Which would you pick? New Zeiss Victory or Leica CRF 1200

[MontanaRifleman]

I have the new Zeiss and while the farthest reading I've got out of it has been about 1480 yards... mine has been able to read 1400 yards in direct cloudless mid-day sun over snow - but I'm in Nevada not North Dakota. Over the snow readings where at about 9800ft elevation. Maybe the thin air helped?


Paul

Paul,

So can you get consistant readings up to 1400 yds in most conditions? If so, it sounds like that might be better than a Swaro that sometimes gets 1800 yds and sometimes gets 1000 yds.

Thanks,

Mark

 

[WildcatB]

Paul,

So can you get consistant readings up to 1400 yds in most conditions?
Thanks,

Mark

Yes. That's on trees and rocks and cows. 1100 is the furthest I've ranged an antelope but that was hand held.

Zeiss advertises 1300 yards so it defiantly performs as advertised it just doesn't come close to Swaro's 1900-2000 yards in ideal conditions. I don't have a swaro for a direct comparison, but it sounds like the Zeiss will do better than the Swaro in sun and snow.


Paul

 

[Tikka Lover]

Well I did end up getting another one, just because nothing else can range that far. I got a smokin deal on Ebay and it seems to work better but I went ahead and shipped it to Swarovski in RI and they're forwarding it on to Austria just to give it a once over before hunting season. I love there customer service!!

Hey twotwenty, glad to hear it is still shooting straight. That NP-R1 is sweet.

 

[BIG MO]

I initially purchased the leica from cabelas. I used it for 3 weeks and it is a very nice piece of equipment. I loved the compact size and the precise aiming square. The range was very impressive also. It would range a brown piece of cardboard at 1000yds. Then my coues hunting buddies asked if I checked out the new Zeiss. Shoot, in all my research I just did not come across any information on this unit before I purchased the leica.

After talking to some folks who used them side by side ranging coues deer and such in the desert southwest, the consensus was the zeiss had a couple more hundred yards ranging distance on non-reflective targets, clarity of optics was close, but the zeiss has a wider field of view and a little more magnification. The aiming reticle on the zeiss is probably too large and not as precise as the leica. The zeiss is significantly larger than the leica. In all out ranging ability the swarovski is king, next the zeiss, and close behind is the leica.

Jeeze, this is my third rangefinder and I really didn't want to expose myself to upgrading again in the future. You need all you can get to obtain a read on these itty bitty coues deer but I was already pushing the budget envelope.

So, I went back to Cabelas and they had one Zeiss in stock. I think it was the first one they had. None of the staff knew much about it. Long story longer, it was $100 more and they swapped me out. After using it in the field at my top secret desert 1000yd range my opinion is the Zeiss has more range on non reflective targets than what I experienced with the leica.

The larger field of view on the zeiss and 8x is advantagous. The aiming reticle and readout on the zeiss is brighter and much easier to see than the leica. The aimng reticle on the zeiss is too big. The leica's small square is superior. The zeiss is big. Good luck getting it to fit into your shirt pocket like the leica. Neither rangefinder is equipped to accept a tripod adapter. It is easier to steady the big zeiss on top of your tripod or spotting scope for extreme ranging. I feel the Leica is easier to steady and aim freehand than the zeiss.

The swaro is probably the big dog on the block, but I think this zeiss will do everything I ask of it for a little less $$$$. For me and the hunting I do here in the southwest it was worth the $100 to gain a couple hundred yards of reach. My thanks to Cabelas for swapping me out without blinking an eye.