Optics thoughts, Leica vs Leupold

I have the latest Leica Nino’s and love them. But I use and recommend the Z8i. In my opinion it is night and day

I've not used any Leica scopes but any of their binos, rangefinders, or cameras I have used are excellent optically and functionally. I have a Leupold 2.5-8 that has been on my 30-06 pump Rem 7600 for 30 years. Never moved, good as day one. Back when they made them shiny and pretty! Anymore there's so many models to compare we would need more specifics for "good" advice.

Optical quality to Leica vs Leupold but CS and warranty poor compared to Leupold. Swarovski warranty and CS is much better than Leica and quality a small bit better as well so why go with Leica when Swarovski is available? You can break the glass on anything Swarovski and get it replaced free of charge.

NightForce and S&B are probably the toughest.

If I could afford it-I would buy Leica all around.
Nightforce toughness comes with added weight-doesn’t bother me but some will balk at the extra ounces.
I have had very good success with leupold and Swarovski but like I said, if I could afford Leica. . .

I don’t own a Leica, but have been using mostly Leupold’s for years. I have some with scrapes and chips that are 40 + yrs old and still going strong.
Out of 20+ scopes, only one has ever had to go in for service. It was new in box, but the magnification ring needed a wrench to turn. Sent it in and had it back in a couple of weeks and all was well.
I’ve looked through Leicas and they are great. They seem a little better optically than VX5/6 Leupold’s, but I don’t think you’ll go wrong with either.

Once you get up to Leupold-level quality, the improvements (in resolution, repeatability in controls, eye relief, etc.) come in smaller and smaller increments. I have both of the scopes you mention, the Leica Amplus and the Leupold VH6HD. The Leica has slightly better resolution. I haven’t noticed a difference in relief. The controls of both scopes are accurate and repeatable. The illuminated reticle in the Amplus is perfect…at least to my eye. Both companies have solid reputations. You won’t go wrong with either….but my choice is the Amplus.

E Butler said:

You have to remember Leopold is glass and Leica is crystal for their optics.

Click to expand...

Do you have a source/citation on this? Not doubting you.. just find this very interesting...

Crystal makes sense as it offers both more clarity and greater light gathering capability (prism effect, which normal "glass" does not have)..

But...

All of the big manufacturers of German/Austrian optics get their glass from the same place.. Schott (which happens to be owned by Zeiss)..

All crystal is in fact "glass".. but not all glass is "crystal"... the principle difference in the two is crystal has a very high lead content (the EU mandates at least 24% for glass to be declared "crystal".. but most of the high quality crystal manufacturers like Waterford in Ireland have a much higher lead content.. Waterford uses a 32% blend..

Low lead content makes glass "soft"...high lead content makes glass more brittle than you would want in an optic.. (a true EU standard crystal I would think would be too brittle to stand up to recoil of many centerfire rifles?)...

Each company (swaro, leica, zeiss, etc) can choose whatever Schott glass/crystal formula they want.. so quality can certainly vary from one company to another or even one line from one company to another line from the same company.. So it is possible that one company is buying "glass" for their entry level scopes, and then moving up to "crystal" for their higher end lines, etc..

On Schotts website they speak to the "glass" they provide for binos, thermals, scopes, etc.. but I cant find any reference to "crystal" being used..


Schott actually only makes a very small amount of "crystal" from what I can tell.. most of which is used by their subsidiary Zwiesel to produce high quality stemware, bowls, and other household items (sold at places like Willams Sonoma, etc)..

I have been underwhelmed with my Leica trinovid Bino purchase for what this is worth. I know it is there lower end but have always bought optics in that class from zeiss and leupold and truly find myself grabbing my vortex more often than not as the handling is superior. Go figure

mdwest said:

Do you have a source/citation on this? Not doubting you.. just find this very interesting...

Crystal makes sense as it offers both more clarity and greater light gathering capability (prism effect, which normal "glass" does not have)..

But...

All of the big manufacturers of German/Austrian optics get their glass from the same place.. Schott (which happens to be owned by Zeiss)..

All crystal is in fact "glass".. but not all glass is "crystal"... the principle difference in the two is crystal has a very high lead content (the EU mandates at least 24% for glass to be declared "crystal".. but most of the high quality crystal manufacturers like Waterford in Ireland have a much higher lead content.. Waterford uses a 32% blend..

Low lead content makes glass "soft"...high lead content makes glass more brittle than you would want in an optic.. (a true EU standard crystal I would think would be too brittle to stand up to recoil of many centerfire rifles?)...

Each company (swaro, leica, zeiss, etc) can choose whatever Schott glass/crystal formula they want.. so quality can certainly vary from one company to another or even one line from one company to another line from the same company.. So it is possible that one company is buying "glass" for their entry level scopes, and then moving up to "crystal" for their higher end lines, etc..

On Schotts website they speak to the "glass" they provide for binos, thermals, scopes, etc.. but I cant find any reference to "crystal" being used..

High-quality optics and technology for sport | SCHOTT

Click here to discover SCHOTT’s advanced range of sports optics offering products such as HT glass for long-range vision and optical prisms for high powered binoculars

www.schott.com

Schott actually only makes a very small amount of "crystal" from what I can tell.. most of which is used by their subsidiary Zwiesel to produce high quality stemware, bowls, and other household items (sold at places like Willams Sonoma, etc)..

Click to expand...

Very interesting, I am very impressed by so much information.

Where did you get or find all this information from?

Thank's for all, five star answer.

homeless said:

View attachment 599375

Missing from this image is my latest acquisition Leica er 3.5-14x42 with ballistic turret without illuminated reticle

Click to expand...

