Ok so I'm stuck... Need Zeiss vs VX3 experienced opinions please

I have a 3-9x50 Conquest mounted on my X-bolt Varmint Stalker and like it a lot. Get the high rings if you get a 50mm scope, medium should be fine for a 40mm. Someone mentioned before that they wouldn't buy the Zeiss because it was only a 1" tube. That doesn't matter at all as it's the diameter of the tube inside that counts. Plus with Zeiss glass you know you're going get the best brightness and clarity out there. Like many others around, including myself, the debate between the VX-3 and Conquest has been a tough one. I cant speak for everyone, but I'm happy with the choice I made. No knock against the VX-3 either, I'm sure I would have been happy if I went that route too. For me though, the Conquest was just a better bang for the buck.
 
Zeiss all the way, I have had a vx3 and a mark 4. Neither of the Leupolds were as good as my Conquest in terms of sight picture or clarity or low light.
I can't stand the variable eye relief on Leupolds.
In Fact I will never own another Leupold as long as Zeiss and Trijicon are still making scopes.
 
VX3 2.5-8 is $506 with a lebarons membership. Definately comparable in price to the zeiss. Having owned both, the zeiss was a nice scope, but I moved it along. It is heavier, not as quick on target from field positions, and just doesn't come into focus and provide as good a sight picture as the leup for me. Now, everyone is different so YMMV. I am sticking with the leupolds, even though the zeiss is a fine scope. Different strokes!
 
I've got both, a 3-9x40 on my Model 70 6.5x55 and a 2.5-8x36 on my Browning Safari. Both are hunting rifles but get shot at the range as well.

The VX3 glass is not as good as the Zeiss glass. There is about 4ozs difference between them in weight. I've sent two Leupolds in for repair I have not sent the Zeiss in yet.

I'll take a Conquest over a VX3 everytime.
 
I appreciate everyones's input and opinions. As I previously stated, due to location and I am unable to handle and compare the two myself. Hence the thread. I've decided thanks to all your help that the x-bolt is going to be wearing a Zeiss. It's on order and should be arriving soon.

Thanks again,

DL
 
I had a discussion with a guy at the sporting goods store about the Zeiss Conquest vs. VX III and he was looking at both scopes in the 3.5-10x44 range. His big issue was the weight difference, said he could notice it in the field, he was dead serious too. REALLY???? the guy was 40 lbs over weight and was worried about the 3 oz. difference in a Conquest vs VX III. Just have to shake your head at some peoples logic. I thought this fellow might be pulling my leg but after reading some peoples post here I guess not.

Cheers!!
 
doublelung said:
I appreciate everyones's input and opinions. As I previously stated, due to location and I am unable to handle and compare the two myself. Hence the thread. I've decided thanks to all your help that the x-bolt is going to be wearing a Zeiss. It's on order and should be arriving soon.

Thanks again,

DL
Click to expand...


Well you made the right choice there!!!!
 
Just for reference here is a pic of my 3-9x50 on high rings. I don't know if medium height rings would have fit but there isn't a lot of space left with the high ones anyway. I wonder what reticle you decided to go with. I went with the Rapid-Z 600, but the design lines are fairly thin and I wonder if I will end up liking it in the long run. Cheers!
2012-10-20134114_zps74f4388e.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sure look high, Zeiss have a big eye piece but if you can you will have a better cheek weld with mediums... JP.
 
I'm not so sure mediums would work without out touching the barrel. This pic might be better, you can see there is literally only maybe 2-3mm of space, and that's with the scope pushed forward in the rings too.
2012-10-20134221.jpg
I didn't want to buy and then sit on an extra set after just to find out either :). I know good cheek weld means better comfort and all around interaction with the scope, but is there anything impartive about it I may be missing?
 
I went with the z plex reticle. I've got medium height x lock rings on mine but only went with the 3x9x40 not the 50, so it should fit fine.
 
I don't have a VXIII to compare it to. but I do have a 25+yrs old Leupold 3-9x40. It has been on 7Remmags, 7-08 and for the last 20-odd yrs on a Rem700 in .338WM. I put the Zeiss 3-9x40Z600, on a Merkel K1, in 7Remmag, this yr. It is really no comparison optically. I've used it a bit now, in varying hunting situations, looked at a lot of stuff in low light, and it works for me. As far as the durability and warranty go, I can live with it taking a while to fix if necc., There are other scopes in the cupboard to use on it. But, some of those will likely get replaced by Conquests. It is a great scope for that kind of money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom