Zeiss Conquest questions

[257WM_CDL-SF]

I have decided in the Conquest I have heard ithas good optics and that the etched reitcle stands out in any light.Plus they are dependable and have a lifetime warranty.Plus I love the RZ 600 reticle. My question is this.It will be used 95 % for deer hunting,I might shoot an occasional groundhog or coyote.
I have looked at the 3x9x40 with 600 reticle,and the 3.5x10x44 with 600 ret
also the 4.5x14x44 with plex My question for all around hunting and low light performance which would work the best.the 3.5 x10 is about 200 more for 1 more power,is it worth it and the 4.5 x14 is about 300 more.Also the 3x9 and 3.5 x10 dont have AO is it needed and does it help.Id appreciate anyone feedback and comments

 

[Acera]

257WM_CDL-SF I have a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x50 MC on a .300 Win. Mag. Browning Acera. It has the 1 inch tube, Z-Plex reticle, and 1/4 inch clicks. The scope compares favorably to my more expensive tactical Leupold in it's clarity and brightness.

I really like this set up on my rifle, and do most of my shooting with it set on the lower powers.

If you decide on the Zeiss, whatever model you choose, I do not think you will regret the decision.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

Acera how is it in low light

 

[lipadj46]

All Zeiss conquests are great in low light their glass is where they shine. I think dollar for dollar the 3-9x40 is one of the best all around deer rifle scope (though they used to be cheaper). You really cannot go wrong with any conquest though.

I will add the the conquest glass is better than leupold VX-3/mk 4 glass. While the Leupolds have better target turrets with more internal adjustment and better "clicks" and just better feel on the target turrets.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

I am bidding on a used Swarovski 3x10x42 but i suspect its going to go higher than I can get the conquest for, I'm just trying to decide if the 3.5x10x44 is worth 100 more than the 3x9x40

 

[lipadj46]

The swarovski would be a better scope but yes they are pricey. Personally for deer hunting I don't think the 3.5x10x44 is worth the extra $100 but others may like the extra upper end.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

yes I willing to go to 600.00 on the Swarovski.Its in great shape it just does'nt have a warranty card If knew it would be ok might even go 650.00

 

[Savage99]

257WM,

I have a couple of 3-9 Conquests along with 2.5-8's and a 4.5-14.

For your application I would get the 3-9. Its an outstanding scope and the 3.5-10's are not worth the extra $$.

Use Cameraland for a source. They have the best prices.

http://cameralandny1.reachlocal.net/optics/zeiss.pl?page=521460

Weekly Sales Blowout Item!
Demo Unit Price: $389.99
#20 Z-Plex Matte Black
Includes a Lifetime
Transferable Warranty.

This is a new in the box scope.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

Thank you Savage i could'nt really see a 100 difference in them I might for 50$ Will i miss not having the AO

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

1 more question I know it has a etched reticle,but doesits size increase with magnification

 

[elktrout]

The reticles on Conquests do not enlarge with magnification. I have a Conquest 4.5-14x44 with AO. It is awesome. Fabulous in low light. Stays shot in. Crystal clear.

For your intended use, the 3-9x40 is likely your best value. As info, a few weeks ago I took my 7mm Wby mag (with the Conquest) out shooting at 8 inch bullseyes at 400 yards. I shot plenty well enough to hit big game and had the scope set on 6x. My next scope, regardless of caliber, will be a 3-9x Conquest.

Good luck.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

thank you elktrout what reticle do you have?

 

[lipadj46]

If you are looking for a scope that offers 95% of the conquest performance for half the price look at the Nikon Team Primos 3-9x40 for $220. I had the chance to shoot my M1A with Bushnell 4200, my Father's Ruger 30.06 and his friends 700 with Zeiss Conquest (all 3-9x40). We shot into dusk. The zeiss was the brightest scope the longest but not by much. They all were equal as far as we could tell for clarity. I did not check things like tracking.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

I have a question.My saw sold for more than I expected .Is a Kahles
CL Multizero worth 100 more than the Conquest

 

[elktrout]

I have the z-plex reticle. Even in low light it is very visible due to the good optics in the scope. I found the Conquest reticle more visible under low light than others. A good way to test this, while at the store, is to take a few scopes into a dimly lit room and look through them.

 

[lipadj46]

I have a question.My saw sold for more than I expected .Is a Kahles CL Multizero wort

Hmm... That's a tough one. I would lean towards yes its a better scope hands down. BUT kahles customer service is an unknown these days and they are also supposedly being sold. Zeiss on the other hand has some very good customer service. Look at CDNN for deals on Kahles scopes.

 

[Acera]

257WM_CDL-SF Acera how is it in low light

Very Good, one of the best I have used.

Try checking here for some prices before you buy,

http://www.swfa.com/default.aspx

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

ok 3x9x40 for 549 or 3.5x10x44 for 625

 

[Techsan]

I am bidding on a used Swarovski 3x10x42 but i suspect its going to go higher than I can get the conquest for, I'm just trying to decide if the 3.5x10x44 is worth 100 more than the 3x9x40

I have the 3.5-10x44 on a .30-06 and the 3-9x40 on a .243, both with the plex reticle. I picked up the 3-9x40 first and liked it so much I decided I needed another Conquest, but thought I should get a slightly higher power for the .30-06. I don't need it, and if I was doing it again I would get another 3-9x40 and save a little dough. Either way, you'll be getting a very nice scope.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

Techsan can you tell alot of difference on max magnifcation between them say like sighting in

 

[lipadj46]

There is not much of a difference between 9x and 10x. For deer hunting 9x is plenty if you want to shoot longer distances or varmint hunting the 10x will be better. And let me say wow the prices on these really jumped up.

This is the affordable 3-9x40 model for $500, you may be able to find it cheaper as it used to be $400-$450:

http://www.swfa.com/pc-5762-259-zeiss-3-9x40-conquest-rifle-scope.aspx

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

here is my problem I agree 3x9 is plenty for sighting on a deer,My problem is when I sight in I cant see the little colered dot at 100 yds

 

[Techsan]

I have not sighted them in together, so I have not looked through them side by side down a 100 yard range to determine if I get noticeably better magnification out of the 3.5-10x44. But, I've deer hunted with both and have not noted a difference in the higher power scope. You're just not going to get significantly better magnification from a 10x over a 9x. In my opinion, the 3-9x40 Conquest is an excellent scope that will serve your needs for virtually any type of game animal in North America. I can remember when it retailed for $399 new. Them days are gone.

 

[257WM_CDL-SF]

thank you

 

[Tamlin]

I have to say up front, I have not purchased a scope yet. BUT - I have done lots of field research at several sporting goods stores - I have looked through several brands and models of scopes, and I have to say, I am most impressed with Zeiss. Leupold . . . not so much. I actually like the Nikon Monarch over the Leupold. But Zeiss -- definitely my favorite. When I purchase a scope, it will be a Zeiss.