VXIII 2.5-8X or Zeiss Conquest or ???Swaro???

B

Beaver Skin

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
179   0   0
Location
Lower Mainland, BC
It's time for a new scope for my new rifle :D This will be going on a 338-06 and for the longest time I've been a Leupold guy. BUT...it seems the Conquest line by Zeiss has been making a very strong impression on the shooting community. So what is the general concensus here? How does the new VXIII line compare with the Conquest? Which would you go for?
 
Last edited:
I use the relativley compact Vari X III 2.5-8 on 3 of my big gmae rilfes...

I love it.

Ziess works very well, I am sure. I like the compactness of the 2.5-8.
;)
 
Beaver Skin said:
It's time for a new scope for my new rifle :D This will be going on a 338-06 and for the longest time I've been a Leupold guy. BUT...it seems the Conquest line by Zeiss has been making a very strong impression on the shooting community. So what is the general concensus here? How does the new VXIII line compare with the Conquest? Which would you go for?
Click to expand...

I had the same question last year, looked at the VX II, VX III and the Conquest.

Compared the clarity V's the $$$, I finished up buying the VX II.

'Gatehouse' checked out my scope when we were out hunting, and was very impressed with it.

IMO, (which is not worth alot) for the $$$, go with the VX II for VALUE of the $$$

If money is no object, and you want a Zeiss scope, then go for the gusto and buy the 'European Zeiss' scope, then you really have something :cool:
 
well your user name brings vivid imagery to my mind




oh yeah about the scopes, I like Leupold VX series, cant go wrong :D
​
 
If you do a little research and compare the Zeiss to the Leupolds on paper you will find... The Leupolds are much lighter, they have more eye relief, they have much greater internal adjustment range, the lens coatings are superior and have better light transmission than the Zeiss...This is a no brainer.
Leupold.
 
Last edited:
Leupold All The Way!

BIGREDD said:
If you do a little research and compare the Zeiss to the Leupolds on paper you will find... The Leupolds are much lighter, they have more eye relief, they have much greater internal adjustment range, the lens coatings are superior and have better light transmission than the Zeiss...This is a no brainer.
Leupold.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but then he can't brag to his buddies that he put a "Zeiss" on his rifle! :p

Go Leupold VX-III.... ;) :D
 
The Leupolds are much lighter, they have more eye relief, they have much greater internal adjustment range, the lens coatings are superior and have better light transmission than the Zeiss...This is a no brainer.
Leupold.
Click to expand...

The 3x9x40 conquest has 4" of eye relief at all magnifications while the 2.5x8x36 vxiii has only 3.5" at 8x so the leupold actually has less eye relief.To my eyes the conquest scopes are brighter than the vxiii with similar magnifications and objective lens sizes.Therefore I also see this as a no brainer in favor of the conquest.
 
I have owned both. The Zeiss has a nice constant eye relief and the optical clarity was superior to the VX-III. I couldn't see where one scope was brighter than the other. On the other hand, the VX-III is sleeker, has plenty of eye relief and looks better in my opinion. It is also a fair bit lighter. Both are fine scopes, I prefer the VX-III to the Conquest.
 
Last edited:
Hey Todd,

The name did not come from what you are thinking :p It was a going joke that if I was left in the woods for any length of time along, my buddies would find me cozy in some log cabin dressed in a bear skin with, get this, beaver skin underwear. Nice and soft :D Well I wasn't about to use the full name, beaverskin underwear so it got shortened!!!

I'll throw another make into the mix as I can get a used (10 yr old) Swarovski A series scope for a similar price. Any opinions around this? Lens coatings improved greatly over the past few years but enough to surpass the initial quality of the Swaro?

I'm really haveing a tough time with this decision :confused: :confused: :cool:
 
I had an older Swarovski fixed 6x and it was a great scope. Are you sure the A series is only 10 years old? Have you considered Kahles? They are less $ than Swarovski, but are very good scopes. The 2-7x36 is $1049 and the 3-9x42 is $1049. IIRC Kahles is owned by Swarovski and the scopes have very similar performance. They are made in Austria and have been around for many decades.
 
I currently own four 3x10x42 swarovski scopes and I have previously owned two older 3x9x36 a lines.All are very clear and bright as well as being light and compact.I prefer them to either the vxiii or the conquest.
 
stubblejumper said:
The 3x9x40 conquest has 4" of eye relief at all magnifications while the 2.5x8x36 vxiii has only 3.5" at 8x so the leupold actually has less eye relief.To my eyes the conquest scopes are brighter than the vxiii with similar magnifications and objective lens sizes.Therefore I also see this as a no brainer in favor of the conquest.
Click to expand...

Im just curious if this is the same for the 3.5-10x 40 VXIII, seems like a better comparison then the 2.5-8.

Cheers!!
 
I've got a 2.5-8 VX111, a 3-9 Conquest and the 3.5-10 VX111 that probably is more comparable. The Leupolds win in weight and size, the Zeiss just might be a bit brighter but it is almost too close to call. The Zeiss will probably have to be mounted higher because the occular bell is huge, but the speed focus that causes it is nice. Price is close enough that it shouldn't sway your decision. I don't think you can go too far wrong with any of them, get whatever you like the most.
 
"If you do a little research and compare the Zeiss to the Leupolds on paper you will find... The Leupolds are much lighter, they have more eye relief, they have much greater internal adjustment range, the lens coatings are superior and have better light transmission than the Zeiss...This is a no brainer.
Leupold"
That's a very misleading statement, lets compare a 3.5x10x40 VX111 to a conquest 3x9x40, the Leupold has more eye relief at 3.5 but considerably less at 10x, The zeiss has constant eye releif, a fantastic feature, the scopes differ in weight by 2 oz, hardly "much Lighter", the FOV in the Leupold scope is considerably narrower than the Zeiss. The quality of the coatings is pretty subjective, I find the Conquest line considerably clearer and brighter at long ranges than the 1 inch Leupold VX111, the VX11 isn't even close.
The Zeiss scope is a fair bit bigger than the comparable Leupold, depending on the on the rifle it can effect the aesthetics. I own a VX11, have owned 2 VX111's, and own two Zeiss Conquests. I find the conquests superior in just about every way to the VX series of Leupold scopes.
Oh yeah, if you shop on line in the US, the conquests are actually cheaper than the VX111 line of Leupolds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom