PDA

View Full Version : Anyone have a Zeiss?


send it_hit
07-21-2010, 1:58 PM
Hey CalGunners,

I'm just starting to get into more long range/precision shooting. I'm going to be using a Savage 10 Police Carbine with a 20" barrel, chambered in .308. I have no optics for it right now, because I'd like to be sure before I buy. So far I'm leaning towards Zeiss, seems to have the clearest and brightest glass, and from what I've heard all the clock work in the turrets is very precise.

That being said, anyone have a Zeiss? Used a Zeiss? Your thoughts? (Please don't tell me to go spend $1500-$2000 on a scope, like I said, I'm just starting and will get super top-of-the-line equipment when I'm more experienced. :p) The $700 Zeiss' are more my price range.

Thanks in advance! :D

brando
07-21-2010, 2:24 PM
Those are mostly hunting scopes and often aren't geared for precision long range shooting. Hensoldt is the Zeiss tactical line and they are $3500+ scopes. If you're sort of new to it, I'd stick to a scope with a ranging reticle such as mil-dot, 1/4MOA or 0.1MRAD turrets and FFP preferably. That's hard to get for under $1500, but there are always compromises.

1911whore
07-21-2010, 3:19 PM
The Zeiss conquest with a mil dot reticle will serve you very well, the glass is crisp, clear, and you will not go wrong for the money. I had one on a savage 10fcp-le and loved the combo, now I wasnt jumping out of planes with it or dragging it through the mud but it worked well. If I were going to engage in paramilitary activities and not just being a mall ninja I would buy something more robust. But you should be well served.

Matt P
07-21-2010, 3:19 PM
Brando appears to be a wise man who knows what he is talking about.

I would suggest the following,
1. Be possibly very realistic on how far you want to shoot. The BIG payoff in quality glass tends to be more quality of viewable image at extended ranges. Not to suggest you can not spend under $300 and shoot out to 800 yards.
2. The other issue will be how well you shoot your rifle as it is. Most would suggest at least being able to shoot 10rds in 1 MOA. Or a 1 inch group of 10 at 100 yards. Distance tends to be a test more of how you contact the rifle each and every time and press the trigger.
3. What is it you want to shoot at? Small things or large. Mil Dots reticals can challenge some in precise retical alignment. I can understand and appreciate being able to shoot small groups, maybe that is not important to you.
4. Magnification, the higher magnification generally makes it easier to find consistent points of aim. Lower magnifications will force you to use terrain or other features to find that same point of hold.
5. First Focal Plane scopes are as brando says, expensive. Its very common for individuals to get into PR and spend loads of money on a rifle, and then try to go cheap on optics, and expect the rifle to do all else. Im not saying you are doing this, but more for something to consider.
6. There are so many aspects to PR shooting to consider. Maybe go cheap, like a Sightmark 6.5 - 24 30mm tubed scope. I have seen those used, and they are actually pretty good for the money. Not FFP, but the knobs lock out, and they tend to repeat zero pretty well.
Maybe cut your teeth on the cheap stuff. Define what your needs are, and then save up and spend the BIG dollars on a S&B, Nightforce, or US Optic.
Good luck, not sure if that helped if any...

send it_hit
07-21-2010, 7:28 PM
thanks everybody, helps alot. like you said matt, i do need something to cut my teeth on first. i do intend to learn to shoot sub-moa groupings etc. so a mil-dot style recticle is in my mind... zeiss conquest is actually what i was looking at... thanks again guys

Matt P
07-22-2010, 9:50 AM
A Mil-Dot wouldnt be the ideal retical to use to shoot tiny groups.
Maybe the leupold TMR style might be a little better.
Typically as long as you enough magnification, then a Mil-Dot will work.
Like I said, the less coarse reticals do not obscure as much. A little easier to shoot small groups.
All the above is suggested for someone JUST getting into this craft.

CSTactical
07-22-2010, 11:38 AM
I have been really happy with the Zeiss items.

We have a USED but in very good condition CONQUEST 4.5-14X44 RAPID Z 1000 MAT that we would sale for $670.00. This scope new is $874.95.

brianinca
07-22-2010, 12:30 PM
I put a 6.5-20x50 Zeiss Conquest #43 on my 16FVSS in 223. I got a great deal on a show demo, I couldn't pass it up (several years ago).

The Zeiss replaced a very good Bushnell 4200 6-24x40 AO MilDot, the eyebox on the Zeiss is much more forgiving and the side focus and target turrets are easier to use. A 1" tube isn't going to give you much elevation to play with in 308, even a 20" bbl is going to get you WAY out there, so if you go with a 1" design you'll need to think about a rail with 20MOA or more built in. I think the point folks are making about the Conquest being a hunting scope is related to that 1" tube.

I don't find the glass on the Zeiss notably superior to the Bushnell 4200, I also have a couple of 4200 3.5-10x50's that are great but have hunting reticles and 1" tubes.

30mm tubes are going to give you more elevation to work with, that may be your deciding factor over glass quality if you're just punching paper. Have you looked at some of the less spendy 30mm glass instead of pre-picking Zeiss? SWFA SuperSnipers, Falcon Menace, etc?

I have a couple 20" FP10's in 308 and 223, they are great rifles and the shorter tubes make them very handy. You'll have a lot of fun!

Regards,
Brian in CA

send it_hit
07-22-2010, 3:12 PM
I put a 6.5-20x50 Zeiss Conquest #43 on my 16FVSS in 223. I got a great deal on a show demo, I couldn't pass it up (several years ago).

The Zeiss replaced a very good Bushnell 4200 6-24x40 AO MilDot, the eyebox on the Zeiss is much more forgiving and the side focus and target turrets are easier to use. A 1" tube isn't going to give you much elevation to play with in 308, even a 20" bbl is going to get you WAY out there, so if you go with a 1" design you'll need to think about a rail with 20MOA or more built in. I think the point folks are making about the Conquest being a hunting scope is related to that 1" tube.

I don't find the glass on the Zeiss notably superior to the Bushnell 4200, I also have a couple of 4200 3.5-10x50's that are great but have hunting reticles and 1" tubes.

30mm tubes are going to give you more elevation to work with, that may be your deciding factor over glass quality if you're just punching paper. Have you looked at some of the less spendy 30mm glass instead of pre-picking Zeiss? SWFA SuperSnipers, Falcon Menace, etc?

I have a couple 20" FP10's in 308 and 223, they are great rifles and the shorter tubes make them very handy. You'll have a lot of fun!

Regards,
Brian in CA

Forgive my ignorance... like i said, I'm pretty new to precision shooting. Why would a larger diameter tube give more elevation? do you mean literal elevation off of the rifle that the scope will sit? if so, what is the benefit of that?

Matt P
07-22-2010, 3:42 PM
Elevation movement from within the body of the scope.
I should have mentioned that. 1" tubed scopes will get you to 500 yards usually, but after that, without the 20 MOA base, you will run out of adjustment with the elvation control.
The above has just been my exp.
A 30mm offers more adjustment because the tube body is wider.

send it_hit
07-22-2010, 5:33 PM
gotcha, thanks