What are your opinions on the swarovski optics? I bought the A line yesterday and It is a nice scope,I'll give it that.But..I compaired it to a $100.00 simmons and I can tell that its a little brighter and a little clearer but I just can't see that much money difference.What do you guys think?

Well, either you cannot see well or you still have the lens caps on the Swarovski. Just kidding!

I have looked at lots of scopes and spend lots of time looking in a microscope at work, so I feel like I can tell the difference in good optics.

I have never seen a Simmons worth having. Heck, someone GAVE me one once because it would not hold zero, it was a piece of junk. So long!

Put both of those scopes on rifles and get them out in the field and do some hunting with them then let us know if can tell any difference.

R F

TNBrian,
The Swaroski scopes and binocs are top line, but like most European scopes are a little heavy and bulky to my mind....and bloody expensive...

Based mostly on cost, and to a lesser degree asthetics, I have opted for Leupold over the years and I have never had any reason to regret that decision.

I presently own 5 Swarovski scopes, EL binos and an AT80HD spotting scope and have had other Swaros in the past without any problem. Compared to my Leupolds Vari X-III, there's only a slight difference in bright sunlight, that is. When light fades, at dusk or dawn, the Swaros will give you an extra shooting 1/2 hour at both ends. Expensive they are but you get the quality you pay for.

[ 07-12-2002, 19:01: Message edited by: Andr� Mertens ]

I just got back from a vacation in Yellowstone. I was using my Zeiss bino's and seeing Elk, Wolf,and Grizzly at long range when others with cheap glass were saying where are they.I think the old saying of YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR holds true with Scopes and Bino's. I have leupolds on most rifles because I can't afford any better but if I could I would.

Rob, did you get smoked-out? There's a 4,000 acre blaze on the west side of the park... apparently it's pretty smoky around the OF lodge... got up this morning and could smell smoke... the winds must have come out of the SW overnight.

I'm not particualrly fond of European scopes for the reasons Ray mentioned. I prefer Leupold. For Bino's, however, the Europeans make the only one's to buy IMO. I particualrly ike the Swaro's and Leica's, though there's nothing wrong with Zeiss! Rob's description of the difference between quality bino's and cheap to mid-range bino's is spot-on.

Brad

Andr� Mertens

I agree with you to 100%

I have only Swarovski's at this moment.

Performance comes at price, ofter there are no free lunches

/ JOHAN

Does anyone else think most european scopes tend to have too short of an eye relief.

Maybe my shooting style (maybe poor), but scope-eye is what makes me want to flinch rather than recoil.

I like 3.5" min on a 30-06! Is it just me?

I have ziess binoculars but only swarovski riflescopes.I have all 3x10x42 a-lines which are as light and compact as leupolds but are clearer and brighter.In canada the 3x10x42 runs $1150 while the leupold 3.5x10x50 runs $850 so the price difference is not all that much.I have owned leupolds and ziess 1" scopes but prefer the swarovski's.

I have had a pair of 10x42 SLCs and they have been the best addition of hunting gear I have. Exceptional clarity and definition in low light and are well worth the extra$. Warranty is first rate and they will see a pile more use as I use them almost daily. Best money I ever spent.
BR

I did a direct comparison between the Swarovski EL 8.5x42s and Bushnell Legend 10x42s a couple months back. I own the Legends and I had purchased the ELs for my step-father. I compared them at mid-day, at dusk, and also several times when I got home from work between 3-4 a.m. After all I've heard about Zeiss and Swarovski, I thought that after the test I would end up owning a pair....but I haven't.

During the day, I couldn't tell the difference which didn't surprise me.

At dusk, I didn't really see noticable difference which did surprise me.

Between 3-4 a.m. I could only see a MINUTE difference, which blew me away! When I would look into the creek bottom behind my house, I could see a little more definition to the leaves but not enough to be able to tell what that "difference" in definition was. I could see everything I looked at clearly with either set of binocs. And that was in the middle of the night!!!! So.....for my purposes, the Legends suit me fine. If I made lots of money, I would own the Swaros because I'm sure they're the finest quality around. That is exactly why I purchased them for my step-fater. If you don't make LOTS of money and you own Swarovski or Zeiss binoculars, I hope you don't have very many hobbies!!!

