this info is gathered from the latest outdoor life

well folks i find it amazing that S&B stays in business. I mean you'd have thought by now everyone would have had this figured out especially considering the cost of S&B and hell in europe they are compared against zeiss v and swaro p series scopes day in and day out. Well to make a long story short, the S&B Zeinth 1.5-6x42 flashdot was given a "poor" lowlight performace rating. It was the worst rated scope in lowlight! Alpen, browning, sightron, leupold etc all beat it. AMAzing, how do they get people to buy their scopes.
One more statemnt from the article to allow to judge its credibility, the zeiss and meopta scopes with 56mm obj lost to the leupold vx3 3.5-10x50 in the lowlight test. in fact, the leupold was the "hands down" winner.
Wow a leupold with a smaller objective that is brighter than a zeiss.

does this make sense ot any of you. Where would you rate S&B compared to swaro ph and zeiss ve scopes in both optics and durability as well as tracking POI

What a strange article. My initial reaction is to say "what a load of crap". I currently own 2 S&B scopes - Schmidt & Bender 6x42 and a Schmidt & Bender 3-12x50. Both are well made scopes with crystal clear optics and feature heavier reticles more appropriate for European dawn/dusk shooting.

Over the years I have owned numerous Zeiss and Swarovski scopes and they are also excellent. In fact I'd say it was hard to seperate any of them optically.

I'm no European scope snob either. I own 2 Leupold scopes - a VX-II 4-12x40mm Adj. Obj. on my .22RF and a VX-III 1.5-5x20mm on my .416 Rigby. Leupold make excellent scopes although reticles are much finer.

It all boils down to personal choice. My S&B's look superb on my Mannlicher rifles and traditionally, in the UK anyway, having a European scope on a deer stalking rifle is considered "good form".

SAKO,

Without seeing this article in Outdoor Life and understanding test conditions and results, we Europeans cannot really comment.

Fuhrmann

to make a long story short, I have found S&B scopes to be absolutely reliable in two medium-heavy recoiling rifles.

I have also taken a number of wild boar with them at night, stalking under a full moon, to my full satisfaction.

the superiority of Leupold over Zeiss may exist, but only in the imagination of Outdoor Life.

there is nothing wrong with Leupold, though.

Sako75,

Personally I would take the results with a pinch of salt.

Even if Leupold has improved the glass, construction and lens coatings of its new scopes so that the light transmission figures approach or even exceed those of Zeiss (and I am guessing Zeiss runs at about 95%) there is no way a 50mm lens can deliver more light ie be brighter, than a 56mm lens, all other things considered.

They could argue about just about anything else, ie resolution, sharpness or colour rendition, but light gathering is basically a function of the objective diameter, the magnification and the quality of the lens and coating as for as light transmission goes.

I have had Swarovski and S&B and have used Zeiss and all three are truely excellant especially their optics.

Regards,

Pete

I have a S&B 1.5-6 on my .375H&H, it's been used in temperature ranges from -20� to +40�C, dropped, abused, used for things it probably shouldn't have been used for and never yet given any trouble. It is mounted in QD rings which hold zero perfectly, though it's only been two years that I've had the scope on there, it's been put through quite a bit already. It is a truly reliable scope/rifle combination.



I have a mix of EU and US scopes and dont really notice that much dufference. The Leupolds are a lot lighter, some critisize this fact, saying that they weight in the EU scopes must go somewhere, wither in the lenses or the body housing. Others have argued that the lighter wieght translates into toughness, or more likely, less likey to suffer recoil(like a big man falling down or a little guy falling over)



My next scope purchase will ba a Leupold 4.5-14x40, which I am curious to test. Currently the only Leupolds I own are 1-4x20 and 2-7x33(2 of them) They work just fine, clear, bright, yes the reticles are fine, but I like them that way.

Sako 75

I have several S&B scopes and all give good performance in low light.

One thing I can vouch for however is the excellent build quality.

Two years ago I was stalking on Islay and had managed to connect with a nice Roe Buck. We went back to the outfitters house to de-bag (drop off coats and rifles etc before sorting out the animal).

In the porch area I placed my Finnlight on a wooden gun rack mounted on the wall, 6 feet above the porch floor. I left the rifle scope up if that makes sense. I then left the porch to go back to the car. As I did I heard a metallic sort of crash twang and I new immediately what had happened.

We went back into the porch to discover the rifle on the deck. I was mortified. The scope was a 3-12 x 42 illuminated. However, upon inspecting the rifle there appeared to be no visible damage apart from a small oval scratch on the front bell.

The next day we went down to the range to check zero and to see if it was a write off. To our amazement it had retained zero perfectly (inch high at 100)and was not damaged at all.

I still use this scope on my 7mm Rem Mag to this day and it is fine. I think it is fine testament to the build quality of these German scopes as the porch floor was concrete, not carpeted or matted but pure concrete. I suppose it also says a bit about sako's too.

In general, at least in my neck of the woods, Zeiss and (in later years) Swarovski are considered the top brands - and it shows in their prices. S&B is considered just one notch down, and in reality the difference may be more visible in price than in performance. S&B scopes are very highly thought of in terms of optical performance as well as durability.

Funnily, S&B scopes actually seem more expensive than Zeiss and Swarovski in the States. I suspect it has all to do with market positioning and little to do with actual quality.

I have 2 S&B scopes (1.5-6x42, 3-12x50), and they have served me well over the years. I would not hesitate to buy another one.
- mike

First consideration: in Italy magazines are paid by various companies (producers) to publish evaluation articles on their products, also in a comparative way. These articles are called "redazionali". Is it permitted to suspect some "benevolence" for the paying producer?
Second consideration: I consider Zeiss, Swaroski and S&B at the same level, moreover now that Swaro has a high precision in reticle movements, and if S&B is less expensive than the other two, as it was when I buyed my last scope, well which one do you think that is more convenient to buy?
Third consideration: Leupold vs Zeiss/Swaroski and S&B I'm not EuroNationalist, but it is more easy for me to use a Europen optics than a Leupold. It is not easy to explain, but for me is more easy to find the right distance between oculae and eye with an European, easiest with S&B, than with a Leupold.

Meopta is, by my opinion and experience, a honest optic, I have a 6x42 on my 22-KHornet, but still far from the three EuroTop.

Hope to help
bye

What about Gerhardt scopes?. I understand that this company is the owner of Schmidt and Bender and operated under the trade name Nickel Supra. These are superb instruments, sometimes rated better than even the Zeiss. No one seems to know in the States about Nickel. I own one and up to date is faultless (a 3 x 12-50 mounted on a 375 H& H). Moreover I hunt always at night and a good scope is a must, thus the very best is needed (and dearly paid may I add).
Please enlight me on this matter.
Weidmannsheil!