Zeiss Conquest vs Swarvoski


PDA






4Freedom
June 12, 2009, 11:28 PM
After visiting Wholesale Sports (previously Sportmans Warehouse) and sampling some various scopes, I have now reaccessed the type of scope I want to purchase for my DPMS LR-308 and I have decided that I no longer am interested in the Leupolds. I compared the Zeiss Conquest and Swarvoski's with the Leupold VX-3 and Mark 4 and I can pretty confidently say that the Zeiss and Swarvoski blow the Leupold VX-3 away in clarity and brightness.

Well, I have set my heart on getting a Zeiss Conquest or Swarvoski now and I like to know what people's opinions are of which is better between the two. I don't want to spend any more than $1000 for my optic and have found some Swarvoski close to that amount. I am thinking I liked the Swarvoski glass a bitter bettter compared to the Zeiss from looking at it, but it was hard to tell 100% which was better with the light conditions of the store. For the extra $300, I wasn't sure if the Swarvoski was worth it. The Zeiss scopes seem reasonbly priced and for what they offer do appear to be equally priced to the new Leupold VX-3 series.

Well, I am considering getting a Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20x50mm with Target Turrets (like Mark 4's) and z-plex reticle. I have been offered the scope for total of $815. I will mostly be doing target benchrest shooting at my range from 100 yards to 600 yards. I previously was considering a 4.5-14x50mm, but I decided having the little extra magnification would not be a problem for shooting 100 yards and I would like the added benefit of being able to have extra power magnification for farther shots. Does anyone think this sounds like a good decision for my DPMS LR-308? I like to hear what people think about Swarvoskis and other EUro-optics in this price range.

I have also found out Zeiss Conquest has a transferrable warranty and that its repairs are serviced in USA, so it has all the same customer service and resale benefits of Leupold.

If you enjoyed reading about "Zeiss Conquest vs Swarvoski" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
lykoris
June 13, 2009, 06:22 AM
if you are looking for service/warranty in the US then go with the Zeiss conquest, I love mine, same model as above.

recommend the No.4 ret over the z-600. At the end of the day, you click to adjust windage/elevation and the target will be in the middle of the crosshairs, remember you are shooting paper at known ranges. It is a much better way to go than using holdover points on the z ret or using the horizontal hash points to adjust for crosswinds.

I think you will learn a lot more on a Number 4 ret as it forces you to adjust elevation/windage with the turrets rather than depend upon the reticle.

for Swarovski it depends on the model, their optics are primarily geared towards hunting

the only negative I have about the zeiss conquest is the range of adjustment on windage/elevation.

lipadj46
June 13, 2009, 07:24 AM
I compared the Zeiss Conquest and Swarvoski's with the Leupold VX-3 and Mark 4 and I can pretty confidently say that the Zeiss and Swarvoski blow the Leupold VX-3 away in clarity and brightness.

I'm not a big Leupold fan but I doubt the Zeiss Conquest blows the VX3 away. They are very very close with the Conquest maybe having an edge. I hear people mention that they go to a store and can tell the difference between scopes. Last time I was at a gun shop I looked through a similar power Bushnell 3200 and Zeiss (Euro) and I could not see a difference in brightness or clarity. Now that was at the same approximate exit pupil but the fluorescent lights are no good as they are not natural light.

Anyhow to your original question if you have the money any Swarovski will be better than a Zeiss Conquest. The Conquest may be the better deal though depending on the price.

4Freedom
June 13, 2009, 07:42 AM
The reason I said the Conquest and Swarvoski blew the VX3 away, was because I noticed a fewe things. I was in Sportman's Warehouse that was very large building and had a clean view out to 75 yards and I was looking at a small picture of a bear on the wall. What I noticed was:
1. The picture of the bear and surrounding was much crisper with the Zeiss and Swarvoski.
2. There was more haziness or foginess with the Leupold in dark areas I was staring at. Maybe this is just beacuse I was indoor, dont know.
3. The light reflection against the wall was much brighter with Zeiss and Swarvoski. The ligh reflection against the wall with Leupold appeared more faded.

These were significant differences I coudl tell. Now on another note, I won't say I know how they will compare at dusk or on a bright sunny day outside. I am going buy the lighting in Sportsman, but I could see some significant differences. However, I am not an expert and new with scopes, so my assessment could be wrong. But from reading other peoples' reviews they seem to correlate with my own feelings of looking through the Zeiss vs LEupold.

Medusa
June 13, 2009, 08:16 AM
Swarovski is, as said, more geared towards hunters and they even don't have much of a mildot-like reticle, unlike Zeiss. Conquest is a fine optical piece, so if you like it, go for it. I've seen plenty of Zeiss'es (Diavaris though) on different sniper rifles and they've gotten the job done, as required.

Maverick223
June 13, 2009, 01:32 PM
Both are excellent scopes (as well as Kahles), I personally think that the Zeiss is the best for the money, but Swarovski and Kahles are good scopes as well. All are really catered to hunters, but there are a few Conquest models that offer target turrets/ballistic reticles. :)

schlockinz
June 13, 2009, 02:09 PM
I liked the conquest over the swarovski lines until the z6, which I couldn't afford.

At dusk, it looked to me like the zess gathered light better, and to me it also blew Leupold out of the water (in low light conditions, and overall clarity, outside, at dusk, at 100+ yds)

Maverick223
June 13, 2009, 02:41 PM
I liked the conquest over the swarovski lines until the z6Yeah apples to apples I think the Zeiss is a bit better/cheaper, the Z6 equates to an upper end Diavari, so I have little doubt that it's better. I have heard that the Zeiss does skew the colors a bit more than the Swarovski though (though both look to have excellent color representation to me).

schlockinz
June 13, 2009, 04:44 PM
The z6 was beautiful and to me it looked better than the Zeiss Divari, but both scopes were more than I wanted to spend.

Thats what I was getting at.

Bottom line, get the scope that looks the best to YOUR eyes

schlockinz
June 13, 2009, 05:12 PM
double post

4Freedom
June 13, 2009, 07:17 PM
I think I have made my decision. I am going to purchase the Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20x50mm scope with a Rapid-Z 1000 reticle. After discussing with some people I think this is the best way to go. It seems the Rapid-Z 1000 reticles gives you lot of advantages, such as being able to quickly adjust for wind or holdover. I know some say it can hinder my learning skills, but I don't see how it can do so. I think I will be able to learn precision shooting and will have the benefit of learning how to use a ballistic type of reticle at the same time.

I have found one of these for under $900 and for that money I think I will grab it. And , from reading, if I buy from an authorized dealer, which I will be doing, it has a full lifetime transferrable warranty.