To me the big thing here is how much time you spend behind them. I spend a lot of time between guiding and hunting and scouting for myself.

Personally for me I would not be without my Swarovski's. I have the 7x42's and the 15x56's. They are world class and them some. Expensive sure you bet, but over time as much as I use them I would not be without them. The only other pair I really like are the Leica's, although I believe they are even yet a bit heavier. For my eyes the Zeiss do not work for me.

Swarovski is a fantastic company. Last fall I was off guidng for 5 months. After being gone for about a month I got a fair bit of dust up under the focusing wheel of my 7's and they needed some help. (these have seen a ton of use over the years so finally having something to deal with is ok with me-especially being as I mainly caused the problem by just leaving them on the dash)

Anyway In called their 1-800 number on a Monday morning in Sept from small town Wyo. The gal on the phone was super to work with (note I actually got someone to talk with) a real pleasure! She asked if the town I was in had a fed-x and hard to believe but they did, she said to overnight them, they'd cover the cost. She'd send me a loaner pair till I got mine back, over night of course. But the outfitter had a pair of 10x42 Zeiss so I declined on the loaner pair. She said they'd get em back to me asap. Well I am thinking I sure hope I get em back by Turkey Day cause I leave for Mexico the day after to guide for 2 months.

So here is the deal I sent them on Monday-Friday morn I get them back to me, over nighted of course! That means I sent them on Monday they got there on Tuesday sometime, they worked on em Wednesday, fed-x'd them back to me on Thursday and I got them on Friday. They looked new- I mean I couldn't believe the way they had cleaned em up. Also was never so glad to get em back after a week of the Zeiss (like I said they do not fit my eyes).

So to me if you hunt a lot, hard and perhaps far-pony up to the bar, save for a while if you have to sell a couple of guns or cars if you have to but by all means get yourself a quality pair of glass. Not that I feel strongly about this or anything-grins.

"GET TO THE HILL" (and take good glass)

Dog

Mark, the quality of Swaro's compared to Leica's, your story and other's like it, are why I went with Swaro's... I've not looked back.

BTW, are you back from MN? Call me... Sunday p.m. or Monday a.m. or p.m. would be perfect to go up to the ranch for some yote calling... if Anita'll let you go of course (grin)~!

Me

PS... the gun show is this weekend... wanna go?

Brad, we stayed at Roosevelt lodge did our spotting of game in the lamar valley most of the game animals were seen on the other side of the valley I'm guessing 1000 yds, not any smoke.My Bino's are East German Zeiss 7X50 and cost $25.00 best deal I ever made.

I dont know why I am going to do this, again, but all you have to do is look at the data on several scopes, and what people are going to say about the European scopes and weight, bulkiness, ect is pure bullshit.

I have posted all the facts on several scopes before and proven people wrong on several occasions about the actual facts of a european scope VS. a Leupold.

Ray- Did you actually read what I had posted before? Why won't you sit down and actually look at whats infront of you for a change?

"TNBrian,
The Swaroski scopes and binocs are top line, but like most European scopes are a little heavy and bulky to my mind....and bloody expensive...

Based mostly on cost, and to a lesser degree asthetics, I have opted for Leupold over the years and I have never had any reason to regret that decision."

Are you still comparing 30MM european scopes to one inch Leupolds? Cant bother to compare like scopes again?

Or is it that your opinions are based on facts from 20+ years ago?

"Does anyone else think most european scopes tend to have too short of an eye relief.

Maybe my shooting style (maybe poor), but scope-eye is what makes me want to flinch rather than recoil.

I like 3.5" min on a 30-06! Is it just me? "

Yes many european scopes lacked eye relief compared to the Leupold, but that has all changed. They are much better then what used to be aval, and even I will admit that I would be hesitant using an older european scope.

I am not doubting the quality of the Leupold, or that any body should nor shouldnt use them. I dont really care, but dont go around saying they are bulky, ect. Too heavy... Thats all BS & you know it.

