Swaro Z5i v Z61 how do they compare to the z3

[bigfellascott]

Can any of you fellows that own these scopes give me some info regarding them and the z3. I'm curious as to whether there is any advantage re image quality under the light/low light - I'm interested in their performance under spotlighting conditions mainly as that's where I would be using them for the most part (there will of course be some daylight late arvo shooting too) but more interested in the nighttime performance under light to be honest.

What are the illuminated reticles like on them? worth the extra $ or not? I like their ballistic turret setups, that I could use at times for those long shots.

I've seen some of the Z5i for around the $1700 US mark which isn't too bad I guess (fucking shitload to drop on a scope) but if its worth it I guess why not.

The Z6i is quite a bit more expensive but I guess has the higher mag range which might explain the extra cost.

Anyway any info on them from those who own and use those scope mentioned would be appreciated.

Or the other one that gets a Mention is the Nightforce Range of Scopes, if anyone has those and the Swaro's what do you find better (if in fact there really is much diff?) who knows.

Anyway give me the good, bad etc

[lowndsie]

I know the Z5 and 6 use a better spring in the turrents...something about leaf vs coil etc etc. Suppose to be a better option if you adjust them frequently.

I'm not sure about the glass quality. I've heard it's the same as the Z3 and I've also heard it's different. Personally, I don't want to look through a 5 or 6 in fear that they are optically better and I can only ever afford z3's..

I'm thinking of getting a z3 4-12x50 for my .270 in a few months.

[bigfellascott]

Some interesting points there Lowndsie - I did see in a vid somewhere they use 4 springs instead of those leaf things, I guess it depends on what you're doing as to whether that is real important or not.

There's a fair ol price diff between the Z3 and the Z6 I guess that's to do with the mag range, just wondering where else the $$ are in comparison.

[louie the fly]

Hey mate,

As illustrated in my last few posts I have just purchase a Z3 3-9 x 36 for $990 which I have been shooting during the day and under the light on my CZ 22.

The other scopes on my rifles are a Kahles CBX 8x56, Leupold 6.5-20x50, Minox ZA5 1.8-8x36, Zeiss Terra 2-7x32, Leupold VX1 3-9x50 and I had a Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20x50.

For comparison sake I only directly compared the Z3 to the Minox and Ziess Terra as they had similar objective size (apples to apples). I know you asked how the Z3 compares to the Z5 and Z6 but since I have never looked through those scopes I can only comment on the Z3.

Optically I found the Z3 superior to the Minox and Terra. Both the latter scopes are around the $500 price point (I got my terra for $370 Minox for about $500). Let me justify why I consider the Z3 optically superior. To my almost 25 year old eyes the Z3 has the best edge to edge clarity and the best resolution. Everything I looked at with the Z3 appeared very sharp and I found the scope was very easy to focus even at closer ranges (around 30 yards). The clarity of the image was very good through the entire magnification range. In comparison the Terra had good image quality but on the max magnification the clarity and resolution was not as good. I also got the "tunneling" affect a little. The terra focused well but imo it the image qaulity was not as good as the Z3. The Minox has good optical clarity and image but I struggled to focus the scope at 8x power which was disappointing. The optical quality of the Z3 is best demonstrated when you use more magnification.

If I was doing a relative comparison of the optical quality of the three scopes I would give the Z3 a 9/10 the Zeiss Terra 7/10 and the Minox a 6.5/10 (7.5/10 without the focus problem).

In terms of build quality the Z3 is again head of the pack. The Z3 has very nice finger adjustable turrets which are firm and positive. The overall build quality is excellent. The Zeiss Terra also has very good build quality similar to the Z3 but just lags behind. The adjustments on the terra are solid and positive. The Minox has average build quality. The entire eye piece came loose which resulted in the scope not holding zero, the turrets are very sloppy and not positive. Sometimes it's hard to determine how many clicks you have done. It's a really shame because I like that little scope. Anyway it got sent back to Minox for repair under lifetime warranty. Still waiting for its return. Overall Z3 build quality 9/10, Zeiss Terra 8/10, Minox 4/10.