Now, my next question is mounts. I am wondering if the Larue LT-158 mount for $195.00 would be the best option. I like that it is so easy to mount on and off of the gun, with the switch. The guys at LaRue tell me most rings willl not work for properly mounting a scope on an AR-10, since the buttstock is at the same height as the barrel and I would not be able to get a proper cheek weld. They claim the rings need to be around 1.5 inches, which is the height of the rings on their mount. I know $195.00 is a lot to fork out for such a mount. I am not sure if anyone has any other ideas about this that would be less expensive. Some have suggested the tall Burris rings, but they are only 1" high as far as I can see. I have tor remind people I am putting this scope on a DPMS LR-308 flattop. So, do most people think its probably best to fork out the extra money for the LaRue?

lykoris
June 13, 2009, 07:46 PM
I have a one with a Z-1000 ret, it is a busy ret and will be distracting.

It will hinder your learning in the sense that you will be lazy.

I went down that path of using hold over/under points and the horizontal hashes to correct windage but eventually you will click to adjust elevation/windage and when you do all you need is a simple crosshairs like a No. 4 ret.

The Z-600 & Z-1000 are primarily hunting reticles when you donīt have time to range and adjust - you will be shooting paper at a range so you really donīt need it as

1. you have plenty of time

2. the distance you have placed your target is known

.......although it might look cool, I would really recommend the No.4 or something similar in simplicity

when you learn to click elevation/windage(as it is really done), everything on that scope reticle will be worthless/a real distraction except the dead centre where both axis meet.

this

http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/7536/rz1000lg.jpg (http://img44.imageshack.us/i/rz1000lg.jpg/)

or this

http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/1333/4lg.jpg (http://img44.imageshack.us/i/4lg.jpg/)

at the end of the day it is your choice, just sharing my experience and regret, my Z-1000 is set to go on a hunting rifle because for range work it is horrible.

just my view, hope you donīt think I am being too frank/candid or in any way offensive.

best of luck with whatever you decide.

Maverick223
June 13, 2009, 07:53 PM
I have found one of these for under $900 and for that money I think I will grab it.Check with Scott (via E-mail or phone) at Liberty Optics before you jump. He might be able to save you a little, just ask for the THR.org discount, as seen here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=449569

4Freedom
June 13, 2009, 08:23 PM
Hey lykoris, I really respect your advice and in know way do I think you are being too frank , you are sharing your opinion and I am seriously suggesting everything you are mentioning. Yeah, I really think much of what you say has lot of truth perhaps. I am a new shooter, so its hard for me to say, I am just going by what many others have said and I am trying to soak it in. The reason I thought the Rapid Z would be nice is that if I go shooting in the woods at variable distances or if I need a good defense scope for zombie attack, I would not want to have to buy two scopes to do two differnt things.

Do you khnow if I can upgrade my reticle later to a Rapid Z? Someone told me that you can do the same calculations and with a Rapid Z as with a Z-Plex or #4. By the way, why do you suggest #4 over the Z-Plex? I think if I was to purchase any other reticle, it would be Z-plex, because everywhere I look #4 is out of stock, maybe discontinued?? Would the Z-plex suffice as well as #4 for the purpose of benchrest target shooting? Do you really think I would be less accurate shooter if I trained with Rapid Z vs Z-pLex? I mean I thought it would be nice to learn the ballistic tools on this scope. One person I talked to mentioned that when you use a duplex reticle, all you do is make an approximation of windage and elevation, whereas with the Rapid Z you can know exactly how much to position it for differnet conditions and distances. The guy told me using a Z-plex was like driving a car without the odometer and guessing your speed, whereas having a Rapid Z was having an odometer and knowing has fast you are going at each time.


To Maverick,
Thanks for the suggestion, but I don't see Liberty Optics as an Authorized Reseller of Zeiss products on the Zeiss website. If you don't purchase from an Authorized Reseller then Zeiss will not give you the lifetime transferrable warranty and all repeairs will be sent to Europe rather than USA. So, on that note, I will ONLY buy from an AUTHORIZED RESELLER, because of Zeiss's policy.



BTW.. Does anyone know the advantages of buying the stainless steel over the black? I know they are a bit more spendy. Would I be better getting stainless for my LR-308? I am thinking the black would work fine, just not sure what advantages stainless steel offers, except aesthetics.

blackops
June 13, 2009, 08:29 PM
At dusk, it looked to me like the zess gathered light better, and to me it also blew Leupold out of the water (in low light conditions, and overall clarity, outside, at dusk, at 100+ yds)

Interesting, which Leupold were you looking through? Longest kill ever recorded in the militarys history was through a Leupold.

Maverick223
June 13, 2009, 08:56 PM
but I don't see Liberty Optics as an Authorized Reseller of Zeiss products on the Zeiss website1858 E-mailed Zeiss and found out that they (Liberty Optics) are an authorized retailer. You may want to check for yourself, but I trust his word. :)

lykoris
June 13, 2009, 09:04 PM
blackops,

if you bring any scope out in middle of the day in the middle east (iraq/afganistan) of course it will be bright, they get a lot of sun there in the middle of the day :D :D :D

4freedom,

go with your gut, if you want the z-1000 then go for it ;) If you think you wonīt be happy with a No. 4 then get the Z-1000 :)

I do not believe you can upgrade from a No. 4 to a Z-1000 but not 100% sure.

I think it is impossible to explain to you as you have to experience it for yourself, effectively you will use the Z-1000 reticle to avoid adjusting the elevation/windage turrets. With all deference to your friend no reticle will be able to read the wind for you.

Get the z-1000 as you seem set on it and in 3 months we will talk again and maybe a lot of what I am saying will make more sense.

4Freedom
June 13, 2009, 09:07 PM
lykoris,
Well, after reading what you wrote I am no longer set on the Rapid Z-1000. You actually stopped me from going ahead with that purchase. Now, I am pondering and taking in everything you said and others. I think you make some good points and many others have also pointed me to the duplex reticle. I have to also mention that the only #4's I see have the hunting turrets and I would rather get the Target Turrets. So, the only Target Turret models I see outside the z-1000 are the Z-Plexes. Would you think Z-Plex would be as good of a reticle as the #4? Is the main problem with the Rapid Z that it is too busy and obstructs the targets or the fact that it makes it too easy and hinders my training and skills?

lykoris
June 13, 2009, 09:09 PM
I was going to go to bed as it is really late here in Europe but I will perhaps better explain what I mean with the Z-1000

Maverick223
June 13, 2009, 09:22 PM
I think what lykoris is saying is that it has a great deal of unnecessary information on it. You may want to go with a simpler reticle like No. 43 (mil-dot), which is less busy but still has hold overs. The RapidZ-Varmit would be alright but it is tuned to a lighter, faster projectile. :)

lykoris
June 13, 2009, 09:29 PM
100% definitely get target turrets.

this is only for illustration as temperature/altitude/BC/weight of bullet and a host of other wonderful variables go into it

EXAMPLE

say you have zeroed your rifle at I dunno, 200 yards

so on this reticle, the Z-1000

http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/7536/rz1000lg.jpg (http://img44.imageshack.us/i/rz1000lg.jpg/)

the dead centre where both the x & y axis meet is your aiming point at 200 yards, you put 10 shots and all is well with the world and you are on target shooting 2"/1moa

then you want to shoot at I dunno, say 600 yards so you then use one of the other horizontal lines to hold over the target...under 200 yards you will be shooting under the target.

