I asked this on another forum and boy everybody sure liked the Conquest over the Leupold but thought I would ask here. If you could choose a 3.5-10x40 VX-III or a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40 which one would you choose. I know some are very biased and thats okay, I am just asking can Zeiss's lower end Conquest be that much better than the VX-III's which are Leupold's better scopes? I know the Leupold is a little lighter than the Zeiss, which is also a factor. I have never bought high dollar optics and am dabbling in it after buying a set of the new Minox ASPH binos, man they are a lot crisper than my Nikon Monarchs both the same power and objective. Looking for opinions on this one.

My choise would be the Leupold. I have heard about too many conquests that has failed in one way or another. They may have better light transmission etc. but I´d rather go for a scope that holds together. If you want great optics, go for the Diavari-line or Swarovski or Kahles or Schmidt und Bender. But then you have to step up a notch or two in pricing...

Conquest all the way...high quality, bright optics, reasonable price considering what you get. I have been a Zeiss convert for about 6 years now and continue to love their scopes. Have had them on everything from 223's to 416's and they take everything that is thrown at them.

Leupold makes great scopes and has a good warranty but the Zeiss maximizes the perceived value received per dollar spent.

If you do a search, I'd bet this has been done on this forum 5 times. That said, the optics on the Zeiss are better, not just brighter. I actually don't know what the difference is, but the reticle is more bold and doesn't require the amount of focusing adjustment that the Leupold does. Something is different, I just don't know what it is. I have had no trouble with the Zeiss yet, although if I were to put it on a .416 or larger, I might go with a 1.75-6x Leupold because I am pretty sure it will hold up as it has been proven. I think the Leupold is a better looking scope on the outside. I believe the Nikon is closer optically to th e Zeiss than the Leupold, but they are not as proven at least by me. When they're available, I'm going to try one of the lower powered Conquests that goes up to 5.8x on my .416 Rigby.

Zeiss has better glass, reticle, w/e adjustments, finish and customer service . Leupold has nicer dimensions ..weight,length etc. Vote goes to the Conquest.

quote:

I have heard about too many conquests that has failed in one way or another.

How many of these stories can you verify as being true?

I ´d have to say at least two veryfied.
A friend of mine had a 3,5-10x44 and his couldnt withstand low temperatures. It became all foggy on the inside when it came back inside to the warmth.
What got me really concerned was when an authorized Zeiss dealer told me these exact words:- I wouldnt buy that scope myself, since Zeiss have had problems with the waterproofing.
This was a 3-9x40. I have to add that he manufactured other brands too, but also other Zeiss scopes such as the Variopoints and the Diavaries. These he only spoke well of. If it was because he would have made more mone, selling one of those to me, or if what he said was true I dont know. It sure got me suspiscious though...
Just my humble thoughts, for what it was worth...

Well between myself and my hunting partners,we do own four 3x9x40 conquests and despite being used in very low temperatures -30 degrees,fogging has never been an issue with any of them.

Zeiss, no contest

Glad to hear that, stubblejumper! I certainly hope your scopes keep on working. This was just my opinion and I am certainly not against Zeiss as a brand, in fact I own a Diavari myself. A great scope, thats for sure.
I=ve read so much good stuff about the Conquests, I begin to wonder if we have received the seconds here in scandinavia.
Anyway thats history now for us, because Zeiss have discontinued the Conquestline here in Europe, they are as far as I know, only available in the North American market nowadays.

I like Zeiss and use Classic C binos but for scopes I prefer Leupold. Zeiss optics may be slightly better but Leupold is good enough and is always in demand if you want to resell. I have never had a problem with Leupold on hard kickers or under hard use.

I own both...and for only one reason.

I badly wanted to purchase another Conquest 3-9x40 to place on a new gun I recently received. Unfortunately, the gun simply begged me not to place 15oz+ scope on the gun.
The next best answer was the Leupold 3.5-10x40,(13oz), so that is why I bought the Leupold.

Basically, as stated earlier, the Conquest is better optically, however in a few limited cases the Leupold may be better functionally.

quote:

I have never had a problem with Leupold on hard kickers or under hard use.

My conquests functioned perfectly on my 300ultramags and served me well even on horseback hunts for sheep,which are very demanding on equipment.

I took both scopes out of a store on a cloudy day and compared them side by side. I found for my eyes that day the leupold to be a brighter scope. I thought Zeiss would just blow leupold out of the water, but when looking at the same object through both scopes, i found the leupold be brighter. I did not compare Leupold LPS scope to the Zeiss Conquest. After seeing the quality of the VXIII compared to European designed optics, I was sold and still am on Leuopold and the VXIII line. I'm a tightwad and get by with what will do the job at hand. OK If i pissed someone off this is just one hayseed's experience on this subject, and my opinion.

For anyone that has the false impression that leupold scopes never fail,read the following link.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/C...6/an/0/page/0#830416

quote:

Originally posted by stubblejumper:
For anyone that has the false impression that leupold scopes never fail,read the following link.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/C...6/an/0/page/0#830416

Of course they fail that is why you see the post about Leupolds repair department and the bragging about a 1 or 2 week turn around. All brand of scopes have failures some more than others. I sent a Nightforce back for shift P.O.I. and they received it and repaired it on the 12 and shipped it back on the 13 apparently they were not very busy

quote:

Of course they fail that is why you see the post about Leupolds repair department and the bragging about a 1 or 2 week turn around

Exactly,if it weren't for failures,you wouldn't be hearing about leupolds great warranty service.The same can be said for ziess and many other companies.

Well guys I thought I 'd let you know, that I decided on the VX-III. I agree that the Zeiss might have slightly brighter glass, but I am not hunting whitetails at dusk and have too many concerns about the durability of the Conquest. This scope went on a Tikka T3 Lite in 300 WM, so weight is an issue and the extra 2.5-3 oz wasn't the main deterrent but I am after a lightweight package with long range capability. So far I have shot about 30 rounds through it from 100-300 yards and it seems pretty sweet. Made immediate and super accurate adjustments when I sighted it in and looks really clear to my eyes. Actually had the opportunity to compare the two yesterday while at Sportsmans Warehouse on one of those shnazzy wooden stock deals with the rubber rings on top that will hold 2 scopes at the same time and I feel I made the right choice, I couldn't see anything better about the Zeiss than the Leupold, both were crystal clear and the Leupold not only had far more generous eye relief but seemed clearer to my eyes.Didn't really like the Heavy duplex on the Zeiss either.I am happy with my decision. Thanks for the opinions and feedback

quote:

Originally posted by AlaskaCub:
Well guys I thought I 'd let you know, that I decided on the VX-III.

... weight is an issue

...super accurate adjustments

...far more generous eye relief

...I am happy with my decision.

AlaskaCub hit some of the most salient points in his decision favoring the Leupold. Light weight (along with compactness) and accurate adjustments are obviously very important, but perhaps not as important in a hunting scope as the size of the "eye window". When he says "far more generous eye relief", he is not only speaking of eye relief (distance from lens), but the size of the eye placement window, which is very long and wide on a Leupold (in optical exchange for a very slight narrowing of the FOV) but is quite critical on the Zeiss (and most other Euro-designed scopes). This generous eye window makes acquiring the sight picture much faster, and allows shooting from some of the more awkward positions you may find yourself in in the field. The "eye window" is one of the most frequently overlooked but most important qualities in a riflescope, and thebiggest single factor in my continuing to favor Leupolds over some very stiff competition.

quote:

This generous eye window makes acquiring the sight picture much faster, and allows shooting from some of the more awkward positions you may find yourself in in the field. The "eye window" is one of the most frequently overlooked but most important qualities in a riflescope, and thebiggest single factor in my continuing to favor Leupolds over some very stiff competition.

Eremicus is that you ?