Swarovski 15X56 vs zeiss 15X60???

[bucktaxi]

I know the zeiss are not made anymore but I see them on ebay on a regular basis. Just wondering if anyone has compared them side by side and which they prefer?

 

[CDN]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-21-10 AT 02:16AM (MST)[p]Bucktaxi- I own the Zeiss 15X60. Yes I have compared them SxS extensively. In general there are three areas in which the Swaro's and Zeiss differ(besides porro vs. roof prism). One, the Swaro have a slightly more true color. Two, the Swaro's are lighter. Three, the Swaros are smaller. However, the Zeiss have a slight edge in field of view, and contrast(depth perception b/c of porro prism), and stronger or more true 15X and a better 4mm exit pupil. I willingly admit that I would rather pack the Swaro's day in and day out but have absolutely no problem saying that I love my Zeiss and have no intention switching anytime soon. In fact, my next purchase will be the smaller, lighter, bettter F.O.V Leica 12X50 Ultravids. Yes, I have compared all 3 SxS in the field. One thing to remember is that the older porro prism style of glass is more efficient at transmitting light than the roof prism. The Swaro's glass and coatings are state of the art and that affords them to be in a smaller package even though roof prism are less efficient only by design. All in all the Zeiss can be had for a great value these days and will always make the list. I can tell you that my hunting partners have all agreed on these findings when doing SxS comparisons. I think they have all asked to buy or trade straight up for them. You know what answer was. NO. One other thing to point out. For those of you that can't see around a blade of grass(Thx Terry)or are often confused for a cyclops because your eyes are so close together you might consider the Zeiss or Vortex Kaibabs. The Swaro's just won't close down far enough for some. IMO CDN

 

[bucktaxi]

Thank you CDN, how recent were the zeiss you have made, and have you looked at the older ones from the sixties? How do the eye cups compare?? Also, do you use the strap down tripod mount?

 

[CDN]

Bucktaxi- I believe these were made in 99 or 00. I bought them from a Zeiss rep. The eyecups are the most recent classic rubber style like on classic 10X40's. Yes, I have looked through some, what appeared to be very old non-armored 15's with hard, non-folding eyecups. Nice optics! I fold my eyecups down anyways. The mounting system is by none other than The Outdooorsmans. It is a neck that clamps over the bridge support bar with rubber sleeve over it. Cost is about a $150. IMO there is no other way to mount them. It is as solid if not more solid than any other mount on the market. Find the interpupilary for you then tighten the screws.Rock Solid!! If you have multiple users with different interpupilary distances you can still change but it will crimp the rubber sleeve. I do not overtighten the clamp. All of the plates for the Bogens, Jim White, and Outdoorsmans heads screw into the bottom of the neck. Very solid set up. CDN

 

[HardcoreOutdoor]

Since CDN is one of the few people on the planet I like to hunt with it will surprise no one that I generally agree with what he said above. However, since we own both and have indeed compared them side by side many times, I prefer the Swaros over the Zeiss by a small margin. The picture is just better over all in my opinion.

I will say that the Zeiss are easier to look through for hours and days at a time. Just more comfortable over the long run.

Since the Zeiss are not in production the question is kind of mute don't you think? Isn't the real choice now between the Swaros and the Vortex Kaibabs? And if that is the case the Swaros are hands down the winner unless the money is really an issue for you.

Wade
www.HardcoreOutdoor.com

 

[bucktaxi]

Well, thanks guys, it looks like I've purchased a pair of the zeiss 15x60 from the 80s era for $1,000. Supposedly they are in excellent condition. He seems to know his stuff and sells a lot of these high end optics. This leaves me plenty of room to get the outdoorsman tripod and head as well. Going by what he (the dealer) is saying about the difference between the two is the zeiss will have more "ghosts" from certain lighting but is completely taken care of with some added black sun shades (lack of a better term). He believes the zeiss's sharpness coupled with these "shades" will edge out the swaros. Whether that's true or not, it sounds like they are right on par with the swaros for long term glassing, in low light, and long distances. I appreciate your guys opinions and I can't wait to get up above timberline to give them a look. The nice thing about all of these high end glasses is their resale value. If It turns out I don't LOVE them I can resale them with hardly a loss.

Thanks again and good hunting, Steve

 

[bucktaxi]

Got a chance to compare my new (old) zeiss 15x60 to a friends swarovski 15x56. They actually fared quite well against the swaros. The only real difference was the swaros were quite a bit brighter, but the zeiss were plenty bright and the brightness of the swaros could eventually seem harsh as they are so bright with any part of the daytime sky in the view. The zeiss are a little bulkier but no heavier. I'll get a good chance to use them this coming week on a muzzle loader hunt in the high country of CO. I think after I send them back to zeiss for restoration I'm going to like them even more.

Good hunting, Steve