Basically your point of aim is continuously shifting on the reticle as you are using the reticle to adjust for elevation....numbered lines from top to bottom.....and then using the hash marks from left to right to compensate for wind.

To contrast this with a No. 4 reticle (havenīt seen the plex ret on the zeiss site....my weary eyes its 2.30am here :uhoh: )

you have it zeroed at 200,

you want to shoot 400, you crank the top turret x clicks up in elevation and then x clicks on the windage turret on the side, your point of aim is always the same, dead centre of the No. 4 ret as you are adjusting by using the turrets.

You canīt do the hold over/under with a No. 4 as the markings are not there...so in some ways a Z-1000 offers the best of both worlds as it is more flexible.

I am literally falling asleep so I will take it up in the morning when i am awake :p

Maverick223
June 13, 2009, 09:40 PM
I really like the Rapid Z 600/800/Varmint better because they are zeroed at 100M, but they will not work for my rifle so I think I might go with the Z 1000 as well (and they don't offer the Varmint in the 4.5-14x44mm), BUT mine is not for target work. :)

schlockinz
June 14, 2009, 12:14 AM
Interesting, which Leupold were you looking through? Longest kill ever recorded in the militarys history was through a Leupold.

Vx7 was probably the highest dollar one that I held, the zeiss replaced a vxII which is waiting for me to get a rifle worthy of it.

It was a very nice scope, I just thought that I saw a slight difference that favored the Zeiss.

One thing that I did find interesting, my old VXII felt better and looked clearer than the newer ones, but that could have just been nostalgia, but it did definitely feel like a much higher scope, and its about 10yrs old now, maybe older.

deerhunter61
June 14, 2009, 12:30 AM
Yes the Conquest BLOWS away the leupold! COME ON! Anyone who is uncertain needs to take both out at dark and see which one you would rather have....

4Freedom
June 14, 2009, 01:33 AM
I am in the dilemma between choosing the Z-Plex or Z-1000 for target shooting. I am taking the informaiotn presented by lykoris's seriously, but I am wondering what other people think of using the Z-1000 for target shooting? Will using the Z-1000 really hinder my skills and prevent me from understanding how to dial in wind and elevation adjustment? Will the busy reticle really block me from quickly acquiring my target? Is there not advantages of having a reticle that can allow me to quickly holdover the target to a different line on the reticle for quick shooting of targets?

Lets say I wan to dial in the elevation and windage for practice at sometimes, like with a Z-plex and use the holdover function of a Z-1000 at other times, is it impossible to have best of both worlds with the Rapid Z-1000 reticle?

I am trying to weigh both right now. I was told to avoid Mil-Dots because the dots on this reticle are a bit large and will block your target. This is on the LEupold, I am not sure how large the dots are on the Zeiss. Would the mildot cause problems in precise target acquisition?

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 02:33 AM
I was told to avoid Mil-Dots because the dots on this reticle are a bit large and will block your target.The Zeiss does not have a center dot, so this shouldn't be an issue. Personally I wouldn't go with the Z-plex...I would either go with one of the Rapid-Z reticles or the mil dot, but that is why they offer so many. :D

lykoris
June 14, 2009, 06:57 AM
Amazing what sleep deprivation does to the mind, no idea how I missed this on the Zeiss site :o

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/9881/20lg.jpg (http://img190.imageshack.us/i/20lg.jpg/)

that is a nice reticle also but I have never personally seen it on a zeiss scope/on a target at distance and maybe it is too thick for high precision shooting :confused:

I have briefly shown the difference, in the end I believe that as a target shooter it will only be a matter of time before you have your crib sheet attached to the flip up lens cover with yards/moa adj.

skeletal mil-dot rets exist but again the primarily use is to estimate range to the target and you are shooting paper at known ranges, fun to do & check with a laser range finder.

I think the best advice I can give you is to go to this forum and ask your questions and specifically talk about scope, (& reticle choice)/rings(you might need to add a 20moa rail to gain elevation, as I said I wish the conquest had more adjustment).

Maybe they will suggest something other than Zeiss but give your budget total for scope/rings - I have no idea what prices are in the US.

It is very important to take your time before you make your final choice, an informed decision is normally the right decision. Do not rush it. There are a lot of extremely knowledgeable people on this site (much more so than me) when it comes to high precision target shooting and they can better inform you of what is available on the US market for your budget.

Explain you are 100% new to shooting and looking for the best advice on what to do vis-ā-vis scope/reticle/mount choice/rail options given your budget in their optics section & on the rifle you will be shooting it on.

http://www.snipercentral.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=5

I donīt think I can get in trouble by posting a link to another forum but my reason is I honestly believe you will be best served in terms of advice by them, while most have bolt action rifles I am sure a few shoot semi-auto.

FYI: I lurk there a lot but have never joined the forum

4Freedom
June 14, 2009, 07:00 AM
The Zeiss does not have a center dot, so this shouldn't be an issue. Personally I wouldn't go with the Z-plex...I would either go with one of the Rapid-Z reticles or the mil dot, but that is why they offer so many

INteresting.. Well, I rather get one of the tactical reticles.. Not just because they look cool , but also because I think they would serve many purposes. It would also be nice to know how to use mil-dots or Rapid Z reticle since I think in any practical real-life shooting situaiton I would more likely want to use the holdover reticle rather than take time to adjust windage and elevation. However, I know it would be good to learn how to do the adjustments, but I would not like to hinder myself from learnign new technology because I need to learn basics. I would like tro try to learn both together. The scope would be primarily for target shooting, but I would like to maybe in future apply it to some tactical applications.

Also, you suggest choosing Rapid-Z or Mil Dot, which would you choose for my .308 and why, the Rapid Z 1000 or Mil-Dot?



It is very important to take your time before you make your final choice, an informed decision is normally the right decision. Do not rush it. There are a lot of extremely knowledgeable people on this site (much more so than me) when it comes to high precision target shooting and they can better inform you of what is available on the US market for your budget.

Explain you are 100% new to shooting and looking for the best advice on what to do vis-ā-vis scope/reticle/mount choice/rail options given your budget in their optics section & on the rifle you will be shooting it on.

http://www.snipercentral.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=5

I donīt think I can get in trouble by posting a link to another forum but my reason is I honestly believe you will be best served in terms of advice by them, while most have bolt action rifles I am sure a few shoot semi-auto.


