Leupold vs Swarovski vs Zeiss

For you folks of the opinion that Leupold's are overpriced, I'm sure you factored in that they have a lifetime warranty surpassed by who else?
Click to expand...

Vortex beats the crap outta Leupold for warranties... Vortex has one. Leupold, two.

Vortex Unlimited Lifetime Warranty (Good for any owner, whether 1st or 1000th, for life, for all products)


Leupold Full Lifetime Guarantee (Only available for "Golden Ring" items)

Leupold Green Ring Limited Lifetime Warranty (Only good if you are the original owner)
 
Last edited:
FYI, for all the folks that have opinions as to optical clarity or lack there of I find in rather interesting that nobody mentions at all the single most important criteria for a scope, and one of the single biggest reasons why the old "you get what you pay for" axiom is true as ever particularly with scopes. You put some of these scopes on a real capable target gun shooting at 200-300 yards and see how they hold POI, you'd be quite surprised I'd wager.
 
scopes

I would have spent less money on my rifle scopes and more on my binoculars.
Click to expand...

+1 about that.
I do not own either a Zeiss or a Swarovski scope. I do own a number of Leupolds. They are fine scopes. I own an even larger number of less expensive scopes - Tasco class scopes. None has even done anything except work right.
That point about how much time one spends looking through a scope is a good one.
Now - I do have a set of Swarovski EL binoculars. They are marvelous instruments. VERY clear, light, durable.
For my money, though, in binoculars....the way to go is one of the all weather versions of the Canon image stabilized binoculars. The image is - to my eyes under field conditions - as clear as the Swarovskis and the stabilizer....if you have never use IS binos, do yourself a favor and try a set. the amount of extra detail that is visible just because the image stops moving is remarkable.
Pete
 
I agree with Darkgael about image-stabilizing binocs. They make a HUGE difference at higher magnification. They are pricey but well worth it to me.

As for scopes, I have lots of them, mostly Leupolds, some Zeiss, Nikon and other "lesser" brands. I wanted to get a Swarovski to mount on a Blaser R8, and they are definitely a cut above. I am fortunate to be able to buy whatever I want, and I may get one at some point, but after comparing the Swarovski to what I already have, for the type of shooting that I currently do, I felt it wasn't worth the extra $1500.00.
 
Interestingly, the brand that's being used by a great many top shooters and many military snipers is the Schmidt & Bender.

Hold on to your wallet, prices are high.
 
To Rembrandt and Nnobby45....Im not trying to get a specific answer about anything, im just curious as to (out of the 3 manufacturers I listed) who in YOUR opinion makes the best scope "overall".
Click to expand...

I was at my local sporting goods one day and was in the market for a spotting scope. We went out back and I tried the Zeiss and the Schwartz, and some other models as well at various distances. I chose the Zeiss because it's optics were excellent. Possibly the Schwartz was a little better, but I couldn't detect a noticeable difference. I went with the Zeiss and never regretted it.

If I'd been strapped for cash, I could have gone with some less expensive models as well, and they would have adequately served my purpose. Call the Zeiss better than what I really require.

I think the better YOUR eyes, the more you can take advantage of the sharper better quality optics. OR, does the better quality help make up for our less than perfect eye sight. Haven't done a thorough test.:cool:
 
Leupold's are somewhat over rated- the best thing about them being the guarantee- which you pay for. High end Leupold's I will confess are very good- but again, you also pay for them. People who this upsets, please note that I own 5 Leupold scopes and am not 'bitching', just making an observation.

I have recently purchased three Bushnell Elite's- two are 3200 10x and a 3-9 and the optical quality appears to be between a VX2 and VX3 Leupold. The guarantee is very good as well and the price is considerably lower than a Leupold.

I don't spend Zeiss or Swarovski money on scopes- I am 52 years old and my eyes can't discern that much difference.
 
I own various leupolds and a Zeiss scope... I've tossed around the idea of a Swarovski, but most of the rifles i've thought about mounting one on, need lots of eye relief, something they lack... Their binoculars are nothing short of spectacular...
 
