Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Swarovski z8i 3.5-28x50 thoughts?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Rich Coyle" data-source="post: 2205842" data-attributes="member: 70559"><p><h4>[USER=85046]Kelly1278[/USER],</h4><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rich Coyle, post: 2205842, member: 70559"] [HEADING=3][USER=85046]Kelly1278[/USER],[/HEADING] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Swarovski z8i 3.5-28x50 thoughts?
Top