OK guys

Say I am starting out from scratch shopping for a scope for a flyweight stalking rifle
(no 72mm objective please)

What scope would you choose with the following criteria in mind

Best light transmission
Lightest weight
Cost no objective
Max range for shot 300 meter / yards
They all have illuminated reticules

I have the following short list

Schmidt and Bender 8x56i
Zeiss diatal 7x50i
Zenith 1.5-6x42i
Z6 1.7-10 x 42i

I won't put my thoughts out at this point so please come back with your reasoning.

The reason I am posting this is because I think my concept of low light perception has been wrong for the past few years and would like your opinion.

"If you have another scope that fits the bill please chime in however please have a reason rather than you have been using one and you have just taken 1000th deer with it. Thanks"

I have been going through this very process for several years and many different custom "ultralight" rifles; I avoid 30mm tubed scopes as the weight factor is simply a bummer when trying to build a 7lb. all up, crf .270Win. or .280Rem.

I have had a bunch of 2.5x8 Leupies, several 1.75x6 Leupies and on and on, ad infin..etc... I have recently bought a Swarovski Z3-3x9x40 and this seems the best alternative and is light, yet, far superior to any Leupie or other 1" tubed scope in all respects.

This one is going on a very cherry Brno 22H, re-chambered to .280Rem. from 7mm Mauser and it will also have a Micky Edge handle and has some other custom mods. This is a "light" rifle, not quite a "flyweight", but, I can pack it in BC's mountains with no major trauma and it does the job on any game we have here.

I also like the Z6 in 1.7x10 and may install one on my custom Dakota 78-.338WM and this should be a winner for early ayem Elk and Mulies.

I believe a fixed magnification scope of 7x or 8x is impractical where you might have a close-in shot on a muntjac or Chinese water deer.

I would pick one of the Zeiss variables, as they can be turned up or down to achieve the optimal light transmission for the light conditions you encounter.

As I understand it, 'brightness' is influenced by magnification as well as exit pupil, so you will probably notice a 'brighter' sight picture at 6x or more with the two Zeiss scopes.

George

I've got the Z6 in 3-18 x 50 and the Diavari 4-16 x50.
For lightweight I would go with the Z6 any day of the week. It is noticeably much lighter then the Zeiss when mounted.
I cant tell the difference in clarity or light resolution between the two.

I have a zeiss and meopta 6x42 on my two rifles, and both shooting light for several more minutes after I can't see clearly with the named eye. When I can no longer see to take a shot it is practically dark and too late to take a shot anyhow.

Dont go too fine a reticle - I loose the fine centre reticle on the meopta before I loose shooting light.

Any of schmidt & benders would work well, depends on whether you want 10x power at top end for odd long shot. Don't discount the Swarovski 3-9x36 or the zeiss equivalent old diavari if you can find one. Lightweight, can be mounted low and all light transmission you need if wound back to lower end magnification. Have used the zeiss on the hill at last light in the winter and wonderful.

I just put a Z3 4-12x50 on a clients rifle (Sako 85 in 6.5 Sweedish). It was the first time I had handled one of them and I was very impressed with it.

We will be testing it hthis week on the Roe so should be able to give some info on the low light ability of it in a couple of days.

Rgds,
K

Do those Z3s and Z4s use the same glass as the top jobs FB?

Ghubert

I can borrow a digital step light source from a surgical endoscope if you are interested in doing a scientific comparison in the coming weekends

We can set up this light source shall we say 200 yards away in darkness and illuminate a resolution chart 0.1 lux increment at a time until there is optical recognition. We can repeat this with all the scope we can borrow

to date all comments on the net ,are subjective and not proven scientifically

If you look at Swarvoski web site light transmission of z4 is higher than z6 for some reason

I spoke to Swarvoski and they think it is a misprint !"

I spoke to khan of zeiss UK on Friday and learned that there is NO unified system of quoting twilight factors other than the usual mag power x objective diameter then take a square root !

Basically we are brand worshipping rather than reallynunderstand what we are buying

Weight is also an issue for me
Thought by going 1.5-6x42 I am saving a few ounces

In fact this Schmidt zenith is 22 oz which is 2 onzes off a z6i with 30 power !

Can you see why I am having a rethink which scope do I keep or sell ?

Very interesting LH.

I like the idea of an experiment of course and whilst a simple test might be questionable in terms of definitive results, it should certainly be illuminating, pun not intended.