I really think its just resintment to the Europeans. After all, Americans get off their duffs and hunt, while European hunters sit in a stand all day and night, just when the AVERAGE American hunter goes to buy his new tree stand with a foot rest no less! (SARCASM)

The new EL Swaros have been said to be the best binocs off all time.

[ 07-13-2002, 19:30: Message edited by: Buell ]

Guys I guess it really don't matter now whether I like it or not.I went back to the gun dealer in less than 24 hrs and he wants $50.00 to take the scope back!!I never mounted it and it does not have a flaw on it.He said I looked through it for 2 days and I made up my mind thats what I wanted so $50.00 was the best he could do.I told him You can't hold a damn scope in your hand and look throught it and tell anything about it.You have to compair it to something on a steady rest.By the way,The gun dealer is Crowders guns in Johnson city Tn.Don't ever buy from that crook!!

Next time try http://www.swfa.com for your optics. Chris has been great to deal with! They have the best prices I've found too. If I see a better price, all I have to do is let him know and he takes care of the rest.

Nebraska-

One of the best reasons to buy Swaro or any other quality optik isnt always about what you see from a few quick glances. Try looking through a cheap pair of binos for hours a day and see how your head feels....and your ability to spot game...

I did get a good price on it.It was $649.95.I looked around for a while and thats by far the cheapest that I found.Everywhere else was around $779.00 and $769.00.Another thing...I was looking at the scope earlier today and I noticed that it has got a small scratch on the lense.I figure that he knew that from the start and thats why he is being an ass about taking it back.I know for sure that I didn't do it.I have only had it out of the box twice.

Leica makes a small pair of binocs that can fit into the front pocket of a shirt. Take a string/rope thats flexible and attach it to the binocs, and then make a loop at the other end. Then with the loop attach that to the shirt on the 3rd button down from the top or so, whatever lines up best... The Leicas trinovid 8x20 when hunting in more confined areas. They are light and reliable. I usually hunt on my uncles property in area 456 (I think) of Mich. (top of LP) and they will work great for that. I dont own a bigger pair of binocs then that, because I dont need them. Perhaps if I were going to go say hunting where sighting would need to take places at .5 miles or more I would try to get my hands on a good spotting scope.



[ 07-14-2002, 21:45: Message edited by: Buell ]

Three of us spent a couple of hours on top of a damned big rock pile in Zimbabwe last September comparing binoculars from an hour before sundown to an hour after. We had my Swaro EL 8.5s, Zeiss Victory 8s and a Leica 8X glass. We decided that all three were pretty much equivalent in optical performance, but the Leica glass was heavy. The Zeiss Victory glass was the lightist. The Swaro EL had the best color rendition.

I have read some reviews from the birders that the Nikon Venturer glass is excellent too.

The best money you can spend on optics is what it costs to buy a copy of John Barsness' Optics for the Hunter. He has some really great data on scopes, binocs and spotting scopes.

jim dodd

Jim, the Nikon Venture is the standard that the birder sites compare everything to, including the Swarovski EL's. The EL's have been the only binos that come close or surpass them. I have looked thru a pair of EL and they are amazing, have never tried the Nikons. The prices are certainly comparable in the $1500 range for the Nikons. The birders seem to love them.

[ 07-16-2002, 03:27: Message edited by: Customstox ]

Buell: Take a look at the following rifle collections and notice all the European scopes used there.

http://www.serveroptions.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=reply;f=2;t=002202

Americans use a great number of Leupold scopes, and a few Japanese and European scopes. Buying Leupold and other non-European scopes has nothing to do with resentment, but much with practicality. For example, my Leupold and Burris scopes gather plenty of light for my type of hunting in Alaska. These scopes are mounted on hunting rifles, and these in turn I view as "tools" or "working" rifles, not rifles that I fall in love with and kiss goodnight. The resentment has to do with the differences between European and Americans in relation to politics and other subjects.