The Z3 performed well with my wolf eyes sniper II mounted on the scope and produced a nice clear image. I really cannot fault it. However for a dedicated spotlighting scope I would prefer a 50mm or 56mm objective.

Although I haven't had any experience with Z5 or Z6 the Z3 is certainly a quality bit of kit for the price. Although it's primarily a hunting scope line imo. I have every confidence that the Z4 Z5 and Z6 line of scope would be equally if not better quality than a Z3. I think I also read that the Z6 line does use different glass (HD glass maybe?) but I'm happy to be corrected. The same applies for Zeiss Victory scopes over the conquest imo.

The reason I bought the Z3 was I wanted good consistent performance and optical quality throughout the 3-9 power range during the day and night and wanted good build quality and turret adjustments. I got all of those in the Z3 and that gives me confidence.

Hope the information helps.

[louie the fly]

The best scope I have looked through is my kahles 8x56 CBX with illuminated reticle....As a dedicated spotlighting/low light scope there isn't much better than that imo. But can't really compare to my Z3 with 36mm objective vs 56mm

[curan]

......Hope the information helps.

Great post Louie!

[Camel]

That's two good posts in one day Louie, you should do it more often mate.

[bigfellascott]

Thanks for that Louie, how does the Z3 compare to the Zeiss Conquest? I guess it would be hard to compare them with the diff Objectives but still would be interested on hearing how they compared none the less.

[big G]

Great post.
Cheers George

[louie the fly]

sorry for the late replies guys.

The conquest compares pretty favourably to the Z3 in almost all logical criteria when comparing scopes. I would say build quality with the older conquests (not the terra) would be similar, turrets were of similar quality, the only difference I found was the image quality. This is not to say the conquest was poor quite the opposite actually. I personally find the Z3 to have the slightly brighter image and better edge to edge clarity. Image and optical quality is hard to explain but all things being equal at low light I think the Swaro has the better glass.

But the conquest price point is where it's superior to the Z3. my 3-9x36 was $990 from Australia. I've seen a zeiss conquest 3-9x40 go for around $450ish. That is basically half the price but definitely not half the performance which makes the zeiss better value for money imo. The Z3 is better but is it 40-50% better for 30-40% more money? Only you can decide. You really cannot go wrong with either and if you aren't too fussed either way the conquest will probably be the better choice.

The new HD5 would also be another scope to consider, they also seem like great value scopes. The 2-10x42 model is a very versatile scope and would be my choice on most rifles if you wanted to stay around the $1000 price point. It has been mentioned on this forum before but the $1000 price point is really the sweet spot for scopes. Obviously there are some exceptions but you can be confident that a $1000 scope will give you every chance to unlock the accuracy potential of your rifle.

[louie the fly]

just a quick note.....when I say conquest I'm refering to the old conquest scopes not the new conquest DL or the new line of HD5 scopes.

The DL scopes look very nice

[bigfellascott]

Thanks for that Louie.

[louie the fly]

Thanks for that Louie.

So any ideas what scope you are thinking of now?

[louie the fly]

I also forgot to add this information....I did some research on the swaro Z5/Z6 last night.

Z6 has the 6x magnification factor Z5 has the 5x.

The 2nd Gen Z6i has HD glass for magnification 15x or greater and has a lot of other small improvements over the original Z6i

Z5/Z6 uses coil springs.

In summary I would say the 2nd Gen Z6i is in a completely different league than the z5 or z3.

[bigfellascott]

Thanks for that Louie, I read all that the other day on their website, that's what got me asking the question as to whether there is a great diff visually between them or not.

I don't suppose you've actually been able to compare them against each other in the field by chance to really see how much diff there is between them and whether its worth the extra $$$?