SWFA SS 3-9x42mm VS Z3 Swarovski, glass quality?

[brsnow]

I was curious if the glass quality is similar. I already have numerous Z3 scopes, but picked up a new rifle and think it might be fun to learn to dial and shoot longer distances for practice. Unlikely I will shoot further than 400 hunting. I just want to make sure the optics aren’t noticeably inferior.

thank you

 

[skywalkr]

If you want to learn to dial then the glass quality is the last thing on the list of importance. I haven’t looked through a Z3 but I really like my SWFA 3-9 (and the 6x) and the best part is I don’t have to worry if it is going to function and aim properly.

 

[ChrisAU]

If you want to learn to dial then the glass quality is the last thing on the list of importance. I haven’t looked through a Z3 but I really like my SWFA 3-9 (and the 6x) and the best part is I don’t have to worry if it is going to function and aim properly.

This, it was great last week when I dialed my 3-9 SS to shoot my first elk ever and had all the confidence that it was working correctly. I would not trust a Z3 to dial.

 

[brsnow]

I don’t dial when I hunt, it would be more geared towards practice and recreation. I have never had an issue with Z3 being durable and like the quality of glass in timber and low light. I am curious if the glass is comparable as dialing would be the least important to me, but something to play with in the summer. With archery I practice to 100 but only shoot to 50 hunting. Looking for similar concept with rifle.

 

[ChrisAU]

I don’t dial when I hunt, it would be more geared towards practice and recreation. I have never had an issue with Z3 being durable and like the quality of glass in timber and low light. I am curious if the glass is comparable as dialing would be the least important to me, but something to play with in the summer. With archery I practice to 100 but only shoot to 50 hunting. Looking for similar concept with rifle.

Oh I'm not a long range shooter, but I zero at 100. Dialed 0.9 mils for a 310 yard shot, and knew all I had to do was point and squeeze. No thinking about math while looking at the reticle to do a holdover. Dial, aim, shoot. Drop chart on my scope cover and my rangefinder, so just a glance after I range tells me what to dial.

 

[brsnow]

How is the clarity in low light? Appreciate the insight

 

[ChrisAU]

How is the clarity in low light? Appreciate the insight

The glass is very good, it's not going to match Swaro probably but I haven't had it side by side with one. It is close to Vortex Razor HD IMO. I can offer more insight after whitetail rifle season starts here. Didn't really use it in low light elk hunting last week.

 

[Formidilosus]

I don’t dial when I hunt, it would be more geared towards practice and recreation. I have never had an issue with Z3 being durable and like the quality of glass in timber and low light. I am curious if the glass is comparable as dialing would be the least important to me, but something to play with in the summer. With archery I practice to 100 but only shoot to 50 hunting. Looking for similar concept with rifle.

You won’t get anything out of practice or recreation if your scope doesn’t work. It’s an aiming device, not a spotting scope.



Resolution is better in the SWFA, “color pop” or what most think of brightness as, is a bit better in the Z3. Actual brightness in low light is pretty even. Build quality, longevity, reliability, is not even close.

 

[tdhanses]

The Z3 I hate to say it as the OP likes it but it is garbage, I sold mine after a year. If it just sits on a rifle, isn’t ever touched and you don’t bounce around or accidentally drop the gun it’ll be just fine. But what real world does none of this happen.

 

[Tater1973]

You won’t get anything out of practice or recreation if your scope doesn’t work. It’s an aiming device, not a spotting scope.



Resolution is better in the SWFA, “color pop” or what most think of brightness as, is a bit better in the Z3. Actual brightness in low light is pretty even. Build quality, longevity, reliability, is not even close.

Following...as I am in the market for a new scope for a current build. "Build quality, longevity, reliability, is not even close", which are you referring to? The Swaro or SWFA??? Thanks

 

[Formidilosus]

The Swaro or SWFA??? Thanks

The SWFA is significantly more durable, reliable and actually built to dial.

 

[prm]

The glass in the 3-9 really isn’t bad at all. Better than the SWFA 6x. Neither will prevent any shot in legal hours. But purely from a “viewing pleasure” standpoint, I much prefer the 3-9. I cannot comment on the Z3.

 

[handwerk]

No doubt the SWFA deserves much of the respect it gets, but for my needs I've been quite happy with my Z3's. I don't dial and the Z3's I use have been dependable from year to year. One has been on my 7 3/4 lbs 300 H&H for 8 + years and even after some bad falls and rough use on backpack hunts it's still been reliable . Many of my other rifles carry the same scope, far from"junk" in my book.

 

[Myronman3]

the swfa is no swaro. it is better in a lot of ways....glass quality aint one of them. that being said...the swfa is a helluva lot of scope for the money. i have no experience with the variable swfa; but i do have a 12x and a swaro habicht.
i think it is silly to expect the glass to be the same. that just isnt realistic. but i will say the glass quality shouldnt hold you back. especially if you are just shooting longer distance for practice.

 

[wind gypsy]

If your primary source of joy on the range is going back and forth between optics trying to pick fly shit out of chili and diagnosing which optical formula is most ideal you might not be 100% satisfied. 3-9 swfas have good glass though man.

 

[brsnow]

If your primary source of joy on the range is going back and forth between optics trying to pick fly shit out of chili and diagnosing which optical formula is most ideal you might not be 100% satisfied. 3-9 swfas have good glass though man.

not too many flies here. In low light picking out branches or small saplings that might deflect a shot matters to me. I will check one out and it sounds like it would be pretty easy to sell if it doesn’t work for me.

 

[wind gypsy]

not too many flies here. In low light picking out branches or small saplings that might deflect a shot matters to me. I will check one out and it sounds like it would be pretty easy to sell if it doesn’t work for me.

I shot a bunch of my rifles last weekend. Used the 3-9 SS back to back with Bushy LRHS, NXS 2.5-10x42, and Kahles gen3 624i. I didn't notice a step down when shooting the SWFA, you might find something if you were looking for it but nothing would get missed because of glass quality. The 3-9 actually just replaced the NXS 2.5-10 on the rifle I'll use the rest of season solely because the longer tube allows it to be mounted exactly where I want it where as the NXS is slightly compromised (cant mount it back far enough to be perfect).

 

[204guy]

If you're that worried about "glass" on a scope used for dialing... I'd just forget the whole notion of dialing.

 

[ChrisAU]

The Swaro is better at looking at animals, the SWFA is better at killing animals. Pick the tool best suited to your goal.

 

[brsnow]

Thank you for the information, sounds like I will stick with Swarovski for hunting and set up a different rifle for dialing/recreational shooting.