Zeiss or Sightron? Feedback

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by rcdinaz, Feb 1, 2012.

  1. rcdinaz

    rcdinaz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    191
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    I need feedback on a scope for a new rifle and I think I have it narrowed down to:

    Conquest 6.5-20 x 50mm Matte (RapidZ 1000)
    SIII Long Range 6-24x 50mm (30mm tube) Matte MOA-2 SF (or the mil/mil)

    I am trying to keep with a long range turret setup but go as light as is reasonbly possible to shoot 1K and in. I have Vortex and NXS scopes already and they are almost a pound heavier than either of these scopes. I have read very positive feedback on both models but I have not seen a lot of info from those who have had a chance to use them both. One comment that did stand out is it seems the Zeiss makes better use of the full range of its power all the way down to 5 and up to 20.

    I also considered the new Weaver and Bushnell Elite tactical scopes but they are very close in price and were a bit heavier. Both of these are relatively new models so there was not as much info yet.

    Thanks for any feedback!
     
  2. Rem700

    Rem700 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    110
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    The guys over at accurateshooter.com love Sightrons, they claim it's every bit as good as a Nightforce without the price tag.
     

  3. highridge1

    highridge1 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    906
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    The Zeiss 6.5-20x50 is a excellent scope .I use them to 1200 yards and they track excellent. I would go with the Zeiss they are proven and have been building scopes forever.
     
  4. rcdinaz

    rcdinaz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    191
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Both of your comments are exactly what I am hearing and seeing. I started off ready to buy the Sightron my only concern was feedback on how it performed when the scope is dialed down to 6, I believe after 9X the image quality drops from what I have read. The downside with the Zeiss was 1" tube and turret adjustments that are IPHY not available in MIL. But I have read the Zeiss image quality is very good for the entire range of the scope.

    Still leaning toward the Sightron for 30mm and the new MOA reticle looks very good. I am also watching the other thread on feedback for the Weaver Tactical scopes.

    Anyone else who has loke through both of these scopes please chime in.
    Thanks!
     
  5. bruce_ventura

    bruce_ventura Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    More info on your application would be helpful.
     
  6. freebird63

    freebird63 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    572
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    I have a sightron S3 6-24X50 with mil-dot reticle, its 2 years old. Its ok, but if I had the money today and was going to buy a good scope I have really been looking hard at the leupold Mark 4 ER. Ya they are more money then the sightron but I have owned more leupold scopes then sightron and have always been happy with leupolds. I see sightron has a new tactical line of scopes too. Good luck.
     
  7. rcdinaz

    rcdinaz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    191
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    I will take a look at the Leupold you mentioned the weight looks great my reservation w Leupold is Mil retical with MOA turrets.

    Applications details:
    Hunting deer to elk size game
    Rifle - custom 7mm RM
    Medium weight rifle 8-9lbs
    Berger VLD's in 168 & 180gr, I will probably shoot the 168's in this rifle mostly as I already have a 180 load dialed in pretty well on my 7mm Dakota.
    Looking and lighter scopes around 1.5lbs

    As I said I want to shoot out to 1K but practical range for hunting will most likely be 750 and in.
     
  8. bruce_ventura

    bruce_ventura Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    What scope do you have on the 7 mm Dakota? You must have a reason for wanting such a high mag range. Personally, I would go lower, say 4.5-14X. Thats just in case a something walks out in front of me at 30 yds and I have one second to acquire, aim and fire. Glare performance and brightness at duskl/dawn are both better for lower mag scopes.

    That said, here's what I have on Sightron: All the variable magnification SII and SIII scopes I saw at SHOT had below average to average glare performance. I specifically looked at the 6-24X50 because I wanted to see if the glare performance had improved since last year (not so). For a range scope, that's fine, but not for hunting scope. I recommend you look elsewhere.

    I have not visually inspected the Zeiss 6.5-24X50, so I can't say for sure. However, all the other Conquest scopes I have evaluated had above average glare performance. I have no concern about glare performance in the Conquest line.

