Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

The guys I go hunting with are all about these Scopes! They paid well over $750 for them. I got myself a bushnel elite 4200 for around 550 bucks. Now when we are all out in the field and its wet and foggy I looked through all of them and didnt see one bit of difference from my scope and theirs. Are they really paying that much more for the name or is it really a better scope.
They are all shock proof,water proof,fog proof and let in over 97% light.

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

if i were going to put that much money in a scope,i'd get a nikon monarch.
i really don't see the need to spend anywhere near that on a scope that i'll be
dragging around the woods,hauling on my atv and throwing in the truck. i usaully spend 150-200 .00
for scope. most shots could be made with a 50.00 scope from walmart.

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

True, but if you can afford one they are the shizzle... If you are spending big bucks (no pun intended) on a hunt, the clarity, ruggedness and light enhancement are woth the cost..

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

Better scopes hands down, but how much better etc... do you need ?

I've mostly had leupold vx-iii, and nikon monarchs.

Bought a swarovski ph 3-12x50 a couple years back, and it's perfect

Just got my first zeiss conquest...for the money so far it seems pretty awesome, I think it may be my new "leupold/nikon" scope.

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

Most of my scopes were bought at a time when I was young and couldn't afford quality glass. In 2006, in preparation for a Mule Deer trip in CO, I bought a .300 WSM with a Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x44mm. I was amazed by the sharpness / clarity of image. At dusk, is where it really makes the difference. This past deer season, I was watching a deer 100yrds across a field. I couldn't see it with the naked eye as it was too dark, but could still see it through the Zeiss.

I've since bought another Zeiss!

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

in most states its illegal to shoot that late anyway.

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

might be but it still happens all the time. i got a meopta and would put it up against any other scope.

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

Currently on my "shooter" guns I have several Zeiss Conquests, Leupold Vari X II, VX II and VX III, and three Swarovskis. I have owned a couple of Kahles but prefer Conquests to them, so I sold them.

My all time favorite scope is a Swarovski AV series 3-9x36mm, and the runner up is a AV 3.5-10x42mm. For my eyes, they are the best.

I firmly believe that in hunting optics that you DO get what you pay for.

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

any $300 scope is as good as a $1200 scope for normal hunting condition..you're definitely buying a name if you pay more than $500...the lens polishing is the main objective, imo...i've got more simmons scopes than any other brand, and have never had one fail me...i don't need a more expensive scope to hunt the way i hunt, and i've never had a problem taking a deer..

RE: Zeiss vs Swarovski and Kahles
 

Define "normal hunting conditions"???

How many scopes/brands of scopes have you hunted with to determine the validity of these two statements?