Scope Comparison

[DrMike]

Well, I made it to the range at 0 dark thirty this morning. I wanted to test several scopes for light transmission at first light. The sun doesn't peek over the eastern hills until around 8:50 at the present. The range is in a valley, so the actual full sun is somewhat later than at other sites. At 7:30, it was still quite dark. I set up to test three scopes at that time. I had a Kahles 3-9 X 42, a VX6 2-12 X 42 and a Swarovski Z6 1.7-10 X 42. I first set the power ring at the highest setting for each scope, focusing on brush at 600 yards. I could clearly make out the smallest branches with the Swarovski, and I could see the larger branches with the VX6 and the Kahles. I then, posted the USAF 1951 Optics resolution test chart at 100 yards. In the dim light, I was able to clearly see the resolution -2/4 with the VX6 at 12 power. With the Kahles set at 9 power, I could define resolution -2/6. With the Swarovski set at 10 power, I could clearly define -1/1 at that time. Clearly, the Swarovski proved superior in that early light to either of the other scopes. The Kahles trumped the VX6. After the sun was up, even in the shade, the scopes were indistinguishable in terms of their resolution at ~600 yards. I like the VX6 a lot, and I like the Kahles even better, but I am positively delighted with the Swarovski.

 

[nvbroncrider]

Thanks Mike. I think you have done me in. I was leaning that way pretty hard so I might as well go all the way and do it right the first time. After I buy another wheel line for the hayfield the Z6 is next!!!

 

[DrMike]

I'll undoubtedly be going out in the morning light to look through a few other scopes shortly. I want to test the Huskemaw and my Zeiss Diavari as well as the VX3 to see what they are like in that semi-darkness. However, at this point, the Swarovski is clearly superior. By 9 a.m., they are all similar. The VX6 is an excellent scope, and for the money, it may be a real stand out among scopes. There is no significant flare, no fuzziness at the margins, and it is easy on the eyes. However, the resolution in semi-darkness clearly belongs to the European glass.

 

[BK]

I've lost track of the inventory at Mike's House of Fine Euroglass. Do you have any of the Swaro Z3 or Z5 scopes?

 

[big rifle man]

Doc, I'm very interested in seeing what you come up with in regards to the Zeiss Diavari. I've been using my 1.5X6 for three years now and none of my other scopes compare with it.

 

[257 Ackley]

Thanks for taking the time to post Mike...good info. It just confirms what my old(er) eyes have been telling me for awhile, though I haven't had a chance to look through a VX6 yet.

 

[SJB358]

Great comparisons Mike. I did a test kinda like that yesterday in Bass Pro, the had a Z5 3-18, Z3 3-10, a 3.5x10 Conquest and some VX3's. The Swaro was king of detail while actually looking into the same dark recesses. They are all nice but the Swarovski was just excellent.

 

[Africa Huntress]

Well, I made it to the range at 0 dark thirty this morning. I wanted to test several scopes for light transmission at first light. The sun doesn't peek over the eastern hills until around 8:50 at the present. The range is in a valley, so the actual full sun is somewhat later than at other sites. At 7:30, it was still quite dark. I set up to test three scopes at that time. I had a Kahles 3-9 X 42, a VX6 2-12 X 42 and a Swarovski Z6 1.7-10 X 42. I first set the power ring at the highest setting for each scope, focusing on brush at 600 yards. I could clearly make out the smallest branches with the Swarovski, and I could see the larger branches with the VX6 and the Kahles. I then, posted the USAF 1951 Optics resolution test chart at 100 yards. In the dim light, I was able to clearly see the resolution -2/4 with the VX6 at 12 power. With the Kahles set at 9 power, I could define resolution -2/6. With the Swarovski set at 10 power, I could clearly define -1/1 at that time. Clearly, the Swarovski proved superior in that early light to either of the other scopes. The Kahles trumped the VX6. After the sun was up, even in the shade, the scopes were indistinguishable in terms of their resolution at ~600 yards. I like the VX6 a lot, and I like the Kahles even better, but I am positively delighted with the Swarovski.

Good report, thank you sir.

I was hoping that you had a Z5 with you so as to see if you felt as we do, that the VX6 rivals it, doesnt catch it, but is right there.

This is pretty much where we are as well as far as the Z6 is concerned, it is at the top. however we also feel the Zeiss Diavari and Schmidt and Bender Summit are there as well. We dont have a new Kahles and that could change our opinion, but we found it to better the VX6, but not the Z6, Diavari, or Summit.

That is just a great report Dr. Mike, thank you for sharing your results

Again to the gentleman that was considering the VX6, or the Z5. The VX6 is an excellent scope for the money and I would get it instead of the Z5, especially since it costs less. However as I stated before my husband is just the opposite, he would pay a little more than what the Z5 costs to get the Z6. But IMHO all three of them will work well for you

 

[FOTIS]

Great report Doc!

 

[alaska100]

Well, I made it to the range at 0 dark thirty this morning. I wanted to test several scopes for light transmission at first light. The sun doesn't peek over the eastern hills until around 8:50 at the present. The range is in a valley, so the actual full sun is somewhat later than at other sites. At 7:30, it was still quite dark. I set up to test three scopes at that time. I had a Kahles 3-9 X 42, a VX6 2-12 X 42 and a Swarovski Z6 1.7-10 X 42. I first set the power ring at the highest setting for each scope, focusing on brush at 600 yards. I could clearly make out the smallest branches with the Swarovski, and I could see the larger branches with the VX6 and the Kahles. I then, posted the USAF 1951 Optics resolution test chart at 100 yards. In the dim light, I was able to clearly see the resolution -2/4 with the VX6 at 12 power. With the Kahles set at 9 power, I could define resolution -2/6. With the Swarovski set at 10 power, I could clearly define -1/1 at that time. Clearly, the Swarovski proved superior in that early light to either of the other scopes. The Kahles trumped the VX6. After the sun was up, even in the shade, the scopes were indistinguishable in terms of their resolution at ~600 yards. I like the VX6 a lot, and I like the Kahles even better, but I am positively delighted with the Swarovski.

thank you, good report

 

[DrMike]

I will not hesitate to recommend any of these three scopes that I tested. One must determine what they require and purchase accordingly. I do not feel restricted with the VX6 and I do believe it is a great bargain. Nevertheless, it is impossible to dismiss the quality of the European glass when speaking of those moments preceding dawn and following the setting of the sun. I have no doubt from previous comparisons of Swarovski and Zeiss Diavari glass that they are equal to one another. I do not have access to Schmidt and Bender, but from what I know of their reputation, I would be greatly surprised if their scope was somehow inferior to the other European glass.

 

[WYcoyote]

Great real world test on some real world hunting scopes.
Thanks for sharing Dr. Mike.

 

[SJB358]

Man, that just upped the SCOPE ANTE for the next rifle to get glass!

 

[Oldtrader3]

Thanks for the review on the VX6 Leupold scope, DrMike. I am also happy that the older Kahles 3-9x42 scope stacks up as well against these newer scopes as it does. I just wish that they still were making these models or medium prices scopes.

Zeiss has announced the sale of their new Conquest Duralyt scopes also with 30mm tubes and power ranges that include a 2-8x42 and a 3-12x50 scope selling for under $1000. There are lots of good products out there now on the market in the medium price range that have excellent optical performance for shooters and hunters.

 

[300WSM]

I have done similar tests and I can say without a doubt the overall winner is Swarovski. Scope or Binocs doesn't matter, the Austrians have the winner!