100% unbiased honest input on Leupold VX6-HD VS Zeiss Conquest V4

[Pdvdh]

Been looking at the Zeiss V4 and V6 also. Have an older "USA Assembled" Conquest that has worked flawlessly.
I noticed this Youtube vid from TiborasaurusRex. He had a discussion with Zeiss -- Seems the V6 uses the same turret system as the extremely reliable S@B scopes. They are actually made in the same factory AND have Schott through and through. Here's the review. Pretty interesting...

I'm interested in the V6 also. As an engineer with a strong background in math, unless I'm drunk, turning the magnification from 18x down to 14x as stated in the video, will NOT change the angular spacing between the reticle hash marks from 2moa to 5moa. The power would have to be turned down to about 7.2X. 18/7.2 = 2.5.

2moa (@ 18X) x 2.5 = 5 moa (@ 7.2X)

Maybe a math quiz can double check my calculation, because I did just consume two bottles of Blue Moon. Makes me wonder how much of the rest of the info in that video can be trusted...

Turning the power down to 14X on would change the angular spacing between the hash marks to 2.57 moa.

 

[Barrelnut]

I'm interested in the V6 also. As an engineer with a strong background in math, unless I'm drunk, turning the magnification from 18x down to 14x as stated in the video, will NOT change the angular spacing between the reticle hash marks from 2moa to 5moa. The power would have to be turned down to about 7.2X. 18/7.2 = 2.5.

2moa (@ 18X) x 2.5 = 5 moa (@ 7.2X)

Maybe a math quiz can double check my calculation, because I did just consume two bottles of Blue Moon. Makes me wonder how much of the rest of the info in that video can be trusted...

Turning the power down to 14X on would change the angular spacing between the hash marks to 2.57 moa.

I hear ya!. I think he just had the distance to the target wrong myself. LOL.
TiborasaurusRex is a well trusted source on long range shooting and scope reviews on Youtube though. Lots of manufacturers allow him to demo stuff. So.... No, we didn't personally hear Zeiss or S@B say that the turret mechanisms were the same, but that was a pretty unique statement for him to come up with.

 

[Sneuses]

Been on a multi year quest of sorts to find and then buy the best rifle scope I can afford for longer range hunting and shooting, more shooting than hunting.
It will be primarily a all around hunting scope first and foremost and a fun longer range scope secondary while I spend the time needed to become a proficient longer range shooter. My goal right now it to be good enough to ethically take game to 700 yards. I reload all my rifle ammo and I already have several superbly accurate (for me at least) reloads for my Tikka T3
I am not trying to become a dedicated long range hunter as I will always get as close as I can before I shoot but sometimes you can not and I would rather be able to shoot farther than not.
It will sit atop a Tikka T3 in 300wsm.
All of all my must haves for the scope which are:
>Budget absolutely under $1600
>Zero Stop
>Adjustable for both elevation and windage
>Locking turrets preferred but not mandatory
>Simple reticle that has sub tensions that allow for elevation and wind holds similar to a MIL-DOT but with more sub tensions that allow for finer shot placement.
>SFP I gave a friends FFP scopes an honest try but just didn't like it for a hunting application. Actually REALLY didn't like it.
>2-3x minimum to 15x to 18x maximum power range.
>30mm tube
>reasonably light
>Reasonably sized
>Maximum 44mm front objective to help accomplish size and weight requirements
>NOT made in china

So far within my budget and my must haves The two scopes that best meets my requirements is a Leupold VX-6HD 3-18x42mm with the TMOA reticle. and Zeiss Conquest V4 4-16x44 with the Zeiss ZMOA-2 reticle
The Leupold meets my requirements better than the Zeiss due to the fact its turrets lock and would be much harder to accidentally bump off zero but is 60% more costly.
But the Zeiss also meets most of my requirements and is about 40% cheaper.
I have only three concerns about the scopes
Tracking and return to zero and durability as the scope will be sitting on a light weight 300WSM rifle.
I would like the input from those that have had enough first hand experience with either or both that they are completely confident in eithers scopes ability to track and return to zero to hunt with and are satisfied enough they would buy the scope again if they could do it over.

Great thanks for the help.
Art/DJ

I own both optics and prefer the leupold over the ZEISS.

Been on a multi year quest of sorts to find and then buy the best rifle scope I can afford for longer range hunting and shooting, more shooting than hunting.
It will be primarily a all around hunting scope first and foremost and a fun longer range scope secondary while I spend the time needed to become a proficient longer range shooter. My goal right now it to be good enough to ethically take game to 700 yards. I reload all my rifle ammo and I already have several superbly accurate (for me at least) reloads for my Tikka T3
I am not trying to become a dedicated long range hunter as I will always get as close as I can before I shoot but sometimes you can not and I would rather be able to shoot farther than not.
It will sit atop a Tikka T3 in 300wsm.
All of all my must haves for the scope which are:
>Budget absolutely under $1600
>Zero Stop
>Adjustable for both elevation and windage
>Locking turrets preferred but not mandatory
>Simple reticle that has sub tensions that allow for elevation and wind holds similar to a MIL-DOT but with more sub tensions that allow for finer shot placement.
>SFP I gave a friends FFP scopes an honest try but just didn't like it for a hunting application. Actually REALLY didn't like it.
>2-3x minimum to 15x to 18x maximum power range.
>30mm tube
>reasonably light
>Reasonably sized
>Maximum 44mm front objective to help accomplish size and weight requirements
>NOT made in china

So far within my budget and my must haves The two scopes that best meets my requirements is a Leupold VX-6HD 3-18x42mm with the TMOA reticle. and Zeiss Conquest V4 4-16x44 with the Zeiss ZMOA-2 reticle
The Leupold meets my requirements better than the Zeiss due to the fact its turrets lock and would be much harder to accidentally bump off zero but is 60% more costly.
But the Zeiss also meets most of my requirements and is about 40% cheaper.
I have only three concerns about the scopes
Tracking and return to zero and durability as the scope will be sitting on a light weight 300WSM rifle.
I would like the input from those that have had enough first hand experience with either or both that they are completely confident in eithers scopes ability to track and return to zero to hunt with and are satisfied enough they would buy the scope again if they could do it over.

Great thanks for the help.
Art/DJ

I own both of these optics and prefer the Leupold for three reasons.

if my memory serves me correctly ZEISS has a limited 5 year warranty whereas Leupold IS lifetime.

the glass on the Leupold has better clarity.

the side focus on the Leupold is graduated in 100 yard increments ZEISS is not, gets you focused quickly.

Also with Leupold there is a custom dial system. Find a load that your weapon likes and play fill in the blanks https://www.leupold.com/service-support/resources/cds-dial-order. Utilizing the CDS and a range finder lots of guess work goes away.

 

[General RE LEE]

I am in the process of doing a thorough comparison of the VX5HD and Conquest V4. I own both and deciding which one to put on a new Tikka CTR.

The Conquest glass is very sharp and clear in the center FOV but the sharpness does start to fall off around the edges. The VX5HD glass is sharp to the edge and is slightly brighter in the lowest light.

The glass in the Zeiss V4 line is not HD glass. It is certainly high quality and neck and neck with the Leupold, but I think the VX5/VX6HD glass beats Zeiss by a hair because it is ED/HD glass.