Leupold VX-6 vs Zeiss HD5

[rebrousse_poil]

I hesitate between these two models (VX-6 3x18x44 or hd5 3x15x44). Shooting and hunting. Someone had a chance to look through these two models? Which one would you choose?
The Leupold would be purchased from a U.S. store (more complicated for the warranty but the dealer advised that he mediates between Leupold U.S. and Canadian customers. In case of any problem, should only pay for transport to go for repair ...).

 

[stubblejumper]

I have a 3-15x42HD5 and I find it to be clear and bright, and it tracks very well. I also have two Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44 scopes, which I actually prefer slightly over the HD5. As to the VX6, it is heavier than I wanted to have for a big game scope.

 

[gtrussell]

The VX-6 is the only one I have experience with.I cant pick one over the other.Remember you cant always believe what you read.

 

[rebrousse_poil]

Thanks for the reply.
I made ​​my choice and I bought the Leupold VX-6 after comparing the two models. I bought from a dealer in Saskatchewan recognized by Korth Group (for warranty) and with the best price -thanks to Darcy at Bowyer's outdoor sports-. Leupold seems to my eyes a bit clearer and more robust (I didn't liked the parallax turret on HD5)... As for the weight,
HD5 3x15x42 is 18,4 oz and Leupold 3x18x44 is 19,0 oz.

 

[stubblejumper]

As for the weight,
HD5 3x15x42 is 18,4 oz and Leupold 3x18x44 is 19,0 oz.

According to the Leupold site the VX-6 3-18X44 weighs 21.8 ounces.

http://www.leupold.com/hunting-shooting/scopes/vx-6-riflescopes/vx-6-3-18x44mm-30mm-side-focus-cds/

Weight (oz) 21.80 oz

And the sources that I can find that list the weight of the HD5 3-15x42, are listing it at 15.2 ounces.

http://www.eurooptic.com/zeiss-conquest-hd5-3-15x42-plex-522621-9920-000.aspx

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/zeiss.pl?page=zeiss_conquest_hd5_3-15x42

 

[rebrousse_poil]

I only checked on SWFA for both scopes weight...Zeiss weight seems to be 15,2 oz on some sites and 18,4 on others...

 

[scott_r]

Really.....like 2 extra ounces make a difference????

 

[rebrousse_poil]

And the sources that I can find that list the weight of the HD5 3-15x42, are listing it at 15.2 ounces.

http://www.eurooptic.com/zeiss-conquest-hd5-3-15x42-plex-522621-9920-000.aspx

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/zeiss.pl?page=zeiss_conquest_hd5_3-15x42

Weird, 2x12x42 at those sources are heavier (17,5 oz) than the 3x15x42 (15,2 oz)...

 

[stubblejumper]

Really.....like 2 extra ounces make a difference????

Depending on whose numbers you choose to use, the difference could be from as little as .6 ounces, to as much as 6.6 ounces. That is a substantial difference.

 

[sheephunter]

My Zeiss 3-15x42 weighs 18.1 ounces without scope covers.

 

[stubblejumper]

My Zeiss 3-15x42 weighs 18.1 ounces without scope covers.

Which model? Target turrets, or hunting turrets?

 

[sheephunter]

There are no exposed turrets on it...it's got a RZ800 reticle.

 

[rebrousse_poil]

sheephunter, how do you find the optic of you're hd5?

weight aside, I was impressed with the scope and it's price

 

[sheephunter]

I think it's a step up from the old Conquest line and I was really happy with my original Conquests.

 

[rebrousse_poil]

I really like also my conquest 3x9x40 with rapid z-600, but as stubblejumper said on an other thread, the 300 yards parallax free on that scope isn't ideal for load development at 100 yards. That's the reason why I buyed a new scope (hunting but mostly shooting). Anyway, I'll put quick detach on both and swap them according to the situation...

 

[purplezuk]

I did a bunch of comparisons when i was looking for my main hunting scope. I found Leupold to be my favorite. Yes they are heavier, but on a 6lb rifle, the extra weight doesn't bother me.
VX7L 3.5-14 x 56. The 34mm tube coupled with the large glass draws in an unreal amount of light especially in the after hunting hours. ( it can be nice to know what the eyes watching you belong to...)

 

[stubblejumper]

The 34mm tube coupled with the large glass draws in an unreal amount of light

The 34 mm tube allows for more adjustment, it doesn't increase the light transmission.

 

[sheephunter]

I did a bunch of comparisons when i was looking for my main hunting scope. I found Leupold to be my favorite. Yes they are heavier, but on a 6lb rifle, the extra weight doesn't bother me.
VX7L 3.5-14 x 56. The 34mm tube coupled with the large glass draws in an unreal amount of light especially in the after hunting hours. ( it can be nice to know what the eyes watching you belong to...)

Larger tube sizes don't typically affect the amount of light that reaches the eye. That falls to the size of the objective lens, the quality of glass and the type of coatings. Larger tube sizes are used to accommodate larger internal mechanics that allow for increased MOA adjustment and in some cases increased zoom range.

 

[scott_r]

In a hunting scope I see no point to a 34 mm tube. Now you gotta find 34 mm rings which are crazy expensive. Most shots taken while hunting are under 200 yards, dont need to turn a dial for that. Guess its the "latest" fad ??

 

[sheephunter]

I really like also my conquest 3x9x40 with rapid z-600, but as stubblejumper said on an other thread, the 300 yards parallax free on that scope isn't ideal for load development at 100 yards. That's the reason why I buyed a new scope (hunting but mostly shooting). Anyway, I'll put quick detach on both and swap them according to the situation...

Lots of things sound good or bad on paper or in theory but you won't have any trouble with load development at 100 yards with your scope on a hunting rifle. Shoot it and enjoy it.