Buell,
What do you mean that 30mm scopes cannot be compared to one inchers?
I understand that the only difference between them is that the 30mm one holds a reticle erector of a larger diameter, therefore allowing for a larger room for correction.
I also understand that the diameter of the beam of light that travels through the tube of the scope is only a few milimeters in diameter and never fills the 30mm or the 1 inch diameter of the tube.
Now, when you think of European hunters maybe you should stop thinking on the beer bellied mercedez benz folk sitting on a high seat carrying 8x56 binos and a 7mm Super Express Von Hoffe 10.5 lb rifle with a 2.5-10x56 scope.
Or maybe you can spend a few days chasing chamois in the Alps. That should make you change your mind. (A SARCASM TOO)
Regards,
Montero

. After all, Americans get off their duffs and hunt, while European hunters sit in a stand all day and night, just when the AVERAGE American hunter goes to buy his new tree stand with a foot rest no less! (SARCASM)

Montero, you are exactly correct. The lens diameters and design have nothing to with the tube dimensions. It is all to do with geometry on the objective lense, scope length, desired scope geometry etc. The larger tube gives greater cross hair adjustments, end of story. I am afraid, as you have surmised, that he is actually from the United States. He seems to like to defame any nationality so at first I thought he might be French (joking). Maybe we can find a country just for him. In the meantime I apologize for his arrogance, we arent all like that.

Chic Worthing

[ 07-17-2002, 03:08: Message edited by: Customstox ]

I've tried to convince myself on several occasions to purchase a set of Swarovski binoculars, especially the ELs. I've even used them on hunting trips that included Swarovski executives as clients; so I've had my chance to compare these binoculars under actual hunting conditions to other binoculars.

The problem is, I've never come to the conclusion that any Swarovski binocular (ELs included) is as well-built or exhibits the optical performance under all conditions that Leica binoculars do. From all standpoints of consideration - from true color rendition to absolutely precise focusing - it is my considered opinion that Leica produces a superior product.

AD

AD

If you are intrested in a Premium Bino I would advise you to go and get Zeiss/Swaro and Leica all together and see what works best for your eyes.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

Just cant lay off it eh Chic?

I said in my other posts the 30MM scopes pass more light through them. From what perspective you view that comment in will either make me look like I dont know what Im talking about or that, in what this case is, the 30MM scopes are usually made by superior European scope makers which produce scopes that have more light going through them.

I have not had the oppurtunity to use Swaros in the field, but hope to some time soon. For now Leica is what I am going to trust for me. They also make some of the best camera equipment in the world, like the R8, m6/7 ect. Plus some very nice P&S cameras.

Yes, there are some truly awesome hunters that come from the US. People who do things right. There are also a hell of a lot more shooters out there who sit in a tree stand all day. A rugged ass elk hunter usually may get to hunt a few times a year if he is really lucky, once likely. Very few people get to head to Alaska and hunt the incredible animals there. What is my point? If you're going to hunt incredible animals at a sometimes incredible price, use the best you can and not just because its made in the US. If you cant afford a top dollar scope thats fine, but dont sit there and try to argue about their effectiveness.

Ray-

You are the type of person that views the European scopes as something of a novelty almost. Like if you use one you're a showoff or something, but when someone uses a working mans scope, ie. Leupold, they are a real man who doesnt kiss their guns. Yes, ive been known to cradle my favorite rifle just because I do love it.

Chic- I believe the 30MM and one inch scopes to be in a different class, yes. Why- they are different types of scopes, no? Ray, as do you, like to compare them together for your own purposes, such as when a month or more Atkinson started saying they are heavier (30MM euro scopes) then the Leupold. Well thats going to be rather obvious isnt it. I could sit there and compare the one inch Euro scopes to the LPS all day and say the Leupold is heavier. Whats the point of that, other then to wrongly prove my case?

Montero-

If you had read the last big debate on this you would have read into what I was saying a skosh better. That line you quoated from me was actually what someone else wrote in, I added the last line. Thats why I put in sarcasm. I dont think Europeans hunt any more off a stand then American hunters do. Maybe its just the thought of you hunting the great wild west for Mulies in the high country, then you sit back and laugh at the thought of these beer bellied european hunters sitting in a stand at night waiting for a porker to come out. Then you wake up.

