Discussion in '.375 & Up' started by Meat78, Feb 4, 2013.
My view on optics (pun intended) is rather predictable isn't it?
Seems that the time between the sun touching the horizon and last light is the sweet spot for me, what can I say?:eyebrow:
its time for a beer then me thinks....:beer:
Because I hunt very much for Foxes, Roe deer, Fallow deer and Red deer, I shoot very many of my animals in low light conditions.
On my 6.5-06 I have a Zeiss 6-24x56 scope and with that I can shoot 20-30 mins earlier in the morning and 20-30 mins later in the evening here in Norway and Sweden than I can with the 3-9x50 Leupold I have on my 375Ruger.
I shoot about 20-25% of my animals in those extra minutes.
And with a bit of snow on the ground and a faint moonlight, I can hunt and shoot all night with my 6.5-06 if I want.
And because of this I don't use my 375Ruger as much as I want and is the main reason for why I want to replace the Leupold scope with the 3-12x50 Zeiss Duralyt.
I have a Zeiss 'Victory' 1.5-6 x 42 with a #4 reticle on my Sako 85 and am very happy with it. It's brilliance and clarity is outstanding. On a 2010 hunt in Zimbabwe I took a leopard in extremely low fading light where a lesser scope might have meant no shot costing me the only opportunity of taking this elusive cat.
On a prior hunt in Mozambique I got lucky on a lion we had been tracking for 18 days and took him early morning with my other Sako .375 which was topped with a Zeiss 'Victory' 2.5-10 x 50. Again, it was a tough shot in extremely low light and I firmly believe my success on this hunt was due to those brilliant optics.
I have owned and used several quality brands of scope, including those you list.... but when the total cost of a trip to Africa is taken into account, and considering you may only get one chance at an outstanding trophy, the money spent on a quality scope is probably the best investment you can make towards successful safari.
For a plains game only hunt, the 2.5-10x gives great versatility but if your safari includes dangerous game I would opt for the 1.5-6x in any top brand. Choose a bold reticle if possible as it will speed up your ability to aim precisely in poor light.
nice post let us know what you end up with ..cheers
FWIW, I am headed to RSA in May and just bought a 375 H & H. This trip is a plains game hunt, but I have dreams of going back for buff, so I mounted a Zeiss Conquest 3 X 9 in Warne QD rings so, if the buff hunt materializes, I can easily swap it for a lower power scope.
I own a Winch 70 Safari Express .375 H&H with a Leupold VII 3-9x40 ... QR rings. :bighello:
What's your range to shoot ?
I shoot about 160 - 190 yds, target less than 7 " no pb but I need x9 !! ... 65 years old ....:eyecrazy:
First I'd put a Hawhke 1.25-4.5 x 24 QR because I don't know the quality of the Winch Safari Express enough,
After 40 shots I have put my Leupold VII 3-9x40 (QR of course) perfect !!!! for my eyes ...
Take care to the distance between your eye and scope need 4". ...
At least you will get it with a Leupold, they have great eye relief.
I have a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40mm on my M70. Plenty of eye relief. The M70 has plenty of weight, it's just not going to slam a scope with reasonable eye relief into your face. Then again the Zeiss has good eye relief too. I love that scope, just a phenomenal value for the money. The local Cabelas in fact is going to have a sale on them this weekend at $299, I may just have to go get one just because.
I don't like the Conquest compared to the Leupold...the higher priced Zeiss models are a lot nicer (but pricier too).
Eric, have you tried the Conquest scopes before? I have owned several and they are top notch and comparable to the Leupold (I actually prefer them) all day long. In fact Leupold assembles them for Zeiss using Zeiss parts.:hail:
Just swapped the Leupolds' off the rifles and replaced with Conquests. Brighter in low light in my field tests. Which makes them a winner for me.
I think the Zeiss 3-9 40mm are well priced, I still am stuck on the Leupold V III, I think the cheaper Leupold I and II, Rifleman and the Redfield are cheaper made. You can find the decent Leupolds on E bay. Like I said for the dollar I have found nothing better. I have looked at $800 Conquests and thought they are overpriced.
Leupold binoculars and spotting scopes are not good. They need to improve, poor in low light and not sharp for the dollar.
$800?? Most Conquests I have seen are in the 4-600 dollar range.
Natchez price 3.5-10 x 44mm Rapid Z-600 Reticle $800, 4.5-14 44mm $900.
I guess I'm still living in the Dark ages! I wouldnt pay that much for ANY scope! Still, good is good and I'll bet side by side with a similar priced Leupold, the Zeiss would win. JM NOT SHO!
i bought two conquest 3-9x40 when i was in reno for $499.00 each. converting the difference from sterling this is approx $200.00 cheaper than the equivalent zeiss in the uk, so i would be happy with the prices over there.
The Zeiss Duralyt 1.2-5x36, 2-8x42 and 3-12x50 cost around $1000 at Opticsplanet.
If you want them with illuminated reticle, they cost about $300 more.
They are the best value for the money scopes you can buy in my opinion.
Separate names with a comma.