I'll bring along the Meopta 7x50, a Leopold vx3 4.5-14x50 and a "control" crappy Bushnell one from the .22. I've picked up your NF and Swaro from the gunsmiths btw, so we can try them too.

I agree, light is good but think spec is more important.

I started this thread a while ago which many be of interest to you. Link

Go mega scope test

I think we should do it in Africa for the sake of scientific accuracy

What do you say to that ?

Ben, I think you might already have the best option in a light stalking scope - the Z6i 1.7-10x42.

The bigger/higher mag Z6i's are less than perfect for stalking in my view, too "fiddly" with side focus, ocular focus etc. Eye relief is too critical: the slightest movement of your head and the sight picture "blacks out".

The S&B scopes are equally excellent, but tend to be heavier like for like compared to Swarovski.

I can't speak of Zeiss as I have never used one, but the Diavari 2.5-10x50 must be excellent.

I have a Z6 2-12x50 TDS (no IR) on the 260Rem, I think this is a really good hunting scope, cwertainly for my stalking which is usually Sika at very last light around heavy cover. I don't mind a little extra weight as I am not doing serious mountain work, and the extra magnification and lens size are a benefit.

However, for a light sleak stalking rifle, I think I would definitely go for one of the 42mm options.

LH,

I agree with much of what you say but don't be in a hurry to pass the data off as a misprint.

My 8x50 binos have a good five minutes of light in them after the Z6 on my 260. I actually think that the simpler fixed power scopes may be better than the high mag scopes of the same brand. I've done nothing scientific to prove this but it is just the feeling I get when looking through the scope at deer in low light conditions.

I am pretty much a dedicated Swaro user, and even though I have switched a couple of times I keep coming back to them.

K

quote:

Originally posted by Fallow Buck:
LH,

I agree with much of what you say but don't be in a hurry to pass the data off as a misprint.

My 8x50 binos have a good five minutes of light in them after the Z6 on my 260. I actually think that the simpler fixed power scopes may be better than the high mag scopes of the same brand. I've done nothing scientific to prove this but it is just the feeling I get when looking through the scope at deer in low light conditions.

I am pretty much a dedicated Swaro user, and even though I have switched a couple of times I keep coming back to them.

K

Kiri the fixed option is also worth thinking about.

The PF 8x50 was available with an IR option and would be great. Don't know if you can get t hem now, maybe only S/H.

I had a standard non IR 8x50 for some years, but in a fit of stupidness traded it off for the Z6 above.

Kiri

I fully agree
but cannot compare bino with mono tubes
only apples for apples

So what is the bottom line on light transmission if we cannot trust the manufacturer web site ?

Twilight factor is out
because if we do that we might as well compare a chinese made scope with same dimension as that of a scholt glass scope

objective size - well if the magnification goes up as well then it negates in pupil size

weight - depends on brand and construction method of each manufacturer aluminium tube or steel tube ......

I am totally confused

OK claret

He is my take

a zoom scope will ultimately let in more light than a fix scope at lower mag

I know one should not use a loade rifle to scan for game however during that golden last 10 minutes gap we all do something similar

I would go for a light weight zoom with a very thin illuminated reticule so I know when I am on or off and no guessing.

Once the game is identified as a safe shot then i might zoom into 6 x to the theoretic optimum

What do you guys think ?

If that's the case then

02 scope fits the above

Z4i 3 - 12 x 50
Z6i 1.7 - 10 x 42

The reticules in Zeiss, Doctors, Kahles and Schmidt are thicker than Swarvoski

For me the thinner the reticule the better one can substantiate a target but ONLY if it is illuminated.

Would you guys agree ?

The up side is that Z series are relatively light for all the hardware the cramp into their scope. Spec for Spec Schmidt will b double the weight.

I agree with Claret one does not need all these hardware when stalking.

OK one more dilemna just to be difficult

Generally 30mm scopes are heavier than 25.4 mm scopes

Why are we lugging them up the hills if we don't need to dial elevation for stalking purposes ?

I think I am shopping for a 1 inch Swarvoski zoom with the thinnest illuminated reticule.

Every ounce counts

quote:

Say I am starting out from scratch shopping for a scope for a flyweight stalking rifle ..... ?

SR20 already has the correct answer.

quote:

Don't discount the Swarovski 3-9x36 or the zeiss equivalent old diavari if you can find one.

+1 Actually, I prefer the now-exstinct Zeiss 3-9x36's but they pop up now & again on the used market. Great scope for an Ultra-Light IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by londonhunter:
OK one more dilemna just to be difficult

Generally 30mm scopes are heavier than 25.4 mm scopes

Why are we lugging them up the hills if we don't need to dial elevation for stalking purposes ?

I think I am shopping for a 1 inch Swarvoski zoom with the thinnest illuminated reticule.

Every ounce counts

While I would stick with an objective in the 32mm to 42mm range, I wouldn't fret on the last ounce of scope weight...IMHO, most folks (myself included!) should be more worried about loosing 7lb from around their waist before fretting a couple of ounces on a scope..

I have a Zeiss 2.5-10x42mm which is excellent in low light..

It is as good as a much older 8x56mm S&B or a 3-12-50 Swaro PH in low light, probably due to the modern coatings...

While I am generally a big fan of Swaro products, when I handled and looked through the Z6, i was very dissapointed; same with the American line that has now morphed into the Z3 but at a higher price..

The only thing that really impressed me with the Z6i was the illuminated reticle...

Well, when it comes to functionality - have we any thoughts about this:

http://nightforceoptics.com/SC...t_2_5-10x32_nxs.html

Tied in with one of the 'Velocity Reticles' it would appear to be a rather useable unit for real world hunting.

Rgds

Ian

Nightforce seems to be like Marmite. I know guys that swear by them and others that have regretted buying them. Never used one myself so I can't really comment on experience.

For what I do I wouldn't go less than a 42mm OL. generally settling at 50mm as a preference. I have a fixed 8x56 but I don't think it is actually that much better mainly due to my eyes not being good enough I think.

I'm with Pete in that weight (of the scope...) is not the be all and end all in the decision. The Leupold that amir mentioned above is a superb day light scope. however at the end of the season when I cull a large percentage of deer in a short period it let me down massively, and probably cost me 8-10 deer in the larder over a week or two. The instant decision was that the Swaro would have paid for itself.

So, if light gathering is the issue, you must (IMHO) go for Swaro/Zeiss/Khales as they give you the lowest light option. When deer are against a dark wood background every scope will struggle in low light, but if they come out on the grass then one of the above could allow you to make a good shot. This isn't just about seeing the deer but also being able to select the beast that is required to be culled out of a herd. In addition the IR is an invaluable tool for low light but it must be dimmable otherwise the reticle can refract through the eyepiece and make the target difficult to see.

Several times I have sat with people that have said to me that they can't see the deer/fox through their scope, and I ask if they mind me taking the shot as I can see it clearly through mine. It makes a big difference to the cull numbers at the end of the year.

K

It has just occur to me that 99% near darknest shots are taken from a highseat but when I am stalking on foot I tend to stop well before dark falls

(I suppose I cannot see what I am trodding on !)

When I am stalking in the morning, light is never an issue anyway.

There's the answer since I shoot a blaser

02 mounts - 02 scopes

Absolute return to zero with 02 saddle mounts

Why didn't somebody teach me that before ....

A 34mm 3 - 9 Z3 weighing 12 ounces, Adjustable stock and a muzzle brake while stalking on foot !

Total rifle weight with one shot in chamber is 6 pounds 3 ounces !

And a 72 mm Zeiss while sitting on high seat !

OK

Those 04 scopes I listed in my first posting

I actually own them all

Anybody want to make an offer please PM me.

I have a z6i 2-12x50 but have gone back to the Swaro PFi 8x50 for my new roe/muntjac rifle. There is no problem with close range shots in my experience.

Don't discount the S&B 7x50i but actually you'll find a 6x42 surprisingly bright into low light, but 8x is my preferred optiona dn always carry the 2-12 set on 8x anyway...

You can still get a PF 8x50 with 4A-i reticle direct from Swaro, but its is costly. May be possible to get them to upgrade an old one?

I do quite a bit of low light hunting here at home. Mostly from blinds or high seats for red and roe during moonlit hours, or bright starry sky over snow or frost cowered fields.

On my lightweight Kimber Montana ( 308 Win), I have for the last three years used a Zeiss Victory 2,5-10x50 with #4 reticle. It should have had a illuminated #60, but it still gives exellent service.
A good compromise on a lightweight rifle IMHO.

On my dedicated night/red rifle in 35 Whelen I have a Zeiss Victory 3-12x56 with the illuminated #60.
This is a heavier rig, but a deadly combination.

Both these scopes have seen rough use here up north, and are performing with flying colors.
The Lotu tec coating also seems to do a good job when stalking in rain or sleet.

If anybody is interested, I have in a German made S&B 8x56mm for sale.

Its on a 1" tube and has what i ithink is a S&B No7 ret (it looks like a widely spaced German No4...)