The fattest people in the world that I have seen come from the USA. More beer bellies here, thats a fact.

Whatever URL that was is wrong- only brings up the reply page.

So you dont like big front bells. What does that have to do with rifle scope selection?

Ok your rifle isnt a display peice. I would hunt in Africa with that rifle SCI sold for 277,000 dollars and ding the hell out of it, if it happened. Why? Because a gun is a gun is a gun.

Ok Ray, so you can see out of your scope by 10AM. What if you could see out of your scope by 9,15 and saw a 70In moose in the balance? Maybe that big belled S&B could be of use after all?

Just something to think about. I have said it over and over- use what you want to use...

Try this one (look at the gun collections):
http://www.accuratereloading.com/gallery.html

quote:

---

So you don't like big front bells. What does that have to do with rifle scope selection?

---A scope with a large lens up in front can easily be damaged when carried in a scabbard, so I avoid those big ugly and expensive European scopes.

Ok your rifle isn't a display peice. I would hunt in Africa with that rifle SCI sold for 277,000 dollars and ding the hell out of it, if it happened. Why? Because a gun is a gun is a gun.

----OK, I don't hunt in Africa, nor do I care to hunt there. "A gun is a gun" to you, but to me it is a tool, and I can't afford a 277, 000 Euros, or maybe 277,000 pesos ($277,000 is just too much).

Ok Ray, so you can see out of your scope by 10AM.

---I said "10:00PM"

What if you could see out of your scope by 9,15 and saw a 70In moose in the balance? Maybe that big belled S&B could be of use after all?

----Not problem with me. Any moose "in the balance" I let go, because to me a "moose in the balance" is a moose ready to walk in the water. I don't shoot it there. I have killed moose as late as 9:30 PM (on land) . But if you really know about moose hunting in Alaska, you want to shoot it at 9:00AM if it was possible; that way you can spend all day skinning, quartering, and packing it out before nightfall before the bears start chasing after the meat. That moose killed at 9:30PM took two of us from 10:00PM to 3:00AM to quarter and load on our ATV's.

Just something to think about. I have said it over and over- use what you want to use...

---Yep, I agree with you. I use Leupold.

---

[ 07-18-2002, 09:26: Message edited by: Ray, Alaska ]

Ive talked to Saeed through email about this issue. I dont know what everyones problem on here is but they dont seem to get that I dont care what other people use. However, I am not going to sit here and have people like Atkinson say hes not going to even look at a simple chart and find out what scopes really weigh, then say it is common knowledge though. Thats BS in my book. Yeah it used to be common knowledge the Earth was flat too... I dont see Atkinson proffesing that one... Just like him charging full price on an elephant with a broken off tusk. But it can be glued he says. Well dandy!

WOW... this is the thread that keeps on giving!

Buell, me thinks your panties need to be de-wadded...

Cheers,

BA

I agree with Allen the leica binocs are the best, I have tested them all side by side for a month then took them into the field. My choice was the leica's They are heavier but built sturdier and had the best glass. The difference in wieght is minimal Leica's win for me.

Ray,

As a Brit I don't have an axe to grind either way in the optics debate as far as brands go.

A few years ago I compared a new Leupold M8 6x42mm side by side with a used Swarovski Nova 6x42mm with a view to buying one or the other. The used Swarovski was actually slightly more expensive than the new Leupold, but was in "as new" condition. Either scope would need to be sent "abroad" from the UK for a major repair.

There were pros and cons to both scopes, but I felt for *my* eyes, the Swarovski had the edge in optical quality and brightness... it was definately better in low light conditions...The M8 had slightly better eye relief, but a narrower field of view.

If I lived in the USA, I would no doubt use Leupold on some of my rifles; a used M8 6x42 must offer remarkable value in a quality scope for instance. I wish Leupold built a quality 4x32mm with fully coated optics; been looking for a scope like that for my .22LR ...

