conquest or monarch?

[LightfootE]

I have a new tikka t3 stainless in 25-06 and want it to be my designated deer rifle. For pack in hunts, long hikes, and brush beating, this will be my go to. I plan to work up a load with the 115grn vld's and would like to be able to make accurate shots out to 400yrds or so, should a shot present it's self in a good scenario.
However, most realistic shots will be 100yrds or less.

the two scopes im looking at most are the Zeiss conquest 3-9x40 and the Nikon monarch 3 2.5-10x42. I've read a lot of good things about both scopes and a few bad on each. I'm trying not to spend more than $350 although I know the list prices on both scopes exceeds that and I just might have to plunk down the cash. I've been hunting for a lightly used scope of either model with out much luck.

If I do end up paying full price on a new one, which would you pick? I suspect the zeiss is categorized as a higher end scope but I do know that Nikons offer a lot of bang for their price range. Does either have the edge?

 

[lloydsmale]

I have both and there very close quality wize. In my opinion and this is an opinion as everyones eyes are a bit different, the monarch does a bit better in low light and the ziess is a bit better in the daytime. If held down to pick one id proabably go with the monarch

 

[Hunter2678]

To my eyes the Conquest takes the prize between the 2 scopes mentioned, must be why I still have a few Conquests on my rifles.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Had both, still have the Conquest....And bought another one after that.

Conquest, hands-down.

 

[Sully2]

Same here. I have both...prefer the Conquest

 

[marinetowgunner]

I just posted about my Meopta 10x42 HD's in another thread. I hate to sound like a Meopta fan boy, but I've played with their 3-9x42 and its a solid scope. From what I understand they used to make the conquest before Zeiss went to the HD5.

Might be worth taking a look at?

 

[MudRunner2005]

My Conquests are phenomenal.....I don't give a crap who makes them. But if they were junk, I don't think Carl Zeiss would put his name on them...Just my $0.02....

 

[Sully2]

from what i understand they used to make the conquest before zeiss went to the hd5.

wrongo!!!

 

[MudRunner2005]

I'm 99.9% sure the Conquests have always been made by Zeiss.....But I have been wrong before.

Also, Zeiss handles their own warranty here in the US, too, before you tell us something else, as well....Which I know is also an internet rumor.


Carl Zeiss Optical, Inc.
13005 North Kingston Avenue
Chester, VA 23836
(800) 441-3005

 

[gillettehunter]

I'd go with the Conquest and I'll illustrate why. 10 or so years ago we were packed in by Yellowstone. Opening day of the elk hunt I killed a 5X6 bull. Next day I got up and decided to go check the gut pile and see if there might be a black bear on it. I got out of camp a little late. When I got to where I had shot from the day before one of the other hunters from camp was already there. He told me a nice 6X6 had just walked across the meadow. I asked why he hadn't shot. It was perhaps 300-350 yards. His reply was that he couldn't see it through his scope because of the glare. I had a Conquest on my rifle. I looked through it and had almost NO glare. I asked him to check his scope again. He said still too much glare to shoot. I handed him my rifle. He took one look through my scope and demanded to know what it was. He was ****ed when I told him a Conquest. He had a Monarch and thought it was the best he could afford. Moral of this story is that the coatings on the lens are important. Both scopes are going to be relatively clear. Likely close in low light abilities. I'd bet that the Conquest still has better coatings to fight glare. Find a store with both and compare them at last light. See what your eyes like. Bruce

 

[glewis]

I have both Conquest and Monarch, also have a couple of Meopros as well. All are very good scopes. I agree with just about all previous comments. My first purchase was the 2.5x10x42 monarch followed by the 3x9x40 conquest. Both cost me the same amount, both do a good job. I next invested in a 4x14x44 conquest for $700. It too is an excellent scope, but later I purchased the meopro 4x12x50 for over $200 less and wish I had stumbled across those earlier. I like them all, the best bang for the buck may be the Meoptas.

By the way, I had a dealer that sells all three tell me Meopta did make the 1" conquest for a while, if it's a lie he told it.

 

[LightfootE]

so majority votes Conquest. I'll have to keep my eyes open. I keep reading that a little while back, Cabelas had them on sale for $299. Will this ever happen again?

 

[lloydsmale]

ziess upgraded the model and the ones that have been available at discount prices are the older model. Still a good scope though.

so majority votes Conquest. I'll have to keep my eyes open. I keep reading that a little while back, Cabelas had them on sale for $299. Will this ever happen again?

 

[CHARLIEDUECE65]

Are people comparing the Zeiss Conquest scope to the new Nikon Monarch 3 or the old Monarch?? I havent read much about the Monarch 3 yet.