Zeiss Conquest Questions

[BitterrootBob]

What site?

I'll see if I can find them again and post a link. I didn't bookmark them, so I'll have to go back through my browser history.

Here is a link to the Zeiss Reticle Selector. You can change animal and light conditions along with looking at all the Zeiss reticles. There was another site that had even better views than the Zeiss link.

 

[Hondo64d]

I have three Conquests, and have had very good results with them. Image quality is noticeably better to me than my previous Leupolds. In fairness though, my last Leupolds were Vari-X IIIs and an FX-III, not the newer ones.

What I really like better in the Conquest than other scopes I have tried are the very crisp reticles. I believe they are etched as opposed to the Leupolds I have used being wire reticles. The conquest reticles have been very black and crisp for me in all conditions, whereas the Leupold wire reticles, can pick up a copper colored hue in some lighting conditions.

I also like Zeiss' target turrets. They are relatively low profile, positive, audible and repeatable. If your scope doesn't come with them, Zeiss will install them for $80 each. While I haven't used any of the really high dollar optics like Nightforce or S&B, I have not found my conquests w/ target turrets lacking in any shooting I have done with them which includes ranges out to 800 yards. Here's a pic of my 3.5-10 w/ the target turrets.

My latest is a 3-9 that I had Zeiss put their #4 reticle and target turrets on. What a great hunting scope! Reticle is great for close range low light and long distance precision both. When I was zeroing my 3-9 Conquest recently, I was easily able to see .264 bullet holes in my targets at 100 yards with the scope set on 3x. Maybe that's not unusual, I dunno, but I was VERY impressed. I have the 3-9, a 3.5-10, and the 4.5-14, and for a hunting scope I think the 3-9 is the best. The eye box on the 3-9 is more forgiving than the others and the image exceptionally bright. The 3.5-10 and the 4.5-14 are very nice too, but when all are set on the same magnification, not any better than the 3-9. The increased $ are just not justified to my eyes, especially between the 3-9 and 3.5-10. The 3-9 conquest has got to be one of the best bargains out there in a hunting scope.


John

 

[BitterrootBob]

I have three Conquests, and have had very good results with them. Image quality is noticeably better to me than my previous Leupolds. In fairness though, my last Leupolds were Vari-X IIIs and an FX-III, not the newer ones.

What I really like better in the Conquest than other scopes I have tried are the very crisp reticles. I believe they are etched as opposed to the Leupolds I have used being wire reticles. The conquest reticles have been very black and crisp for me in all conditions, whereas the Leupold wire reticles, can pick up a copper colored hue in some lighting conditions.

I also like Zeiss' target turrets. They are relatively low profile, positive, audible and repeatable. If your scope doesn't come with them, Zeiss will install them for $80 each. While I haven't used any of the really high dollar optics like Nightforce or S&B, I have not found my conquests w/ target turrets lacking in any shooting I have done with them which includes ranges out to 800 yards. Here's a pic of my 3.5-10 w/ the target turrets.

My latest is a 3-9 that I had Zeiss put their #4 reticle and target turrets on. What a great hunting scope! Reticle is great for close range low light and long distance precision both. When I was zeroing my 3-9 Conquest recently, I was easily able to see .264 bullet holes in my targets at 100 yards with the scope set on 3x. Maybe that's not unusual, I dunno, but I was VERY impressed. I have the 3-9, a 3.5-10, and the 4.5-14, and for a hunting scope I think the 3-9 is the best. The eye box on the 3-9 is more forgiving than the others and the image exceptionally bright. The 3.5-10 and the 4.5-14 are very nice too, but when all are set on the same magnification, not any better than the 3-9. The increased $ are just not justified to my eyes, especially between the 3-9 and 3.5-10. The 3-9 conquest has got to be one of the best bargains out there in a hunting scope.


John

You like the #4 better then the #20 Z-Plex? It is kind of hard looking at them on the Web. It just seemed to me the thick parts of the #4 would be distracting and they didn't come to a point, which was different.

 

[coyotezapper]

I have three Conquests, and have had very good results with them. Image quality is noticeably better to me than my previous Leupolds. In fairness though, my last Leupolds were Vari-X IIIs and an FX-III, not the newer ones.

What I really like better in the Conquest than other scopes I have tried are the very crisp reticles. I believe they are etched as opposed to the Leupolds I have used being wire reticles. The conquest reticles have been very black and crisp for me in all conditions, whereas the Leupold wire reticles, can pick up a copper colored hue in some lighting conditions.

I also like Zeiss' target turrets. They are relatively low profile, positive, audible and repeatable. If your scope doesn't come with them, Zeiss will install them for $80 each. While I haven't used any of the really high dollar optics like Nightforce or S&B, I have not found my conquests w/ target turrets lacking in any shooting I have done with them which includes ranges out to 800 yards. Here's a pic of my 3.5-10 w/ the target turrets.

My latest is a 3-9 that I had Zeiss put their #4 reticle and target turrets on. What a great hunting scope! Reticle is great for close range low light and long distance precision both. When I was zeroing my 3-9 Conquest recently, I was easily able to see .264 bullet holes in my targets at 100 yards with the scope set on 3x. Maybe that's not unusual, I dunno, but I was VERY impressed. I have the 3-9, a 3.5-10, and the 4.5-14, and for a hunting scope I think the 3-9 is the best. The eye box on the 3-9 is more forgiving than the others and the image exceptionally bright. The 3.5-10 and the 4.5-14 are very nice too, but when all are set on the same magnification, not any better than the 3-9. The increased $ are just not justified to my eyes, especially between the 3-9 and 3.5-10. The 3-9 conquest has got to be one of the best bargains out there in a hunting scope.


John

Very well said. I don't currently own a conquest but the 4.5-14 I sold, I am still regretting selling it. In my opinion the glass and turrets are as good as anyones.

 

[Hondo64d]

You like the #4 better then the #20 Z-Plex? It is kind of hard looking at them on the Web. It just seemed to me the thick parts of the #4 would be distracting and they didn't come to a point, which was different.

The Zeiss #4 is my current favorite hunting reticle. The thick parts make it easy to bracket vitals at close range in low light, like pigs at sunset + 45 or a bright moonlit night. The fine part is fine enough to allow precise aiming at extended distances. The only improvement I can imagine would be to put windage reference marks on the horizontal wire, as often the wind is not stable enough to make dialing it in a workable proposition.

John

 

[BitterrootBob]

Well, I got it ordered. I went with the 4.5X14X50 AO MC #20 Z-Plex and Target Turrets. I know I'll like it. I've always liked Zeiss glass, it just seems to fit my eye. I like their Conquest Binoculars as well as the $2000+ models from other companies.