The only Leica products I own are rangefinding binos which I have been most satisfied with over the years with different generations of the Geovid. What I can not understand is when Leica produces a scope with nice physical dimensions in proper power range (the bottom two pictured) for most hunting applications it disappears from the US market?

homeless said:

Very interesting, I am very impressed by so much information.

Where did you get or find all this information from?

Thank's for all, five star answer.

Click to expand...

Crystal is a little bit of a personal interest of mine (albeit not an obsession of any sort).. my wife really likes crystal, so when in Ireland for example we took time out to tour the Waterford factory, buy some stuff that is only offered at the factory, etc.. when in Austria time was taken to tour Swarovski, buy some bespoke items there, etc..etc.. and we've collected bits and pieces of things here and there over the years..

I got interested in optical "glass" several years ago when discussing (arguing) the merits of various Euro brands vs US brands vs Japanese brands, etc over and over and over again with hunters, photographers, etc.. and started looking into "what makes one "glass" any better than another?"...

Information was basically gathered over time and associated with personal interest.. and a little internet digging after the comment was made that euro optics are being made with crystal (Ive never heard that statement before.. and would have thought this would be something I would have known if true?)...

Ultimately there is a very fine line between clarity, quality, durability, etc of truly top shelf glass (or crystal) and most glass (or crystal) of above average manufacture.. there is certainly a noticeable difference (proven by the science, not just people looking through it), but the question is.. is the difference that can actually be seen by the typical naked eye worth the cost difference associated with top shelf vs maybe 2nd shelf quality glass?

Thats really an individuals decision (something is "worth" what someone is willing to pay for it)..

For me, I can absolutely tell a difference in clarity and brightness in my mid range (VX3, VX5, etc) leupold optics and my mid range european optics (Swaro X5, Zeiss Conquest, etc).. The european scopes win every time...

but..

FOR ME, I have largely went from being a Zeiss guy to almost exclusively a Leupold guy for 2 reasons (might not be the same decision for everyone else).. 1) Leupold customer service is simply among the best in the business.. 2) their VIP program for military vets, law enforcement, and industry professionals makes their pricing outrageously attractive (roughly 40% off MSRP)..

So while I have rifles in the safe with a variety of german/austrian scopes on them as well as a few pair of german binos on hand etc (all with Schott glass in them).. almost everything I have purchased in the last few years wears leupold.. and Im sure most everything I purchase from this point forward will wear leupold as well..

gearguywb said:

Thank you for all of the replies!

I picked up a VX6HD 1-6 to give it a try.

I am a huge fan of NF scopes when it comes to long range stuff, including on my hunting rifles for elk, etc. There does not seem to be much love for their low power offerings.

Click to expand...

I think you’ll be very happy. I looked at a Swarovski 1-8 but the price difference was too big for me.

I have a VX6HD 1-6 patrol on a semiauto and love it.

Maybe I’m wrong about this, since it has been awhile since I looked for a scope. But the Europeans still offer fairly uncomplicated scopes for the hunter. Nearly all of Leupold’s line of scopes now feature a number of wheelygigs and geegaws that I have no use for.

I only have experience with the older Leupold scopes, the 2.5-8 Vari-X and more recently the fist generation 3.5-10 CDS. Both have withstood, without problems, a recoil of 60 ft/lbs. The 2.5-8 was used for about 15 years prior to going up in power to the 3.5-10!

I have grown with Leupold's scope. Nothing compares to the resolution of European glass.

Not really questioning the clarity of scopes, but just how clear does a scope need to be for a hunting firearm?

I understand the need if you have a shot at a animal at first or last light, but in most states that shot wouldn't be legal. I've killed a lot of animals just as it was legal first thing in the morning and in the evening to the point that it was dark when I got to the animal.

I shot a bull elk one morning and saw another hunter walking towards me once I got to him and made sure that he was dead. It was a CPW officer who had been watching the elk and heard my shot. He asked me what time it was when I pulled the trigger, I told him when it was and said that I even waited a bit longer just to make sure that I was legal shooting time.

He helped me clean it and then took some of the liver and headed back around the hill.

To this day he was the only officer I have ever seen out hiking on opening day.

Oh, by the way. I had a Leopold VX 2 3-9x40 on my 7mm Rem mag and could see that elk just fine at 350 yards

Leupold makes the better rifle scope but Leica makes the much much better binocular

European scopes, definitely, have better glass, but have a reputation of being delicate.

Leupolds are more rugged and have the best warranty of anything.


The most rugged scopes are made by Nightforce, Trijicon, and SWFA, but their scopes aren't really built for hunting.


I've never used anything other than a Leupold on an African hunt, and I've never needed more than 1 shot. (.300 Win Mag, .375 H&H, .416 Rigby) (13 BG animals).

Safari Dave said:

The most rugged scopes are made by Nightforce, Trijicon, and SWFA, but their scopes aren't really built for hunting.

Click to expand...

???? Is that a joke? Ironically, those are the only three I use for hunting, mostly Nightforce, with which I'd guess I've shot a couple of hundred deer and many hundreds of pigs. eta - I also use an Aimpoint. So, add that to my list.

Reliability is the single most important quality in a rifle, scope, and ammo.

Scopes that have failed on me include Leupold, Zeiss, Nikon, US Optics, Redfield, Tasco (no surprise there), and a few I cannot even remember that came with a used rifle.

Here is just a few short months ago with a Nightforce. That is a native South Texas deer, no pen raised put and take there.






Another deer taken with a Nightforce 2.5-10x42

Doug3006 said:

Nearly all of Leupold’s line of scopes now feature a number of wheelygigs and geegaws that I have no use for.

Click to expand...

Impeccable word choice: "wheelygigs and geegaws".