Known Member
#10
Before making your final decision about which scope to get, think about the fact that big diameter scopes weigh more than smaller ones, they spoil the rifle ballance (variables are heavier too) and they make it necessary to raise the stock comb for correct eye alingnment & cheek weld.
Also big lenses collect more dirt & raindrops than small ones. - sun shades help keep things cleaner.
I think that 50mm diameter objectives are the max as a working compromise, even with the scope set low against the rifle. 56mm being a bit OTT.
I started with small diameter - started with 32mm - went big gradually up to 56mm - now going back the other way.

Ian

Agreed. . . I'm currently using a 42 objective on my .222 and a 50 on my .308
I have owned scopes with 56 objectives but won't again.
Far too heavy and unwieldy for next to no advantage.
 
#11
Given the advice above, here's food for thought then: Meopta Artemis 3-9x42, FFP and 30mm tube, inn-illuminated ret. Just been cerakoted graphite black to tidy the tube, optically perfect. £350 delivered.
 

pete evans

Well-Known Member
#12
If I were on a tight budget and wanted a scope purely for stalking I would get a second hand 6x42 s+b swaro etc. You can pick one up for £250. If you decide to sell you will get your money back. Light compact and very capable with nothing to adjust.
 

boar & deer

Well-Known Member
#13
I dont think you could go wrong with a ziess duralyt even if money isnt a prob i own or have ownd ziess victory swaro z range kaps s&b nikon meopta and the scope i still have on my main boar rifle i 3-12x50 duralyt and i love it and i normal just use the moon light when im after boar at night but as said before everyones eyes are diffrent
 
#14
I've tested them side by side with quite a few other people and we all agreed that none of us could see any difference in low light performance between Swarovski and s&b. If you want the best low light performance then you have to go to zeiss as they are ahead of the other two both in the testing I did and also in any well conducted optical testing that I have ever seen. I thought nickel were maybe a shade better than zeiss but there was nothing in it and they are big money and not so easy to get. Take a look at the optics test link I posted recently, it was well conducted and, of course, zdiss came out of top for optics.
 
#15
One other point is that all the big name scopes are more than adequate for stalking. They will simply all do your job and so "the best" is not necessary. In my view s&b offer the best value - buy a second hand Schmidt well and it will not break the bank and will always be worth what you paid for it and it will give you performance beyond what you actually need to shoot your deer. I think fixed mag is hard to beat and use an 8x56 s&b with which I've shot deer from 20 to 250 yards, after a recent experience I've actually started to form a negative view on variable scopes for stalking as opposed to my previous position that they simply weren't necessary and offered no benefit. Given the cash for a top notch zeiss I'd keep my Schmidt and spend the cash on going stalking as that would increase the number of deer I shoot far more than having a new and grossly over specified scope would.
 

Cadex

Well-Known Member
#16
One other point is that all the big name scopes are more than adequate for stalking. They will simply all do your job and so "the best" is not necessary. In my view s&b offer the best value - buy a second hand Schmidt well and it will not break the bank and will always be worth what you paid for it and it will give you performance beyond what you actually need to shoot your deer. I think fixed mag is hard to beat and use an 8x56 s&b with which I've shot deer from 20 to 250 yards, after a recent experience I've actually started to form a negative view on variable scopes for stalking as opposed to my previous position that they simply weren't necessary and offered no benefit. Given the cash for a top notch zeiss I'd keep my Schmidt and spend the cash on going stalking as that would increase the number of deer I shoot far more than having a new and grossly over specified scope would.
Your talking a lot of common sense, the downside of that is no one will listen :lol:
 
#17
BTW, 25 or 30mm tube will make no odds to light gathering.....[/QUOTE Eric the Red)

Perhaps you would care to enlarge upon your rather throwaway comment, opinion or whatever you would like to call it.

In the meantime newcomers to rifle optics seeking some professional guidance might like to look at Telescopicsightschuckhawks

ATB WB
 
Last edited:

Milligan

Well-Known Member
#18
BTW, 25 or 30mm tube will make no odds to light gathering.....[/QUOTE Eric the Red)

Perhaps you would care to enlarge upon your rather throwaway comment, opinion or whatever you would like to call it.

In the meantime newcomers to rifle optics seeking some professional guidance might like to look at Telescopicsightschuckhawks

ATB WB
It's a pretty well established fact so hardly a throwaway comment.

Larger tubes can give you more windage and elevation (not always) but has no influence on light transmission.

Chuckhawks has a number of incorrect assertions and errors and often contradictions so isn't really a great place to start.
For example http://www.chuckhawks.com/optical_sights.htm is contradicted by http://www.chuckhawks.com/riflescopes_same.htm on the topic of tubes.
 
#19
It's a pretty well established fact so hardly a throwaway comment.

Larger tubes can give you more windage and elevation (not always) but has no influence on light transmission.

Chuckhawks has a number of incorrect assertions and errors and often contradictions so isn't really a great place to start.
For example http://www.chuckhawks.com/optical_sights.htm is contradicted by http://www.chuckhawks.com/riflescopes_same.htm on the topic of tubes.
We agree to disagree on that then, I have owned and still own all manner of scopes used over last 40 years Foxing, and experience tells me otherwise.

ATB WB
 

pete evans

Well-Known Member
#20
We agree to disagree on that then, I have owned and still own all manner of scopes used over last 40 years Foxing, and experience tells me otherwise.

ATB WB
I was always under the impression that it was the objective lens size the magnification and the lense quality that contribute to brightness of image. I admit that I have never compared an identical scope in both 25 and 30 mm format side by side.
 

Top