Swarovski z8i 3.5-28x50 thoughts?

[Rich Coyle]

That Swaro must have been really bad because I've had a Bushnell 4.5-30 6500 and that glass was junk anywhere past 25x.

Yes, my first one was like that. Bushnell had a policy: They gave a full year to like it or a full refund. They even included the original shipping insurance in the check.

After a few months, like with the Swarovski, I tried again. It was and is great. Now I have three.

I don't know why you would keep anything that is a junker.

 

[LeddSlinger]

Yes, my first one was like that. Bushnell had a policy: They gave a full year to like it or a full refund. They even included the original shipping insurance in the check.

After a few months, like with the Swarovski, I tried again. It was and is great. Now I have three.

I don't know why you would keep anything that is a junker.

Yeah I didn't keep it long. Bought the scope used so didn't have any option of sending it back to Bushnell. It wasn't even useable on 30x. Really milky and blurry. Poor low light performance as well.

I don't know about the z8i, but I know the Swaro x5i, 5-25x50 is highly renowned for its superb optical quality.

 

[wasskeet]

IMHO, just make sure you order one from Doug at Cameraland, or another dealer who might likely let you look at it (not mounted of course) with the privilege of sending back if it does not meet all your expectations. Give um' a call and see what they can do.

 

[Rich Coyle]

wasskeet,

The first one came from Doug. The next two I bought from another company which charged less. Neither of those were as good as the first one. I tried again from another company and got one that was barely behind the Bushnell's glass but about four ounces lighter. It had the ballistic turret. I practiced a lot with it and the range finder. I used it for four hunts. Between the first and second hunt I had to send it in for repairs. The same thing again after the third hunt. Both repair sheets informed me they had to replace the erector. I sold it on line with full discloser of its history.

 

[Pdvdh]

Bummer. So far (5yrs on one) my 3 Swaros have held together. All on muzzle brake equipped heavy recoiling rifles. Nice glass.

Your luck with Swaros mirrors mine with Burger bullets. They were the greatest thing since sliced bread, was the most common sermon preached.

I tried them and concluded I was the unluckiest Burger bullet hunter in North America. Burger, by the way, is what I was left retrieving on any muscle hit game, provided the bullet expanded. The ones that failed to expand, even more miserable.

 

[Kelly1278]

Well I ended up going with a march 2.5-25x52 with mtr-4 reticle . I think im going to like it

 

[Pdvdh]

So we have the all-clear to continue hijacking your thread?

 

[Bullmark]

Kelly1278,

I don't want to burst your bubble but I just returned one without mounting it. The way I check scopes is open them, adjust the reticle by putting the parallax on infinity, adjusting the magnification to max and thengetting the reticle as sharp as I can. Then I compare it to what I now have: A Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50. First let me say most scopes' glass do not match its clarity on the optics chart at 127 yards. Not even the Bushnell 6500 2 1/2-16X. I bought four and sold them because I am spoiled. Some that have better glass are March 2 1/2-25X52, Nightforce NSX 12-42X56, a Swarovski z6i 2.3-18X56, and a Schmidt & Bender 12-50X. I forgot its objective size. It was definitely the best, but the Nightforce was extremely good. Notable scopes that did not match it were four Swarovski z5 5-25X52 and a z6 5-30X50. Now I can add to the very long and growing list, of maybe fifty pages of notes, the Swarovski z8i 3.5-28X50. The Leupold VX-6 4-24 was slightly better than the Swarovskis that didn't make it and about the same as the Bushnell.

I really wanted the 3.5-28X50 to replace my Bushnell. But there is no way I will settle for a scope, at any price, that is not sharper on the chart than the Bushnell 6500. It looks like I will put a March on the new rifle. They are $700 or $800 cheaper so I guess I can use the savings on Hammer Bullets.

I must say that's an interesting way of determining the overall value of a scope. And if it works for you, then I'd continue to do it. In my humble opinion it's a contrived way to create an unusual set of circumstances that wouldn't likely transfer into any practical usage.
Most regular guys, like me, choose to set the diopter one time at the lowest power and leave it alone. If you start adjusting the diopter at every setting, it's going to alter the the clarity for your eyesight.
Why not adjust it according to your Vision, and use the parallax based on the actual yardage, as intended and according to every scope's manual that I've ever owned??
Ive been a junky for high end optics for a long time, and currently run a Z8i 2.3-18x56 on one of my rifles and there's a reason it won every award possible when it was introduced a couple yrs ago. WHEN USED CORRECTLY, it's optical quality across the board is amazing. I'm also running a S&B Exos and a Polar, and recently mounted a new Leica Magnus on my muzzleloader. For my eyes, and apparently a lot of others too, the Z8i is tough to beat. Those other 3 are very close....almost too close to say, but in the end I would choose it, if based entirely on optical quality.
The other 3 have a more robust, tactical build, and feel more indestructible. I like the turrets more also. But they are heavier.
Just my take. And I'd wager the Z8i would win 100% of every blind "taste test" against anything Bushnell has ever produced......that's not a shot at Bushnell, as their glass has gotten much better.....but still has a long way to go to bolster any claims of being on the level of most European optics.

