Zeiss Conquest HD5 worth the money???

[dmax1800]

I'm considering a new Zeiss Conquest HD5 in a 3-15x42 with a rapid z 800 reticle. It goes for $975 to $1000 depending on where I buy it. Is it worth the money??? I like the reticle far better than a Leupold VX 3. I'm going to use it elk hunting and would like to be able to shoot 500 yards. It would sit on top of a 300 win mag.

 

[chopit]

I just spent a month of sundays comparing zeiss conquest hd5 5x25, to meopta and swarovski. If you are ok with 4x12 the meoptas in my opinion are way better. I went with swarovski z5 only cause im old and wanted more magnification. The meoptas run from 500 to 1000. The glass to me on the zeiss seemed to have a yellow tint. Someone I know who sells scopes for a living tells me that the conquest are japenese glass. Not sure if its the truth but I can see a diference.

 

[CLKHunter]

I'm considering a new Zeiss Conquest HD5 in a 3-15x42 with a rapid z 800 reticle. It goes for $975 to $1000 depending on where I buy it. Is it worth the money??? I like the reticle far better than a Leupold VX 3. I'm going to use it elk hunting and would like to be able to shoot 500 yards. It would sit on top of a 300 win mag.

You cant go wrong with it. I have the HD5 5-25 with Z1000 and it fits my needs perfectly. For your needs, a whole lots of scopes will let you shoot to 500 yards.

 

[Robster80]

which meopta 4-12 are u referring to? meopro or meostar?

 

[chopit]

I like the meopro but the glass is great on both just depends which features you like. If you havent looked thru one put it side by side with the zeiss. It wasnt even close for me.

 

[Robster80]

I like the meopro but the glass is great on both just depends which features you like. If you havent looked thru one put it side by side with the zeiss. It wasnt even close for me.

which meopro u got? 4-12x50? does it compare to a swaro z3 at all??

 

[chopit]

I bought the swarovski z5 5x25x52 only cause I wanted a lot of magnification. There was no difference to me and my eyes in any meopro and the 1650$ swaro z5. In low light or bright sun.

 

[Robster80]

I bought the swarovski z5 5x25x52 only cause I wanted a lot of magnification. There was no difference to me and my eyes in any meopro and the 1650$ swaro z5. In low light or bright sun.

seriously? i have a swaro 4-12. ive considered selling it and getting the zeiss hd5 or either the swaro z5. isnt the reticle in the z5 a bit thin?? one reason i considered the meopro is cuz ive heard the reticle is a little bolder than the swaro. could be wrong

 

[MudRunner2005]

If it says "ZEISS" on it, you can't go wrong...

 

[6point5x284]

I have the 5-25x50mm HD5 mounted on my 6.5x284 Norma and absolutely love it. The only negative I have to say is the weight, however it's not on a light backcountry rifle so wasn't an issue for me. But as long as you can live with the weight, the glass is crystal clear, sharp from center to edge, outstanding color, and the turrets repeat and track perfect.

Just worked up my new load for my Berger 140 VLD and after a long weekend of tweaking, now have a 1 hole gun for the MT antelope, muley, and wolf seasons coming up!

I'll be getting a 3-15 for my backcountry .300WM elk rifle later this year.

-6point5x284

 

[Robster80]

how much does it weigh

 

[6point5x284]

it weighs in at 27oz. not sure how that compares to the other brands (might be less actually because it's a 1" tube) but it was noticeably heavier than my 4.5-14x44mm Conquests I have on my other rifles. but again, i'm not packing it in the mountains, and the rifle it's on is heavy side anyway. definitely amazing glass though. i have zero regrets. it's going to make an outstanding plains rifle. i looked at vortex too (among others) and chose the HD5 because of pricing i get for Zeiss, it was too good to pass up. if i had to pay full price however, i would have had to go back to comparing the Vortex PST and the HD5. now that i have the HD5 i'm happy i went that route (i like the turrets better and i prefer a 2nd focal plane scope as i dont range at all with a scope, just my range finders). i will say to me, the HD5 glass is a little better than the PST, however they are very close. i think it will come down to what scope offers you the features you want. lastly, i will say when comparing to leuopold when i was originally looking, i wasn't very impressed with leuopold when comparing. that being said, i was looking at the Mark IV line, and not the VX6 or whatever their top line is.

 

[FSU Seminole]

I'm considering a new Zeiss Conquest HD5 in a 3-15x42 with a rapid z 800 reticle. It goes for $975 to $1000 depending on where I buy it. Is it worth the money??? I like the reticle far better than a Leupold VX 3. I'm going to use it elk hunting and would like to be able to shoot 500 yards. It would sit on top of a 300 win mag.

Is it worth the money? HECK YES!!!! I'm a HUGE Zeiss, Swaro and Kahles fan. I won't put anything atop any of my rifles if its not 1 of these 3 brands.

The new Conquest HD should be considered a STEAL. I mean, someone at Zeiss has lost their minds. With the new Conquest HD you're getting basically the old Zeiss VMV victory glass and coatings as Zeiss has upgraded their glass and coatings for the Diavari models in the HT series. So you're getting V/VM glass, multi T coating plus LotuTech coatings. What Zeiss has done some how is produce the same scope as the Swaro Z5 series for 500-600 dollars less.

I have 2 Z5s 1 on a 300 wsm 1 on a 270wsm, I'm getting this HD 5-25 for my Sako Finnlite 7mm to save 600 bucks. Its basically the same scope just less.

So yes, they are defenitely worth the money in my humble opinion.

 

[Robster80]

anyone know if the plex reticle is the same as the original conquest? nice and bold?