I thank you for your advice and your help lykoris.. I will take your words to heart. I am thinking I may go with the tactical reticles, like Z-1000 or Mil-Dot. I am hoping they will not be a detrimental mistake that will result in me doing poor target shooting. Unfortunately that European style #4 reticle you show me is not widely available here, mostly I see the Z-Plex. The only guns with the #4 reticle have hunting turrets, not target turrets, so it would not be desirable to get that scope. I have found some Z-Plexes with the target turrets, but they are thick as you mentioned. I am not seeing how the Zeiss Mil-Dot reticle is a disadvantage. Also, how would the Z-1000 hinder me when hitting a target if all I am doing is focusing on the center where my target is?

DO any other people find the lines/dots of Z-1000 to make acquiring the target very difficult? THe Mil-Dot reticle from what I seen, look simple enough on the Zeiss with some of the added advantages. However, I never looked through it before, so I am not sure. I know the Leupold mil-dot reticle was too thick IMO for precise target shooting, when I examined it at the store. I could see where it would throw off the target a bit.

lykoris
June 14, 2009, 07:30 AM
The only scopes with the #4 reticle have hunting turrets, not target turrets

then forget the No.4 ret as target turrets are better considering your use is primarily for the range

Also, how would the Z-1000 hinder me when hitting a target if all I am doing is focusing on the center where my target is?

it will hinder you to the extent that you let it, I find it very distracting but that is perhaps just me and I let it :o

if you later range/dial with the Z-1000 the rest of the information on the reticle will be redundant.

lykoris
June 14, 2009, 07:34 AM
it is possible to get the No. 4 ret with target turrets, I bought my conquest from Alex at eurooptic.com (email to ask him his discounted price list as they are cheaper than what is listed on his website)

here you can see what I mean 3rd one down

http://www.eurooptic.com/Zeiss/Zeiss-Conquest-Rifle-Scopes_65-20x50.asp?category=CR11&vendor=XXZE&parent=XXZE

lykoris
June 14, 2009, 07:36 AM
they must be popular as he doesnīt have any No.4 ret in stock with target turrets - all sold out.

lykoris
June 14, 2009, 07:38 AM
scope body colour is preference, personally I bought black as I prefer it to the silver, each to their own

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 11:51 AM
which would you choose for my .308 and why, the Rapid Z 1000 or Mil-Dot?Whilst the Rapid Z 1000 is actually made to ballistically compensate for the drop of a .308, I would go for the mil-dot because you plan to make adjustments making a bdc (bullet drop compensator) reticle less appropriate and like lykoris said it can be distracting and cluttered. If you were not planning on making adjustments (other than to zero) then the Z-1000 would be perfect, but dialing in the DOPE it will lie to you (the 400M mark will not equal the drop at 400M) making it useless, confusing, and in the way. The mil-dot requires a bit more skill, but can be more useful when used in combination with adjustments. A typical use for a target shooter would be to dial in the elevation and use the mil-dot reticle for hold-overs for windage on a gusty day. :)

EDIT to add: Another use for the mil-dot would be in a tactical situation where you didn't have time to dial in, or you had already dialed in and another target needed to be engaged at a different distance (say if a previously unknown target was closing on you).

blackops
June 14, 2009, 04:59 PM
lykoris,

I understand in your opinion Zeiss accepts light more efficiently, but have you looked through a VX-7 at sun down? I have and let me tell you the clarity is phenomenal. In my opinion. if you have a solid Leupold paying more would just make your scope a luxury instead of a necessity.

4Freedom
June 14, 2009, 05:34 PM
Whilst the Rapid Z 1000 is actually made to ballistically compensate for the drop of a .308, I would go for the mil-dot because you plan to make adjustments making a bdc (bullet drop compensator) reticle less appropriate and like lykoris said it can be distracting and cluttered. If you were not planning on making adjustments (other than to zero) then the Z-1000 would be perfect, but dialing in the DOPE it will lie to you (the 400M mark will not equal the drop at 400M) making it useless, confusing, and in the way. The mil-dot requires a bit more skill, but can be more useful when used in combination with adjustments. A typical use for a target shooter would be to dial in the elevation and use the mil-dot reticle for hold-overs for windage on a gusty day.


Ok, well I think the mil-dot sounds like the best way to go. I will have some advantages of being able to holdover for wind and perhaps rangefinding in the future. I suppose the Mil-Dot is not used for BDC like the Rapid-Z? Why would the Rapid-Z lie if it is calibrated for a .308 caliber and I am using a .308 gun for shooting? I agree the Rapid Z is very cluttered and busy as compared to the other reticles. All the lines, markings on Rapid-Z make it look cool, but being an inexperienced shooter, I have no idea how it would help or inhibit my target shooting. I am confused though in what you mean it will lie to me when I am dialing in, which makes it useless? If you could explain a bit more, it would help me, pardon my ignorance on this subject.

SO, you think the Mil-Dot would benefit me with its other features and nor impede my acquiring of targets? I was looking closely on Zeiss's website and their Mil-Dot target and the center porition of the reticle looks fine enough that pinpointing a target would not be hard. ANyhow, I think you have sold me on the Mil-Dot reticle. Any others feel this is a good reticle for target shooting? I have to make my decision and cannot go spinning round in round in circles forever :uhoh:. On Monday, I am planning on getting my scope, so I have to make the decision now.

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 06:55 PM
I suppose the Mil-Dot is not used for BDC like the Rapid-ZIt can be used for just about anything: bullet drop, windage, range estimation, size of target, etc. The key is the dots are all equidistant (all the same distance apart) so as the reticle moves with adjustment the distances are all the same.
Why would the Rapid-Z lie if it is calibrated for a .308 caliber and I am using a .308 gun for shooting?If you dial in for say 200M (on the major crosshair) and it is zeroed for 500M (which is almost a prerequisite for that reticle's major crosshair, 100M is the minor crosshair), the next hash down would NOT be 600M, or 300M for that matter.

Basically, do you plan to dial in for elevation? If so the mil-dot is the way to go. If you want to zero the scope and leave it there (until you change loads, etc.), then the Rapid Z-1000 is going to be much easier to use. Does that make sense?

