Zeiss Conquest

[mildot]

Hi,

Im thinking of getting a the above scope in 6-20x50 and wondered if anyone had one? What they think of it? and if they know how it compares to the Leupold VX111 scopes? (as i have one)

Many thanks

[simon bmann]

I haven't owned the model you are asking about, but I did own a 4 - 12 x 56 Zeiss Diavari. Although a fine scope I was never convinced that the extra cost was worth it compared to a Leupold

[GAZZAR15]

I have that very scope mounted on a AR15 excellent piece of kit,I also own other Conquests and Leupolds and the Zeiss is probably better quality and excellent value for money check out the prices on Cabelas website
Gary

[Musclefox]

ive owned a zeiss conquest and they are top scopes,good price and excellent optics..

[mildot]

My main worry was that the zeiss only has 25mm tube where as all my others have 30mm! So i assume that the 30mm allows light to pass easier! subject to lenses. Am i correct in thinking that the Zeiss has better glass!




P.S Does anyone have the Leupold MK4 in similar mag? Wht do you think of it?

[BWH]

I have a couple of conquests but not the model you are after. They have better glass than the leupolds. Not all scopes that have 30mm bodies have 30mm lenses inside them which i have been told is the case in some leupolds so they will not offer all teh advanages of a 30mm tube. I dont think you will go far wrong with a conquest.

[bjarup]

My main worry was that the zeiss only has 25mm tube where as all my others have 30mm! So i assume that the 30mm allows light to pass easier! subject to lenses. Am i correct in thinking that the Zeiss has better glass!

P.S Does anyone have the Leupold MK4 in similar mag? Wht do you think of it?

I have an Leupold VARI X III and it is far beyond compare with e.g. a Leapers scope or even Falcon 10*42T (have owned both sorts). Much more clear in the optics and much more light in spite of the fact that the Leaper and the Falcon has 30mm tubes compared to the 1" of the Leupold. The two simply does not reach the quality of the Leupold. I wouldn't worry about the tube.. I'd worry about the glass (lenses). Zeiss might have better glasses comparet to Leupold but also a better (higher) price than the Leup.

[The Good Shot]

great model mate cant go wrong...;)

[Peter M]

IMO the zeiss is top draw. Really pleased with mine, awesome low light performance.
To be honest I have not had the pleasure of looking through a Leupold in that mag/variety.
As difficult as it is try and look through both prior to purchase. Glass is certainly a personal preference. What suits me and many others may not agree with your eyes??
Regards
Peter

[mildot]

Thanks guys i think you have pursuaded me to get a Zeiss now! I was going to get the Leupold MK4 with illum ret but i can get the Zeiss for almost £300 less! ! ! ! ! ! I also have a burris black diamond which does have slightly better image than my current Leup VX111 but i think for a saving of almost £300 i can forgo the illum ret.... :D





thanks for your time guys

[Skany]

Thanks guys i think you have pursuaded me to get a Zeiss now! I was going to get the Leupold MK4 with illum ret but i can get the Zeiss for almost £300 less! ! ! ! ! ! I also have a burris black diamond which does have slightly better image than my current Leup VX111 but i think for a saving of almost £300 i can forgo the illum ret.... :D





thanks for your time guys


you wont be disapointed:)

I went form a vx3 & it was in a different leuge!
Andy

[bling_it]

What's it going on? They're parallax free from 50 yards on so not really much cop for an air rifle. If it's full bore then it's a bit restricted at 45" of vertical at 100 yards, you'd probably need a 20moa rail on to get to 1000yards.

[REEVES]

I also went from a VX3 to a conquest 4.5-14x50 MC,parallex down to 30 yds.

Also use a Meopta artemis 2000 3-12x50 both on air rifles.

I would not go back to a VX3 as both the above suit me better.

Nick.

[mildot]

Im really surprise that no one has defended Leupold mk4's. :confused:

They are obviously better than the Leupy VX111's.

[bjarup]

Im really surprise that no one has defended Leupold mk4's. :confused:

They are obviously better than the Leupy VX111's.


Either no one think so or no one owns such a scope. And I am pretty happy with my VXIII..

[ross H]

I also went from a VX3 to a conquest 4.5-14x50 MC,parallex down to 30 yds.

Also use a Meopta artemis 2000 3-12x50 both on air rifles.

I would not go back to a VX3 as both the above suit me better.

Nick.

the conquest is the nicest optics ive looked through but for hft which is what i looked at it for it didnt have a useable ret so i went for a vxiii:)

[REEVES]

the conquest is the nicest optics ive looked through but for hft which is what i looked at it for it didnt have a useable ret so i went for a vxiii:)

Mildot ????????????

[ross H]

Mildot ????????????

yer it is mate but mildot doesnt give any real advantage over a 30/30 ret apart from a bit of bracketing, im getting the varmint ret in my vxiii (ballistic ret ie lines rather than dots) this gives a finer aim mark, same as my bushnel at the moment just better optics hopefully

[mildot]

I had a leup vx111 with the varmint ret! very good ret i must admit. The thing i like with it was that the spaceing wasnt the same for all marks!

[ross H]

thats odd you say that because i dont think the bushnells is either:)