Optically the scope is excellent, and the exterior finish is probably 90% with some marks visible where the rings have been...These are not scratches as such, but the finish of the scope simply looks "dull" ...

Anybody interested, drop me a PM...

A lightweight stalking optics is the opposite of a low light hunting optics... So a good question how to bring both tasks under one hat...

I would go with the Z6i 2-12x50 or even better the Z4i 3-12x50, which is much cheaper and has more the classic style...

If it must be from you list, take the Z6i 1,7-10x42, with more weight of stalking optics then on low light hunting optics...

Just my 2 cents

Klaus

quote:

Originally posted by scubapro:
A lightweight stalking optics is the opposite of a low light hunting optics... So a good question how to bring both tasks under one hat...

I would go with the Z6i 2-12x50 or even better the Z4i 3-12x50, which is much cheaper and has more the classic style...

If it must be from you list, take the Z6i 1,7-10x42, with more weight of stalking optics then on low light hunting optics...

Just my 2 cents

Klaus

Of the two, I'd pick the z4i. If you want a z6, try the 2.5-15x44 from the z6i range. Don't forget that sub-15x models don't have HD glass, so I'm not sure exactly what you are paying for in the Z6i 2-12 over the Z4i 3-12 except different illumination module and style... Just a thought.

I have three Zeiss 1.5-6x42 scopes and really lie them. Were I looking to save weight and yet still handle 300 yards I would seriously look at the 1.1-4x24 offerings from Zeiss/Swaro/Schmidt.

I would also consider the Meopta offerings which bring virtually the same performance and a lot less cost.

@Jabali: right - the same what I think, but the 2,5-5x44 is not a lightweight scope ! weight 100g more then the Z4i 3-12x50 ! (having that luxus problem at the moment myself and thinking about which will fit my Rem 700 Titanium best for her task..., but I am totaly confident with your choice: I would take the Z4i 3-12x50 over the Z6i 2-12x50...!

Hi scubapro

We have crossed path before

There are many blazer shooters here

Can I be a bit cheeky to ask

1 how much lighter is your titanium saddle mount compared to the standard factory mounts

2. What is the best price you can do for AR blazer hunters

Thanks

Hi Londonhunter,

my Titanium scope mount won´t fit the Blaser rifles, but for example nearly all "classic style" bolt actions such as: Sauer 202, Tikka, Sako, Remington 700, Win 70,...

Weight for a whole scope mount (bases plus the very stiff and one pice only "bridge" will weight 137 g in the Titanium edition and just 106 g in the Featherweight edition. Prices are (including German VAT) 400 € per base pair and starting from 550 € for a bridge.

But the realy unique is the possibility to set up a battery of rifles with just one scope - WITHOUT sighting in between changes! So You could mix a battery of scopes with a battery of rifles however you like...

for those who haven´t seen it yet:
http://www.titanium-gunworks.c...um-scope-mounts.html

the height may look high, but it is the same as any pivot-scope mount of EAW or Recknagel... !

Thank you

quote:

Originally posted by londonhunter:
Thank you

You are always welcome...

if You like sign in for my newsletter or email me your email-adress and I will do it for you...

Thanks Klaus

I love simple fixed power scopes but if you absolutely have to shoot something last light then I can swear to you that for the absolute last word in performance you need a 50 or 56mm objective and as much power as you can get. Thusly a variable high quality 50mm or 56mm is best. Which you get depends on your preferance.

I have tested side by side on live deer. It gets to the stage that you can shoot a fallow buck in darkness so complete that you can't because though you know it's roughly fallow shaped and that it was where a deer was before it got pitch black there is no single identifying mark that you can say hand on heart it's a deer and not a cow that walked into the field.

Given the zeiss is lighter and shorter my vote goes to the V series x50mm IF the IR goes dim enough.

Low power is absolutely useless in true low light to my eyes.

Conclusion

I am finally come to the following choices and thank you for all your contributions

Previously for the last 04 years (since launch) I have been hunting with one scope z6i 1.7-10x42

I never really understood what I was looking for and drifted around trying other people's scopes.

I now understand I wanted high power because I cannot shoot tight groups when load developing however I never use that in the field so why carry all that weight ?

Secondly with the years passing ( less iPad incident) I find that I am struggling with low light ability to clearly defind my game 100% - 99% is not good enough for me

Thirdly I am very aware of the weight of my gear

I also now realise that Swarvoski have been very clever in their marketing tactics.

They launched their flagship Z6 range first in UK with a £3 million pound marketing plan and once there is enough marketiong saturation they then lauch their lower models.

I now realise Z6 is far too heavy at 740 grams, over spec and too large for what I need. A lot of my friends have also commited to this model range following the constant bombadrment of their advertisiment in the past 04 years.

I was trying to get one scope to serve all my purposes and this is stupid - somehting has got to give and it is always a compromise

I am selling my Z6 and reinvest in the following

Weaver 36 x for load development - thanks KR

Z5 3.5-18x44 BT for stalking (the weight of this is LIGHTER than a Zeiss 7x50!) both weighing an identical 450 gramsn but with the manification I wanted

8 x 56 with IR for moon seat or late evening hunting on high seat so weight is NEVER an issue

Beacuse I hunt with a Blaser system I will invest in 02 mounts and swop for specific stalks

I was also wrong previously dicarding the ballistic turrets as a gimick

There is one aspect which their own development team have not thought about

In UK a lot of us shoot moderated rifles - majority ? right GHUBERT ?

I have been hunting with a PES weighing 700+ grams at the end of the barrel for 4 years

Firstly it looks stupid and secondly when you take this off the POi changes drastically. So everytime I change I have to re-zero.

WELL that's the answer with the ballistic turret !!!!!

I can actually click quickly to the changed POI in seconds. OK they don't have windage turret.

1.5 years ago I wrote to Swarvoski suggesting that is a good idea and I have now received a formal reply from them confirming it has been taken into consideration for future production models ! Fantastic

I will swop from moderated to unmoderated mode within second and no need to re-zero

I can also swop from a heavy low light scope to light stalking scope without re-zero - advantage of saddle mounts - 100 % return to zero

Thanks guys for all your inputs and I hope you dont mind me sharing my thoughts openly on this forum - I consider this problem solved

NOW no more pissing around and back to some serious hunting. .................

Brian - I have installed a muzzle brake on my K95 now...........and this rifle will never be for sale

PS I have found a light weight manufacturer for blaser mounts if anybody is interested with aluminium rings

They are stupidly low and the bore axis to sight axis is 25mm as compared to the lowest blaser factory setup which is 32mm

This is significant

Since my caliber is low recoil aluminium rings will save some weight.

In total my changing to a light weight scope plus light weight rings and without moderator

the rifle is around 1.3 kilograms lighter !

Benjamin,

In respect of more learned scope users, I had felt it would be better to read than comment.

Did you ever look at the new Leupold VXR ?

Admittedly not the highest quality of some of the Euro optics, but then not that bad either.
and certainly meeting your weight requirements with an innovative illumination feature.

I am interested to know about this low weight Blaser mount source you have found, and would appreciate any information on this.

Skeet shot

Did you know that the high end blazer stocks are made in Bulgaria ?

I learned that from one of that team members a few months ago

A very well kept secret indeed

One f these work shop manufacturer a comparable saddle mount with either aluminium or steel rings in both dimensions

The quoted me the following weights

Saddle base 110 grams £120
Alu 1 inch rings with base 159 grams £220
Alu 30 mm rings with base 165 grams. £220

My factory mounts are well over 230 grams !

So roughly half the price in UK and roughly half the weight

Yes

Leupold are great scope but a little challenge for hunting in Europe

skeetshot you will understand more than anybody else here is that the sight axis is significantly lower Than factory

I will PM you their details and where they are selling them

LH,

I agree with much of what you say regarding the Z6's. Although I must qualify it that I think the 1-6x24 Z6i is a scope which no other can touch at the moment in its class.

Other than that I think that the Z3-5's have some excellent items in their range that I would probably go for in preference to the Z6's.

I just got back from testing my 260 and I think I need to do more load development but you are right, the high magnification helps...



K

K

Each to their own - we all have different ways of doing things.

But you might check an 8x56 in the field - I didn't find any evidence of it's fabled low light capability when I tested a PF 8x56 alongside a PF 6x42. Wind the variable equivalent (Nova in my case) up to 12x and you really do have a low light scope.

Changing scopes and adding/removing moderators is bad news and doing the two together really bad news

What calibre is your K95 going to be?

1894,

I've got a 8x56 on my 243 and have just taken in a 6x42 PF in PartX so I think that would be a worth while comparison.

Indeed the 50mm scopes I have don't seem to suffer by comparison so it will be good to see what happens at 42mm OL

Rgds,
K

Ok now that I have sorted out my daytime scope

Which one would you guys say is the brightest (subjective) fixed power scope

Make and model please ?