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 07:10 PM
To better explain I made a crude sketch of the phenomena that occurs when mixing a BDC reticle (such as the Rapid-Z 1000)and dialing in for elevation.
http://i642.photobucket.com/albums/uu141/Maverick223_album/ZeissRapid-Z1000.gif

4Freedom
June 14, 2009, 08:21 PM
Thanks for this detailed explanation Maverick. I will say I am a little confused still, but I think I have a general idea of the concept. You are basically saying that if you use the Rapid Z-1000 that it is essentially useless to dial in elevation, since the BDC works perhaps more like a Trijicon ACOG, where you use holdover rather than dialing to hit the target, which is calibrated to the .308 caliber. I think from reading what you wrote, that you are saying that a Mil-Dot reticle has evenly spaced dots, which are not related to the caliber, so there is no specific distance that each dot represents, rather its more related to where the center of the reticle is aimed.

Am I correct in my analysis of your explanation or I am missing something else? Please let me know if I am missing anything. I am rather new to this, so I am sure I could be misinterpreting what you wrote.

Anyhow, so would you say for my target shooting from 100-600 yards, that the Mil-Dot is the way to go? I also plan in the future of doing some shooting in the woods, where I can help improve my range finding skills.

As of now, I think I will go purchase the Zeiss Conquest 6x20 Mil-Dot reticle with the Target turrets. Let me know if this is the wrong choice.


BTW.. DO you think the $195.00 LaRue mount for this scope is the best way to go for mounting it on an AR-10?

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 09:02 PM
Am I correct in my analysis of your explanation or I am missing something else?You got it!

Anyhow, so would you say for my target shooting from 100-600 yards, that the Mil-Dot is the way to go? I also plan in the future of doing some shooting in the woods, where I can help improve my range finding skills.The mil-dot is the way to go IF you want to dial in (basically for target work). The Rapid-Z is better for fast drop computation in hunting and most tactical situations. It really depends upon your needs. The target turrets aren't really needed if you opt for the Z 1000 reticle (it does all of the work for you). :)

As far as the LaRue, I have heard that it is a great mount (never used), but Armalite makes one just for your rifle, that should be just as good, but not as easily detachable. Again it depends upon your needs, but the Armalite is less than 1/2 the price of the LaRue. As seen here... http://www.armalite.com/ItemForm.aspx?item=EX0027&Category=a14c8168-f1cf-4f11-8859-bafe17a66e1e

4Freedom
June 14, 2009, 09:27 PM
You got it!

:D:D Wow.. I am glad I am finally able to comprehend some of these optical concepts. Thanks Maverick, lykoris and the others for your in depth explanation.

Thanks for the link for this Armalite mount. Yeah, this mount looks pretty nice and would probably serve my needs well. I guess I will have to debate whether or not I want to fork out the extra $110 for the LaRue. hmm.. I do like the easy on/easy off ability and I know the quality of a LaRue is hard to beat, but I am spending so much money on stuff, saving a little would be nice. I will have to investigate to see if this Armalite mount requires to be bolted or screwed on or if it can be tightened or removed with fingers, rather than tools. Also, Armalite says they are out of stock, so I don't know how long I would have to wait on this item. Rifle companies are not known for their fast response times.

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 09:30 PM
NP, 4Freedom...let us know what you decide upon. :)

1858
June 14, 2009, 10:08 PM
4Freedom, first off, after buying a Zeiss Conquest from SWFA, they told me that Liberty Optics, Inc. is not a licensed Zeiss distributor so I emailed Zeiss and they told me that LO, Inc IS a licensed Zeiss distributor. I trust Zeiss on this rather than SWFA so my next Zeiss will be ordered from Liberty Optics, Inc. using the THR discount mentioned by Mav.

Second, your comment "I compared the Zeiss Conquest and Swarvoski's with the Leupold VX-3 and Mark 4 and I can pretty confidently say that the Zeiss and Swarvoski blow the Leupold VX-3 away in clarity and brightness." is uninformed (no disrespect intended). I OWN and USE Mark 4s and a Zeiss Conquest under a variety of conditions so I KNOW better.

Third, I have the RZ-600 reticle in my Conquest and you'd have a tough time finder a better reticle for hunting. As for target shooting or any other form of shooting, I'd go with the RZ-1000 over any other non RZ reticle offered by Zeiss. With the RZ series, you can adjust the POA using the windage and elevation turrets if you have time, or in reactive target type events or other situations, you can use CALIBRATED holdovers (at a given magnification) ... THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS!

I have a couple of LaRue mounts (QD LT-104) on ARs and they're the BEST and worth every penny ... no doubt about it.

Personally, I'd buy a Mark 4 with a TMR reticle for target/tactical applications and a Zeiss Conquest for a hunting rifle.

:)

1858
June 14, 2009, 10:23 PM
If you were not planning on making adjustments (other than to zero) then the Z-1000 would be perfect, but dialing in the DOPE it will lie to you (the 400M mark will not equal the drop at 400M) making it useless, confusing, and in the way.

HUH!! Mav, didn't you read my thread with a link to the free Zeiss calibration utility for the RZ reticles? :confused: You can calibrate holdovers for all of the RZ reticles for any load on the planet.

http://www.zeiss.com/c1256bcf0020be5f/Contents-Frame/3dc0003746ab21148525726200057786

Let's say your load is a 168gr with an SD of 0.462 moving at 2,700 fps. Enter that data (along with altitude and temperature) into the utility, go the to the reticle analysis form page, enter the sight in distance and maximum magnification of the scope and click on "optimize power". Now look at the holdover values (Zero Point column) ... close to perfect at 19.2X (so call it 19X for government work). So if I were using this scope/reticle on a match rifle or any other rifle for that matter, I'd adjust the zero at each stage of fire using the elevation/windage turrets as necessary, but return it to the 500 yard zero setting (and 19X) for general use on targets from 100 to 1000 yards. This is where the FFP scopes come into their own, using holdovers over different distances where a wide field of view is desirable.

http://128.171.62.162/hawthorn-engineering/thr/optics/zeiss/rz-1000_1.jpg

http://128.171.62.162/hawthorn-engineering/thr/optics/zeiss/rz-1000_2.jpg

:)

Uncle Mike
June 14, 2009, 11:02 PM
How much did you say you could purchase a 6.5-20X50 for?
And from whom?
Thanx-

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 11:19 PM
HUH!! Mav, didn't you read my thread with a link to the free Zeiss calibration utility for the RZ reticles?I did not...but I will, that is a cool program. It will definitely prove handy if I can ever afford get one. However...what I was referring to was dialing in the DOPE and trying to use the reticle simultaneously. Due to the reticle's format (built in BDC) it would become difficult to read...but it is just about perfect for someone that does not want to dial in the elevation. You could "tune" the elevation using the closest distance on the reticle (for instance 420M, go to the 400M hash and dial in an additional 20M)...but that too could become confusing.

