80’s Vintage Zeiss Vs Leupold Vari-X iii

[Westerner1939]

Hi everyone, I have an old tang saftey Ruger in .270 that I’m looking for a scope to put on. It’s a beautiful rifle and I can’t stomach to put a matte scope on it, seeing there’s no new options in gloss out there today I’ve hit the used/vintage market.
I’ve narrowed it down to either a West German Zeiss Diavari-C 3-9x36mm or an early 2000’s Leupold Vari-X iii 2.5-8x36. I’m 33 years old so I’m not exactly old enough to remember the performance of these older scopes or how they compare to today’s. I’ve done research on the Zeiss and it seems as many people think they were as good or better than the conquest scopes.
Doing research on the Leupold has been pretty tough as they offered that model but labeled VX3 until fairly recently, most of the reviews i find are for the newer offerings.

Anyone’s input would be welcome as well as suggesting other scopes from thar era. One thing I’ve considered as well is the company “US CERAKOTE” they take new scopes and Cerakote them gloss black. While it’s close there’s still a hint of uncanny valley and lacks the depth of the factory gloss black scopes to me. If anyone has a cerakoted gloss black scope and can comment as to how they appear in rear life that would be appreciated as well.
Thanks

 

[Westerner1939]

I forgot to mention, I’ve been looking at the Kahles Helia S 2.2-9x42 as well.

 

[WAB]

I have taken truckloads of game with a 7x57 topped with a Leupold VX3 2.5-8x36. It is a fantastic scope for the money.

 

[Berettaco]

All are solid options - if all are the same reticle and meet your needs I go with the best value.
I’m partial to 36mm bells with low mounts

 

[uplander01]

Vintage scopes ae cool but rarely hold up like the new stuff, and the eye relief usually doesn't compare at all.

 

[Mountaineer]

Get the Leupold. They make it with the Boone and Crocket reticule also. It’s a great scope.

 

[meigsbucks]

Both great options. I favor the Leupold only due to warranty. I have several VX from that era and I think they are tougher than today’s. I only have one old Zeiss and it has held up with no issues.

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

Hi Westerner,

I would chose the Zeiss first. Great. Small, outstanding optics and super strong! To me, the best ages of Zeiss scopes.
Second, the Leupold 2,5-8x36.
I would discard the Helia S. The main thing is they are long, heavy and the optic design has a tunnel efect in low powers. Hate it!
Kahles fixed, in my opinion, all "defects" of that "S" variable series in the next Helia C line, 30 mm tube diameter. If you can find any Kahles Helia C 1,5-6x42 or even Helia C in 2,5-10x50 you are done! The light metal versions because Helia C were made also with steel tube. Great but too heavy in my view.
Also any of the late Kahles 1" tube, in 2,5-7x36 or 3-9x40 are truly great scopes!!

Good Luck!

 

[MontanaGrant]

Both would be a toss up. Very close in quality I have a a 3-9 zeiss and then two leupold vx3s and they’re near identical.

 

[PerH]

I had such a Kahles , it was good but the tunnel made me swap it for a Leupold vxR 3-9x

The Zeiss is good , but not made any longer , but its a well known one .

But i would chose the 2,5-8x since it is in production and its the long eye relief and excellent handiness of it , as well as lenses.

A 0,5 difference in magnifying is sometimes not much to differ , but its good Bush snd woodland and Scout like use

 

[Luvthunt]

Leupold all the way.

 

[professor]

I have a little leupold 2x7 vari x ll. Its a great scope on older rifles that need a slimmer profile. But the vari x lls are not amazing glass wise. This one is 1976 model.

 

[Firebird]

Another vote for the leupold.
Just for fun-have you looked at “Vintage Gun Scopes” website. Might hold your interest for a minute or two even if you can’t find what you seek

 

[Ruraldoc]

Ziess a little ahead of Leupold.

Khales if low light is the primary concern.