 

[Cred1]

This has all turned out quite civilized...I'm glad, I don't post much and stop reading when things get silly. I shot the march 2.5-25x52 with mtr-4 reticle this morning atop my new sako s20 6.5. Zero'd in 2 shots at one hundred, thought what the hey I'll try the 875. Ding. Ding, ding. Ding ding ding. So much fun I dialed up the 730 yard small plate. Ping, ping ping ping. Cranked it back up to 84 clicks for 875.... 20 or so rounds later, big smile. I was just going to do a quick site in today....
Grabbed the Bartlien TIkka 6.5 with the NX8. Had Strelok set to mils so I missed the first few..un-stupided myself, then more clanging' fun. Two little wisps of clouds were my wind flags. They sat there without a stir. Dead calm. Unusual up on that ridge.
Didn't have the Swaro's today. March seems to have better colors than NX8. It's really green up here now. March is more finicky focus. I say focus not parallax because unless your're trying to count details, there is no parallax effect on any of theses scopes past 200 unless you're way out of focus. March at 25 and NX8 at 32 both showed plenty of detail and bullet splash. Clipped a branch at 700 or so on the way to 875 and saw it snap and fall, then a steel splash, then a ding a little later. Beautiful optics make life worth living. I hope you all love whatever you have and enjoy it as much as I do. Come to think of it popping squirrels by the barn with my dad's ruger 10/22 gave me the same feeling. Guess we're all just chasing the Dragon, but it's a peaceful easy feeling and it's not even bad for you...
You will love the March's capability of zooming in on a Caterpillar at 12 yards and seeing what color his eyes are. Useless? Perhaps. Surprising how much you'll do it? Definitely. I gotta say there's no flies on the NX8. I was watching a bird at 20 yards on 32x the other day, waiting for the fog to clear out, and was watching the inside of his mouth thingy all white and pink while he warbled...just like Planet Earth on the big screen.
If you love optics and can swing it in any way, you have to own a March one day. For the money the 2.5-25x50 is 60ish percent the price of z8 and theta, but still 100% world class optic in it's own way. It's a hard toss up between the NF and the March, but it would be like choosing between a Harley and one of those new BMW GS's...real tough. But thinking of that decision makes scopes sound cheap! Sell your extra pistols, buy some optics, I did!
There is no right or wrong at this level of optics. Pick one and know you have one of the best.
Ping ping ping what a morning. Going back out tomorrow...

 

[Cred1]

Is this what they call hi-jacking a thread? Seriously, I still can't find whatever a "sticky" is up on top somewhere when people mention it...swear to God. I sincerely apologize if I high jacked! I usually just read all this stuff, you all are certainly more knowledgeable than me, and I really appreciate this forum. I can offer that you are going to love than March...sorry again if I muffed up.

 

[Rich Coyle]

Bullmark,

I don't understand what you are saying about adjusting.

 

[Bullmark]

What I'm trying to say is your diopter should be adjusted, for your eyes, one time and one time only. If done properly, you should have a focused reticle through the entire mag range (lowest to highest). This applies to most all scopes with a wide mag range. Things are slightly different with a 1x scope like a 1-4 or 1-6, but that's a different subject altogether.
That's the reason a lot of scopes have a locking mechanism on the diopter.....and binocs are the same.
You then use your parallax to focus the target in your FOV.
Constantly changing the diopter will cause all sorts of headaches, as your eyes will force something to focus. That's why when setting the diopter, you shouldn't stare at the reticle for longer than a couple seconds. The drill is: Turn the diopter all the way clockwise. While pointed at something neutral, like a solid color wall or the sky, glance at the reticle then look away, turn the diopter back counter clockwise a bit and glance again.....once you glance and it's focused sharp edge to edge, you are done.
If your scope doesn't have a locking diopter, I'd make a small mark with something harmless, and make sure it doesn't get adjusted unintentionally.
Obviously it's vitally important to having a proper diopter setting along with your parallax dialed to the distance of your target if you wanna achieve the best a scope has to offer.
I hope that helps. I did things wrong for a long time in my younger days.
My son has horrible vision and mine is 20/20. There is such a difference in the settings when we try to shoot the same rifle, we stopped trying.

 

[Bullmark]

Is this what they call hi-jacking a thread? Seriously, I still can't find whatever a "sticky" is up on top somewhere when people mention it...swear to God. I sincerely apologize if I high jacked! I usually just read all this stuff, you all are certainly more knowledgeable than me, and I really appreciate this forum. I can offer that you are going to love than March...sorry again if I muffed up.

I don't think u high jacked it. These threads often start out as one thing and grow into something else. You kept the topic in the ballpark, that's the main thing.
If you had drifted into why you missed that big 5x5 or how to tell your wife that you don't want her hunting w/ you.....that would be an cer-ti-fied hijack.

 

[Rich Coyle]

Bullmark,

Thanks for taking time to respond with such clarity. My inability to communicate comes through again. What you described is what I always do with new scopes.

I guess we can thank Cred1 for resurrecting's a dead thread. He didn't add anything I didn't already know. He trotted out some very old accusations. It's like the wind in the trees. There's a sound but nothing is being communicated.

We all see through scopes with our own eyes. What we see is the only thing important to each individual. At least it should be. I guess some folks are impressed with the the amount they pay for a scope. My friend with the z6 5-30X50 bought it because it cost a lot and kept it because he was suppose to like it. Once he realized, with his own eyes, it was not as good as a "cheep" Bushnell and didn't have to keep it to impressed others he put it up for sale the next day. He became free.

We should all be free of not trying to be one of the "cool kids" from high school. My wildcat cartridges are for my pleasure. If they impress someone, that's okay. If they don't I couldn't care less because I made them for me.