Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="huntaxhunta" data-source="post: 1417285" data-attributes="member: 101742">I purchased four z5 5-25X52. The first one was better than my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 during low light. The next two were equal to but no better than than the 6500 and the next z5 was much better than the 6500 in low light only. My criteria was on what magnification setting could I see the fork antlers 131 yards away well enough to shoot at the buck growing them.I will include a small comparison of the z5 with a Bushnell 4200 4-16X40. This morning, December 13, 2011, there is fog but not so much I couldn&#039;t see the woods beyond the pump house. So of course I laid out a couple sand bags on the porch edge. (The temperature is a chilly 25 degrees.) I put the Bushnell 4200 and the Swarovski z5 on them. I set them on their lowest settings: Bushnell on 4X and Swarovski on 5X. I could not make out the antlers which are about 131 yards away with either. I could see the antlers but could not make out the forks on either side. I turned them both up to 6X. With the Bushnell I could distinguish the forks but I could not with the Swarovski. Dispite the 6500 starting at 4 1/2X and the z5 starting at 5X the field of view is larger in the z5. The field of view in both of my 4200&#039;s is larger than the z5.According to Swarovski customer service the z5 and the z6 use the same lenses. I never tried the z6 because they weighed too much for my criterial of less than 18 ounces. I didn&#039;t consider the 3 1/2-18X because it was about the same weight as the 5-25X.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="huntaxhunta, post: 1417285, member: 101742"] I purchased four z5 5-25X52. The first one was better than my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 during low light. The next two were equal to but no better than than the 6500 and the next z5 was much better than the 6500 in low light only. My criteria was on what magnification setting could I see the fork antlers 131 yards away well enough to shoot at the buck growing them. I will include a small comparison of the z5 with a Bushnell 4200 4-16X40. This morning, December 13, 2011, there is fog but not so much I couldn't see the woods beyond the pump house. So of course I laid out a couple sand bags on the porch edge. (The temperature is a chilly 25 degrees.) I put the Bushnell 4200 and the Swarovski z5 on them. I set them on their lowest settings: Bushnell on 4X and Swarovski on 5X. I could not make out the antlers which are about 131 yards away with either. I could see the antlers but could not make out the forks on either side. I turned them both up to 6X. With the Bushnell I could distinguish the forks but I could not with the Swarovski. Dispite the 6500 starting at 4 1/2X and the z5 starting at 5X the field of view is larger in the z5. The field of view in both of my 4200's is larger than the z5. According to Swarovski customer service the z5 and the z6 use the same lenses. I never tried the z6 because they weighed too much for my criterial of less than 18 ounces. I didn't consider the 3 1/2-18X because it was about the same weight as the 5-25X. [/QUOTE]

Verification