It's odd people think Leupold overpriced in this comparison when the average Leupold costs a fraction of what you have to pay for a real Zeiss or the high end Swarovskis. That said, the Zeiss Diavari etc line has the best scopes I've shot in regards to optical clarity, eye relief and dusk performance (disclaimer, I never used a Z6 series Swarovski).
 
I love my Swarovski PH 4-16x50.When I bought it,it was the most that I'd ever spent on optics.It really made a difference in overall clarity,and brightness over my other scopes.

Zeiss is also a great scope.If they would ever put a 30mm tube on the Conquest line,they would probably sell more scopes than anyone,but their 1" scope tube just lacks the ability for much windage/elevation adjustments,and their Rapid series reticles are just too busy for most people to use.
The Diavari line is a very,very good scope,but the price is in the crazy range for most people.

I have to agree with Leupold's being very over priced.They make good optics,and have a good warranty,but so do a lot of other scope mfg's for a lot less $$$.
I have a few Leupold scopes and they are good scopes.

There are a bunch of scope mfg's,that make good affordable optics with lifetime warranties out there.
To me,Sightron scopes are some of the best optics on the market right now.I have 3 Sightron SIII scopes,and they will run neck and neck with my Swarovski in every catagory of testing.The only thing they don't offer is FFP reticles.

I thought like a lot of people for years that a $300-400 scope was just as good as the higher dollar ones.Then I looked and shot with a higher end scope,that was all it took for me to really see what I'd been missing for many years.Some think it's crazy to put a $2000 scope on a $800 rifle,but now I think it's crazy to put a cheap scope on a $800 rifle.

You can't shoot,what you can't see!
 
I have to agree with Leupold's being very over priced.They make good optics,and have a good warranty,but so do a lot of other scope mfg's for a lot less $$$.
I have a few Leupold scopes and they are good scopes.
Click to expand...

I think in this instance the extra money you're spending on a Leupold helps keep someone employed in the US. I don't know where Zeiss or Swarovski scopes are made but it seems some people like the idea of supporting an American company. With that said, I have nothing against Nikon, Zeiss & Swarovski and would consider purchasing their scopes, but only after evaluating their quality.
 
I have a few Leupold Vari-X III scopes and VX-III scopes, and I am (and have been for years) very very pleased. I paid a lot of money for them, but I was happy with the expenditure. I don't think that they are overpriced. And as for the guy that said that the Vortex warranty was better than the Leupold warranty, somebody needs to 'splain' how that can be. Does Vortex do all that Leupold does and then send a hooker with a note of apology and beer money? That'd be better, for sure. Anyway, I've used and sometimes abused Leupold scopes for many years and I've never had one even complain, much less have one fail. A Nikon Monarch failed me after about 300 rounds through my 223. I guess that heavy recoil (sarcasm) must have killed it. Top of the line Weaver failed me. Redfield did, Tasco did. Bushnell did. I once dropped my Sako 270 when I fell off a boulder and busted my tail. The Leupold and Sako fell on the boulder. Same scope and same rifle were strapped across my back when a ladder to a stand gave way and I fell backward from about 4 feet onto some big rocks right on the scope (and beloved Sako). The rifle fell out of my Kubota last season and landed hard in the gravel road. Obviously, the problem I have is mostly me and my apparent death wish, but except for some minor POI adjustments to that same Vari-X III, it's still on the gun. I noticed today that the Sako rings were scuffed pretty bad, but the scope looks brand new. That's a tough scope and it has earned my respect. I guess I'll never know if spending twice or three times as much for a top of the line German scope gets me more than I got from Leupold. For years I hosted a lot of south Texas deer hunts and I got to where I could look at a guy and his gear and his gun and I could tell if he was a serious shooter. Mostly those serious guys used Leupold on their well worn and scuffed up old Model 70's and 700's and seemed to prefer 270, 25-06, or 264 Win Mag.
 
I have a Redfield 3-9x 1960's version), a Simmons Prohunter 4x, and a Leupold Vari-X II, 1-4. The one I like best is the Leupold. Perhaps the Leupold being more expensive than either of the others might have something to do with it. None the less I like the Leupold the best, especially in low light conditions.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top