I have been reading back and forth between two translations of the Zohar. One is the edition put out by the Kabbalah Center folks and the other is Daniel Matt’s critical translation. Part of that is just because I want to see two takes of it, especially since Matt takes a philological approach and attempts to reconstruct an original out of the variants.
I am working with the first volume of each right now (because I’m only a little crazy) and so far like the Matt translation better. Mostly, I am dipping in and out of different sections, reading a stretch here, then there. There is just one thing that grates on me a little, which I never imagined would—extensive footnotes. There is so much critical apparatus attached to the Matt translation that I am having a difficult time working through the text on its own terms.