Don't get me wrong I really like the reticles (and plan to get the Z 1000), but I don't plan to dial in most of my measurements...and on the occasions when I do I plan to use the method detailed above. :)

Maverick223
June 14, 2009, 11:22 PM
Found...looked at...and linked. I saw your review, but I guess I tuned out too early on your Zeiss thread. Good stuff...see below...
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=453367

1858
June 14, 2009, 11:58 PM
Mav, you're a good lad ...:) ... I just wanted to clarify that all of the RZ reticles can be "calibrated" for any load, any rifle and any application. I like the RZ-1000 reticle and would use it both ways as I mentioned. I'm a sucker for options and I see the RZ-1000 as offering lots of flexibility. It even comes in an illuminated version so that'd be even better. I don't need another "tactical" or match scope at the moment .... but if I did, it'd most likely be a Mark 4 or Nightforce. I would like to try the Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA system but it's not a priority yet. I bought the conquest for a hunting rifle and will be ordering another this week for another hunting rifle. I think the Zeiss Conquests in 3-9x40mm with the RZ-600 reticle are the bees knees in terms of features, quality, cost and warranty if you're looking for a scope for a hunting rifle.

Mav, if you're dialing in DOPE then you'd use the center aiming stadia which would be intuitive to me. If you're using holdovers you'd leave it at the 500 zero setting. I don't see a problem with that system as long as the scope is left at 19X.

:)

Maverick223
June 15, 2009, 12:11 AM
Mav, you're a good ladThanks...I value your advice, opinion, and good nature. I still don't really agree with you, but thats okay too. :)

I see that you like your LaRue mounts...any experience with the Armalite equivalent? Just curious, I have no experience with either.

EDIT to add: Although when used solely for target use, it wouldn't hurt to dial in elevation (to center x-hair) because you have plenty of time to make adjustments for other ranges and can will be reseting to the zero afterwards. :)

4Freedom
June 15, 2009, 02:54 AM
Third, I have the RZ-600 reticle in my Conquest and you'd have a tough time finder a better reticle for hunting. As for target shooting or any other form of shooting, I'd go with the RZ-1000 over any other non RZ reticle offered by Zeiss. With the RZ series, you can adjust the POA using the windage and elevation turrets if you have time, or in reactive target type events or other situations, you can use CALIBRATED holdovers (at a given magnification) ... THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS!


Thanks for your response 1858.. My God, I was just ready to purchase the Zeiss Conquest 6-20 Mil-Dot and took most of what Maverick said to heart, but now I am more confused thanever :banghead::banghead: . Ugh.. this has been one of the most challenging decisions of my life, next to having my right arm amputated (joke) :D. So, Maverick is saying the Rapid-Z is a poor choice for target shooting, because the calibrated marks on the reticle are inaccurate and 1858 is saying that the Rapid-Z would make the best quality target shooting reticle and that the marks on the reticle can, with proper calculation, be used for both dialing in elevation/windage as well as for fast holdover target acquisition. Am I correct here in my analysis or am I wrong and confusing myself even more?

This is very tough decision and complicated. I explained earlier that I want an optic to put on my DPMS LR-308 24" bull barrel rifle. I am going to be doing benchrest target shooting at the range from 100-600 yards, but also plan on doing some long range shooting in the woods/wilderness to help increase my range finding skills. So, knowing this, would I be better with the Zeiss 6-20 Mil-Dot or Zeiss 6-20 Rapid Z-1000? 1858, I didn't quite get all the technical jargon that you wrote and it would take a little bit of time for me to analyze it deeper before I can ascertain the details of your post. If you can explain in layman terms to a newbie like me, it would help.

As far as the Mark IV, it is a bit more than I can afford and it seems I can get all the snazzy features anda bit better glass with the Zeiss Conquest as with the Mark IV. You can be right, maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but after looking at the VX3 at 75 yards in sportsman, I could without a doubt say the image was crisper and the light reflecting against the wall was brighter with Zeiss than Leupold. Does that mean that it is better inall environments, lighting and applications, definately NOT! I am just writing my observation in the store, the Zeiss image appeared brighter and more crisp. The wall did not have the brilliant white color reflecting off it with the VX3 as it did with the Zeiss or Swarvoski.


Anyway, not to get off topic, I don't want to debate about my perception of Leupold vs Zeiss.. I would like the Zeiss and I think it would make a good enough target scope for me.. So, if someone can assist me with what is best reticle for the situaiton, that would help. I am going to reread 1858's post with more diligence and hope I can try to understand some of it. LOL. If you have any reasons why the Illuminated TMR woudl be a better target scope, I like to hear them. I was told to stay away from illuminated reticles, as they distort the reticle and make it harder to acquire the target. This can be wrong, I am a newbie, going by what I hear.. THere is no illuminated reticles south of the Columbia or north ofthe Umpqua , so I cannot go try one out. ANyhow Illuminated TMR Mark 4 is too much $$$ for me, Zeiss scopes I can find at bargains, not so with Leupolds.

Maverick223
June 15, 2009, 03:34 AM
In all honesty you will probably be fine with either...and FWIW 1858 has more target shooting experience than I...so he may very well be on to something. Also, cheap illuminated scopes tend to blur the reticle as well as the tube. Any good quality scope will not do this (Zeiss, Leupy, Swaro, et al), though I don't believe it is worth the premium just for the added feature. IIRC you have to buy the Diavari to get the illuminated reticle (oh by the way it costs 2x as much). If decide you want a illuminated reticle I would look elsewhere (other than Zeiss).

Whatever you do...DON'T rush the decision and sacrifice doing thorough research...and don't listen to 1858 :neener:, lykoris :D, or that Maverick guy :cool:...get what you want and think will meet your needs. In my experience you won't be happy by getting what I want (but if you do get the 4.5-14x44mm version and you can give it to me). :)

1858
June 15, 2009, 04:45 AM
4Freedom, I'm not a big fan of the mildot reticle since mildot stadia don't offer enough resolution for my liking and I don't think that they're intuitive for long range shooting using holdovers. The 1/2 mil stadia increments on the Mark 4 TMR reticle are better but the RZ-1000 reticle is better yet. You should realize, whatever reticle you choose for your Zeiss (which is a great scope by the way regardless of the model), you're stuck with that since according to Zeiss you CANNOT upgrade to an RZ reticle later. With that in mind, I would 100% choose the RZ-1000 reticle. It CAN BE CALIBRATED for any load that you develop for your .308. In other words, you can use it accurately and intuitively using holdovers or you can move the natural center using the elevation and windage turrets ... what more could anyone want? As for claiming that it's too complicated, or it'll make you lazy, or it'll adversely affect your ability to learn how to make windage and elevation corrections .... yeah right :rolleyes: .

