Another scope question

N

NHSHOOTER

New member
I am looking for a scope that gathers the most light (where I hunt in SC you can shoot pretty late after legal sunset. I have been thinking Swaroski 4-12x50 with a 1 in tube. Then I got to looking at zeiss Conquest 3-12 x 56 with a 30 mm tube. Of course the Zeiss is a bit cheaper but I am just thinking that with the 56mm objective and 30 mm tube this scope would gather more light..Opinions please. Unfortunately there isnt anywhere around here that I can look at these scopes first hand..
 
It will. What’s that extra 6mm more worth to you? In low light the difference, especially on lower power, will be noticeable side by side, but only noticeable as long as the optics have a similar light transmission rating.
 
The 30mm tube has nothing to do with light. It gives you more adjustment for long range shooting.

The 50mm lense is only helpful in low light up to 10X, above that it won't let in any more light than a 40mm glass set on 8X. The 56mm lense will allow you to go up to 11X.

If you've got the money the Swaroski will most likely have the better glass and be better on all magnifications.

But you're over thinking this. The difference between a $300 Leupold and a $3000 Swaroski is about 5 minutes more shooting time before both are useless.
 
Since you are buying high end scopes may one of your friends might have a high end scope with a 40mm objective and you could compare with one of a larger objective on a lower budget scope or vice versa. This way you can compare how much of a difference there really is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top