Now you say that you don't need bright optics for your type of hunting. What about when you trying to view into deep shadow on a bright day? Or perhaps trying to see a beast in deep woods at last light?
The only explaination I can think of is that Moose or Elk are so damned large! As our Roe are so small in comparision (typical buck dresses out at 35lb!) we tend to want the brightest optics available.
I traded my 6x42Swarovski for a 3-12x50 Swarovski PH on my .308. The scope was originally bought for night time fox shooting, but some how ended up on my .308 first. I was so impressed with the optical quality and brightness I have continued using it. Its not a combo that would be my first choice for mountain hunting, but I figure I can afford to loose several pounds from round my middle before In worry about a few ounces on my rifle!

Regards,

Peter

For the last time, Buell I will tell you that you may use whatever, I do not care, I think European Scopes are too expensive, to bulky and ugly. simple as that and most are too heavy, perhaps not all...I don't care

I can tell you that I have hunted more than you or more than you ever will, I have used at one time or another most all scopes and I have settled on the discontinued 3X Leupold as my favorite scope, followed by the 1x4x Leupold..Now that should blow your skirt up. I have no use for larger scopes except for a 3x9 on my 222 and it has served me well.

I do not like the coating on some European scopes as they slip in rings, I hate big objective lenses and do not care for the large eye pieces and lack of eye relief on European scopes, yes even the 1x4 you tout. I don't care to look up anything just to please you..Why should I fix something that isn't broke. I base my choices on experience and what has worked well for me, not on a bunch of figures of manufacturers as you tout so highly..thats mostly hype and of little concern to me.

One lesson in life you need to learn is to get a life, it's not even a big deal and your blowing it all out of porportion and to no avail...so just take a rest,Mary Agness.

I use Leica binocs so that should make you happy and I use them because I feel they are the best not because you want me to....when I need a keeper I'll let you know

Bottom line is you need to grow up and get off your high horse and learn there is more than one correct answer or more than one way to skin a cat....

Geeze I thought we were done with this?

Such bold statements of you when we have never talked in person?

You have used almost every scope out there? Really? Hmm... For someone so hell bent on using Leupolds you still have time to have used every scope out there? What a contradiction of your beliefs... Maybe you have used many scopes from many makers in the past, but I doubt recent enough to make a accurate report of them.

Why wont you look into anything? Whats the point on even posting about it then? If you wont use them in the field, wont do anything, then you shouldnt post about it. Knowledge gained about things from the past in this case has little to no bearing on whats today.

I think the Leupold looks like a peice of shit I would flush down the toilet without a regret. So what? Thats not to keep anyone else from using them, and I dont care at all.

You are justifying this to yourself. You are too old to change now, that is apparent. Some slip in rings? Theres not much else to say about that but there was a f- up somewhere along the line.

I thought we were done arguing over this a few days ago and I need to get a life? You tell me my posts are out of line, and your are so noble with all your knowledge that you are sitting in your office all day being an asshole to anyone who doesn't share your opinion or looks at you crosseyed. If someone agrees with you suddenly they are the best thing since sliced bread...

What hype could possibly come from a simple facts such as I posted. You cannot discredit any of that. That is the simple truth. I have the right to tout anything I want to when you say they are too heavy. Well, I showed you examples of the oppisite and I am made out to be the asshole here. But your opinions gained from such diligent work over the years over rules that because anything posted by Atkinson is right eh? You have hunted so much more then the rest of us right? Such as your miscopception that every european scope is going to be heavy, bulky, ect...

I found it odd that when D'Arcy Echols and you had a discussion about heat treating actions on the gunsmithing forum, he proved you wrong, and you came back saying you would re-look into the matter because your data was 20 years old. Somethings seem to repeat themselves....

Why dont you use Leupold binocs as well? They are not as good as the european brands. There is no way you can deny that. So why not use European scopes as well? Surely you could see game animals with Leupold binocs, and surely they are going to be cheaper right? Is cost not also an issue, perhaps more so in this case, with binocs?

Now becuase you know I am younger then you, you think you have the right to be an asshole to me and give me all sorts of life lessons. F-that Atkinson. Maybe one of the things you have gained besides your self touted greatness is likely the worst case of bitterness and ignorance I've come across in an old man...

Buell

[ 07-24-2002, 20:52: Message edited by: Buell ]