:)

4Freedom
June 15, 2009, 09:28 AM
Thanks 1858 for this explanation or wise words shall I say.. LOL. Well I respect both Maverick and you. I know Maverick says not to listen to anything of you guys say, but I just don't have enough time to spend more months researching about scopes before I buy one. I have spent the last few months reading people's opiions and learning the basic about scopes and I am finally ready to make my decision. I think what you have said sounds good and I think I will then revert back to my original plan of going with the Zeiss 6-20 Z-1000 reticle :scrutiny: .. Yeah I know some think I am rushing into it, but you can only spend so long researching about a target scope. The scope does have lifetime transferrable warranty, so its not like I will lose everything I put into it if I deceide to sell it and go somewhere else.

The Z-1000 I admit looks real fancy. But, I didn't want nice and tacti-coolish rectical to be all that would make me purchase the scope. I want one that I will be able to get the most use out of and will have the most functioniality and will help in improving my target skills. I guess from what you said and since you have a lot of target experience, the Z-1000 will be a great reticle for my DPMS LR-308. I think I would love to learn to make such a nice reticle work for different applications. I guess if I just cannot get good groups with this reticle, I will sell it and exchange it for something else.

1858, Can I ask you how do you think the Z-1000 would perform if I decided to use it on my AR-15s? I would do most my target shooting with the LR-308, but I do plan on also wanting to use the scope sometimes on my AR-15. Would the Z-1000 reticle make shooting with a .223/5.56 caliber impossible or very difficult? I know the holdover features are gauged for the .308.

I noticed you were displayhing some sort of software or program that calculates reticle analysis. I don't know if it is necessary to have this software to accurately gauge or dial in my scope to its target. Where do you get this software and can you explain something more about its purpose? Being a newbie, should I even bother to use such a program? I would like to know that I can make the Z-1000 work for me without having to spend lot of money on fancy gizmos or software.

Maverick, I am taking in what you said too. Its a hard choice, cause i talk to 15 differnet people and get 15 different opinoins; it seems only seldomly do they coincide. I am really going to have to ponder this. I hope if I get the Z-1000 I won't regret it. I know one guy said it was so bad he couldn't shoot targets with it. Maybe, he was just use to a duplex and couldn't keep his mind focused on the center versus all the other data on the reticle. I am speculating, but I hope it will work out for me.

Uncle Mike
June 15, 2009, 10:29 AM
Illuminated reticle scope...

Check out the Trijicon Accupoint. The 'reticle' is not entirely, or lit as much as some other scopes, but the aiming point is lit.

These scopes utilize tritium as a illumination source during low, or no light use and use fiber optic strand for ambient light source illumination.

The glass is good, while I would not corral them with Swaovski, Kahles or even the Conquests scopes... they do have superior glass.

Yea... I know, the glass is from the rice bowel(japan) but it isn't bad.

No batteries to leak and ruin your scope, and by the way, if you do have a battery bust and corrode the innards of your scope... no manufacturer will warrenty this!
So remove those batteries when not in use. Remember the batteries are not as well built as your scope, so bringing that 14 degree scope into the 70 degree hunting camp may cause the battery to blow! :banghead:

lykoris
June 15, 2009, 10:46 AM
1858
As for claiming that it's

too complicated,
or it'll make you lazy,
or it'll adversely affect your ability to learn how to make windage and elevation corrections .... yeah right .

1. I never said the z-1000 was too complicated, I said to me it was a busy/distracting reticle when you dial.

2. lazy comment, fully admit saying that but maybe I badly explained what I meant. see below

3. I never said the Z-1000 would have a detrimental impact on learning to dial, I said it was more flexible than the No.4 and offered both approaches/styles of shooting.

lazy, not the best term to have used, complacent maybe in the sense that once calibrated you stick with it and never bother to learn how to dial in for a given range.

What shaped my view on reticles having used hold over/under was many long conversations/seeing the rifles of a fellow club member who shoots F-Class open on the German national team, 40+ years of experience.

I think you can debate extensively many aspects of a single scope for example mounting it on an AR ok but if it was a bolt gun and you were shooting 600 yards to maximise your potential accuracy I would say the zeiss conquest was a poor choice as it's only 1/4moa in adjustment...I would go with 1/8 or 1/16 for distances out to 1,000 yards.

Another example is first versus second focal plane....again you can debate endlessly on that with some having a strong view/preference for one or the other.

In another thread we also seemed to clash views on scopes...I guess at the end of the day it comes down to personal preference from direct 1st hand experience and using whatever works best for you.

4Freedom,
I am sure you will be very happy with it and most important of all have fun shooting it.

Maverick223
June 15, 2009, 01:33 PM
4Freedom, I wasn't saying that you haven't done enough research and you should wait (because I really don't know how much thought you have put into it), just that you should be 99.99% sure of what you want. In all honesty I think you would be happy with that particular scope with about any reticle. Also the Rapid-Z 1000 is the one you were originally interested in, so I don't think you will be dissatisfied with it. I would like to know what you decide upon, and a review would be good too. :)

As for using the Z 1000 for the AR-15 (I am assuming .223/5.56) you will be fine but you have to fine tune the magnification to match the bullet. .223 and .308 are reasonably close at shorter ranges (up to about 500yds.).

1858
June 15, 2009, 04:00 PM
Would the Z-1000 reticle make shooting with a .223/5.56 caliber impossible or very difficult? I know the holdover features are gauged for the .308.

As Mav mentioned, the RZ-1000 reticle is better suited to calibers such as the .308 which is what you're buying it for ... right? However, you can make it work for whatever caliber/load you choose. For example, if you put it on your AR15 and decided to shoot some Blackhills 69gr SMK ammunition, this is how the holdovers would work out for you with a 500 yard zero and a 100 yard zero. Notice the difference in the optimized magnification value for both situations.

http://128.171.62.162/hawthorn-engineering/thr/optics/zeiss/rz-1000_3.jpg

http://128.171.62.162/hawthorn-engineering/thr/optics/zeiss/rz-1000_4.jpg

These calibrations may not be ideal compared to typical .308 loads but you get the idea. Also, there are horizontal stadia at 1/4 and 1/2 intervals between the 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 to represent 25, 50 and 75 yard increments.


I noticed you were displaying some sort of software or program that calculates reticle analysis. I don't know if it is necessary to have this software to accurately gauge or dial in my scope to its target. Where do you get this software and can you explain something more about its purpose?

It's a free reticle utility available on the Zeiss web site. Here's the link again.

Zeiss reticle calculator (http://www.zeiss.com/c1256bcf0020be5f/Contents-Frame/3dc0003746ab21148525726200057786)

If you want to "calibrate" your reticle you'll need to use the free reticle calculator. Some ballistic programs such as ExBal from Nightforce have their own reticle calculators but it'll take more work on your part since you have to know how the stadia are spaced.