    Incidentally, the Burris XTR 4-16X50 has good glare performance and good correction of off-axis aberrations. All the Weaver Super Slam and Tactical scopes I've inspected had good optical perofrmance. Something to think about.

    Lastly, what are you using for a ballistics computer? I use an iphone with Ballistic app and it gives vertical/horizontal holdoffs in moa/moa, moa/mil, mil,moa or mil/mil. For me, it would be not problem using a moa/mil scope if I had to. I would just train with it to make sure I was solid on dialing moa for elevation and holding off mils for wind. I'm really nudging you to reconsider a Leupold. VX-3 scope have generally average to good glare performance. Mark 4's are good, period.
     
  9. rcdinaz

    rcdinaz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    191
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Thanks Bruce!

    You confirmed why I hadn't jumped on buying a sightron due to other feedback I have seen.

    The 7mm Dak has a PST 6x24 on it and I have a 3.5x15 NXS this rifle will start out with. I have 3 other Burris scopes on other rifles a 300 RUM, 6x284 and a .243. The .243 is a Tikka T3 light that is very light and can be carried if I am going to be doing a lot of walking. We hunt Coues deer evey year and usually spend almost all of the day glassing and encounter a lot of far shots that can't be improved. The terrain and the smaller size of the deer make it very tough to jump them close and actualy have a good shot. This year I missed a very large deer that I tried to move closer to due to bad conditions with gusting wind. Getting closer only allowed every tree and bush around him to obscure him at least partially for the next hour and finally causing me to take a less than ideal shot.

    This rifle will fit between the heavy 7mm Dak and the others. I hope to use it on coues and antelope this next season. If the NXS works out it will stay on this rifle and the 300RUM will get new glass. I will take a hard look and the Mark 4's and the Zeiss in the next week but have found no one that carries the Weavers in my area.
     
  10. bruce_ventura

    bruce_ventura Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Nice stable of rifles. Too bad about the deer - wind is a bitch.

    I'm curious, what do you plan to use for computing ballistics? I checked my Ballistic app again. It will display IPHY/mil and a 100 other combinations.

    I looked at the Burris MTAC line too. Above average glare performance and light. AO focus is not my favorite, but it works.
     
  11. sp6x6

    sp6x6 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,043
    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    I have not seen a NF MIL in 20x, Leupold has a Mark 4 m5 turret, I got mine in 2010. mil/mil. It was spendy, could have got a used USO FOR PRICE. Might find a used one, they also have a high end m5 w/34 mm tube and locking turrets, guy on this site has one, use search and it has photos. I got mine because it was 22 oz. For my pack gun. Love the scope ffp. Reticle takes me to 825 w/200 zero. You could change zero or climb reticule and gain more range.
     
  12. rcdinaz

    rcdinaz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    191
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    sorry I was unclear the NXS is a 3.5x15.

    I am using Shooter for my ballistic software and it does have mil, moa, and iphy. My issue was everything I have is mil probably not at big a deal.

    I was looking at the leupold mk4 ert and I agree 22oz is about as good as it gets so am taking a real hard look at that one may just have to put off the purchase for a while and spend the extra dough. I have a 20moa base so I think it shouldn't be an issue to get to 1k.
     
  13. brentc

    brentc Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,610
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Optics are very subjective. I suggest you look through, run the knobs and let the scope make the decision for you. I've owned several of the products you're speaking of. Sightron, Mark 4, Zeiss Conquest, Vortex PST amongst others. I have never once had a glare problem in either of my Sightron SIIIs in field conditions (the only place I have tested them). To my eyes they are extremely clear and the tracking mechanism is flawless. The Conquest line is fantastic too. There are pros and cons for all the scopes you've listed.
     
  14. brentc

    brentc Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,610
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    The Zeiss has nothing in Mil. You can get a Sightron with mil reticle and adjustments.