cougar1717
Member
I'm in the market for a scope and found this thread. I was interested in this discussion since I also noticed the great ranking given to the Bushnell 4200/6500 series. The problem with this rhetoric is that forums allow you to argue semantics without consequence, and scopes are things that have to be physically inspected, since regurgatated website information means very little to me. I own a VX-II, a VX-III, and a Conquest. I have relatives and friends who have let me compare their Leupold Euro-30 and Swarovski scopes. I went to Cabela's yesterday to compare scopes. I looked at three scopes: Bushnell 4200, Zeiss Conquest, Leupold Mark 4. I understand that Cabela's environment is not a hunting situation, but it was very easy to see that although the SWFA has listed the 4200 to be of similar quality as the other two, I can attest from firsthand inspection that it is not. I would compare the 4200 to be of similar quality to a VX-II. If you disagree, I encourage you to test them for yourself and compare them side by side as I did. My personal opinion is that the Zeiss Conquest was the clearest of the three, but the Mark 4 was very, very close and would probably outperform the Conquest in dawn and dusk situations due to the 30mm tube. I suspect this since my relative's Leupold Euro-30 scope performs similarly at dawn and dusk to my Conquest, even though the Euro-30 is not as clear in the daylight. These are my opinions and I would encourage you to form your own from physically viewing the scopes.