Maybe it's worth mentioning to the difference between a front/first focal plane (FFP) reticle and a second focal plane (SFP) reticle. The Zeiss scope you're considering has a SFP reticle. What this means is that as you change the magnification on the scope, the spacing of the reticle stadia on the target will appear to increase relative to the size of the target (assuming the target is stationary). For this reason, holdovers on SFP reticles for a SPECIFIC load (MV, BC, bullet weight) are only valid at a SPECIFIC magnification. The Zeiss utility attempts to optimize the magnification to align as many as the horizontal holdover stadia as possible for your particular load whether it's a .308, .300 Win Mag, .223 etc.

:)

1858
June 15, 2009, 04:20 PM
lazy, not the best term to have used, complacent maybe in the sense that once calibrated you stick with it and never bother to learn how to dial in for a given range.

But I find that comment surprising since in my experience the reverse is true. It's much easier to learn how to dial in elevation and windage adjustments than it is to learn how to accurately use holdovers for static or moving targets. In fact, I view holdovers as being the last resort if you don't have time to make physical elevation and windage corrections. This is why the RZ-600 reticle is ideal for hunting where you don't want to have large external turrets to get hung up on brush etc. or add uneccessary weight, plus you often don't have the time to make physical elevation/windage adjustments anyway.

In another thread we also seemed to clash views on scopes...I guess at the end of the day it comes down to personal preference from direct 1st hand experience and using whatever works best for you.

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing about this stuff. There is no "one size fits all" here.

:)

4Freedom
June 15, 2009, 05:36 PM
I don't want to throw anyone off here, but I think I will have to change my opinion and rethink out my reticle and scope after talking with a customer service person at Zeiss. The cust service rep at Zeiss said that I should not use the Z-1000 reticle if I am only shooting from 100-600 yards. She said it was designed to be used when shooting beyond 500 yards and that if I am mainly shooting at 100-300 yards, that the reticle will have problems, since the center hash mark is guaged at 500 yards. Sorry, if I am misquoting her and using improper terms. I guess what she said was that if I will shoot at 100 yards, that I will always have to use the very top hash mark which is at 100 yards and it may not always work depending on the co-factors of the environment and location of target.

Well, the person at Zeiss customer service was steering me towards the 4.5-14x50 Rapid Z-800 which is centered at 200 yards. This seems like a better option. She also suggested that I could use a Mil-Dot in the 6x20x50 to utilize holdover, windage, BDC but that the magnification was more than I needed. Some here have been saying the dot sizes or resolution of the dot stadia (??? not sure what that mean), makes the Mil-Dots not a good choice? I suppose the Rapid-Z would be nice. Yes, I have tried out the calculator and can see it will be a powerful tool , should I get the Rapid-Z reticle. I still don't know how to use it of course, but I was explained what it can do.

I am now considering a 4.5-14x50 with Rapid-Z 800, but the one problem with thse is it has hunting turrets. Would the hunting turrets be a great hinderance? Zeiss told me they can put target turrets on the scope, but it will cost $100 or more. $40 per knob + $15 shipping + my shipping to them. What do people think of that? I am going in circles, but definately learning more through the process. Between the 4.5-14x50 Rapid-Z 800 or the 6.5-20x50 Mil-Dot which would be a better choice for target shooting? I suppose from what I was told, the Rapid-Z 1000 just won't work sufficiently for how I am shooting. Too bad. :(


Uncle Mike, the Accupoint is a nice suggestion, maybe I will look into it. If I buy an ACcupoint, I do so blindly, since nobody around here carries one of those, I wonder what Trjicon's warranty is like on that product. I have heard Trijicon has not been known for great warranties like Leupold and Zeiss. Like, they don't have a transferrable warranty. Would you say the illuminated reticle on the Accupoint is sharper than on a Mark 4? I am told the illuminated reticle on the Mark 4 is a bit fuzzy and can make it hard to get an accurate representation of the target?

lykoris
June 15, 2009, 05:42 PM
in my experience the reverse is true. It's much easier to learn how to dial in elevation and windage adjustments than it is to learn how to accurately use holdovers for static or moving targets.

I started with mil-dot ret & moa turrets, instead of mil/mil or moa/moa. I regretted not doing my homework but you live and learn.

but I agree dialling is much easier and I would never go back to hold over/under for a range rifle where you have all the time you need and the target is stationary.

lykoris
June 15, 2009, 05:50 PM
I am told the illuminated reticle on the Mark 4 is a bit fuzzy and can make it hard to get an accurate representation of the target?

Well mine is crisp and I am very impressed with it, lights up only when on a dark target.

it has 11 levels of illumination, least my model does, 8.5-25 lr/t with illuminated tmr ret.

Uncle Mike
June 15, 2009, 05:56 PM
Uncle Mike, the Accupoint is a nice suggestion, maybe I will look into it. If I buy an ACcupoint, I do so blindly, since nobody around here carries one of those, I wonder what Trjicon's warranty is like on that product. I have heard Trijicon has not been known for great warranties like Leupold and Zeiss. Like, they don't have a transferrable warranty. Would you say the illuminated reticle on the Accupoint is sharper than on a Mark 4? I am told the illuminated reticle on the Mark 4 is a bit fuzzy and can make it hard to get an accurate representation of the target?



It is my worthless opinion that the Accupoint illuminated reticle is indeed 'sharper' than the Leupold Mark 4's. The illuminated 'dot' of the Accupoint is a bit smaller than the comparable compititions dot, this all the while allowing for more precise aim, with less 'bloom' at the dot.

As for the warranty... Materials and Workmanship is Lifetime.
The illumination is provided by tritium, which is warranted for 15 years.
The brightness of the Tritium is prorated during the 15 year warranty period.

Tranferable warranty for the Accupoint... No. However this should be of no concern to the owner... past or present.

-:D

Maverick223
June 15, 2009, 06:23 PM
I mostly agree with the customer service representative. The Rapid Z reticles were primarily designed for hunting, and personally I think the 6.5x on the low end of magnification is a bit too much...so I would (and I plan to) go with the 4.5-14x44/50 (I like the 44mm because it can be mounted lower, but you may want the 50mm for the added brightness). This is available in Mil-dot and Target Turrets. :) http://www.zeiss.com/c1256bcf0020be5f/Contents-Frame/c6b062a1c5089a5585257546006e354d

Maverick223
June 15, 2009, 06:37 PM
If you are willing to pay a little more, IOR has some good quality (uses Zeiss Schott glass) scopes with better reticles and are illuminated. They are very nice scopes, I nearly bought one to put atop my Desert Tactical SRS (but decided I wanted FFP, and had heard horror stories of IOR FFP models). :) http://www.valdada.com/product/6bc60426-b290-4d5b-9053-35e59579e645.aspx
http://www.valdada.com/product/cc8d6054-9ae7-4916-ac84-295daae08506.aspx

If you enjoyed reading about "Zeiss Conquest vs Swarvoski" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!