Opinions of Zeiss scope

This is just my opinion, but the scope that you are looking at has a 56 mm objective lens, which would make that scope rather large and heavy to have on a hunting rifle, especially a sheep rifle. I know I wouldn't want to hike up a mountain with it. Having said that, a 3 X 12 scope would certainly cover a large range of hunting situations, and Zeiss makes a good scope. I would put a scope in the range of a 3 X 9 X 40 on a hunting rifle myself.

Yes, you will need to order rings and bases if you don't already have them for your rifle. There are a lot of different choices for a Remington 700. I personally like the Burris Zee rings with the plastic inserts. Both Leupold and Burris bases would work with these rings.
 
I got the Conquest 3.5 - 10 X 44mm on my Rem XCR 300 Ultra Mag fitted with Burris Signature Rings and base. The objective just clear the barrel with medium height rings. Be aware that the 56 bell will be heavy and can ruin balance of the gun.

I have a Elite 4200 2.5-10 X 40 on a Ruger 300 WM and their is definately a big quality diffrence between the two. In the Elite at 200 yards I see chromatic aberrations. And it is less define than the Zeiss.

I will not buy another Bushnell scope to put on long range rifle. Minimum quality now= Zeiss. I'm hooked to glass now.

Greatmush
 
I too use the 3.5-10x44 zeiss conquest on my Sako300 stainless hunter. Low mounts too, Its a great fit and well balanced. I wouldn't go bigger.
 
Sako300 said:
I too use the 3.5-10x44 zeiss conquest on my Sako300 stainless hunter. Low mounts too, Its a great fit and well balanced. I wouldn't go bigger.
Click to expand...
Can you tell me how one orders "low mounts"? Does that mean rings and bases? What should one order (I have a Gsmith putting it together).
 
I had a look at the Zeiss 3-12 x 56 at S.I.R. and was not impressed with this scope at all. When zoomed in to 12 power it was as if I was looking thru a tube with little F.O.V.

For the scope mounts, the base is one size and it’s the rings that are higher or lower as req’d to mount the style of scope that you desire...
 
I have 2-40's and 2-44's Conquest so I guess you could say I'm pleased with their performance:D. Have been subjected to hard hunting use in western canada and never gave me an ounce of grief.

I concur on the objective size, no need for 56mm on a biggame hunting rifle IMHO.
 
I'm not trying to change your mind as to the brand to buy, but what I would suggest is that you have a close look at the Bushnell Elite 6500 in 2.5-16X42. The weight is significantly less than the first Zeiss you mentioned and is designed for both short and long range hunting.

http://www.bushnell.com/general/riflescopes_elite6500_65-2164md.cfm
This is a new line from Bushnell and the availability is very limited. US retailers have them advertised between $550 and $600 but on back order (local retailers in the Ottawa area have them in stock for around $600-640).

I do have a Zeiss on one of my rifles and you can't go wrong with this brand. I also have a bit of experience with the wide range of Bushnell scopes and their value for the money is very good.

Duke1

PS. It comes with the choice of 2 reticule type - MILDOT and Fine Multi-X
 
Last edited:
purchase

I oredered the zeiss 4.5 x 12 x 44. I hope that I made the right decision. I put a Bushnell elite on the savage 7mm mag. I will try out both scopes and decide what I want for my next gun. Im thinking of a remington 700 7 mm mag alaska ultralite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom