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

martinbns wrote:

"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 are crisp, I'll give them that... but far too many hours peering through the new VXIII and VXII's under my belt to buy this claim. I'd guess 9/10 people would can not tell the difference between an New mc4 VXII and VXIII..... and the 1/10 that could be simply be making a lucky WAG!

The VXIII simply gives features such as finger adjustable turrets, range finding reticles (which I have not been impressed with), as well as other luxury options such as side focus parallax adj., B+C reticle, and a wider gold ring. If that bends ya fly at it...

But, when it boils down to an unbeatable variable hunting scope, that is rugged scope with phenominal optics... one would be cheating himself by not spending his hard earned $$$ on a VXII IMHO.

I run Swaro EL 10x42 binoculars and Zeiss 65 spotter, but my scopes are for keeping the crosshairs where they belong... not replacing my optics.

I'd personally buy the VXII and spend the rest of the cash on ammo to practice... it will benefit a fella more in the long run... but I never have been one to pay for what I can't see... funny that way I guess.

280_ACKLEY
 
My biggest beef withj Leupold scopes is the standard duplex reticle, I find the thick parts to close together, and not thick enough, they disappear to easily for my taste. I prefer the Zplex reticle.
 
I saw the used Swarovski today and it looks older than it is so it is definately out. The VXIII is definitly more compact than the Zeiss but I really liked the FOV of the Zeiss and the reticle. Unfortunately, it looks like there will be a clearance issue with the occular bell with the rings I currently have. The Leupold is great but I am leaning towards the Zeiss (at least this hour). :)
 
Leupold's warranty is second to none plus there is a repair center in Canada.

Having a repair center here is the best part of buying a Leupold. I have broke 3 in the past 5 years, all my fault. Those scope were fixed for free and were back on my rifles in 2-3 weeks.
You Cant Beat That.
 
Republic of Alberta said:
Leupold's warranty is second to none plus there is a repair center in Canada.

Having a repair center here is the best part of buying a Leupold. I have broke 3 in the past 5 years, all my fault. Those scope were fixed for free and were back on my rifles in 2-3 weeks.
You Cant Beat That.
Click to expand...

I have had a ziess scope damaged in a horsewreck.It was fixed for free and back on a rifle in 2-3 weeks as well.
 
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...
martinibns 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"
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.
Click to expand...

If your going to compare you should use equal magnifications scopes...
The field of view is greater at high Magnification in the Luepold... where it counts!:redface:


Here you look at the numbers for yourselves. both 3-9X40's VXII and a Conquest.

CONQUEST 3-9x40
Technical Data

Magnification
3-9x
Objective (mm)
40
Tube diameter (inches)
1
Field of view (ft at 100 yds)
33.90-11.01
Parallax (yards)
100
50 Shotgun
Reticle Image Plane (Magnifying) 2nd
(no)
Exit pupil (mm)
13.3-4.4
Eye relief (inches)
4.02
Length (inches)
12.99
Weight (ounces)
15.17
MOA 1/4
Windage/Elevation Adjustment (inches)
64.08
Diopter Adj +2/-3

LuepoldVXII 3-9X40
Product Specifications
Actual Magnification: 3.3(3x) 8.6(9x)
Length (in): 12.4
Eyepiece Length (in): 3.1
Objective Length (in): 3.5
Objective Diameter (in): 1.8
Eyepiece Diameter (in): 1.6
Tube Diameter: 1.0in
Weight: 12.0 oz. / 340 grams
Eye Relief (in): 4.7(3x) 3.7(9x)
Eye Relief (mm): 119(3x) 94(9x)
Obj. Lens Diameter: 1.6in / 40mm
Max. Adjustment @ 100 yds (in): 56
Max. Adjustment @ 100 m (cm): 142
FOV @ 100 yds (ft): 32.3(3x) 14.0(9x)
FOV @ 100 m (m): 10.8(3x) 4.7(9x)
 
280_ACKLEY said:
I'd personally buy the VXII and spend the rest of the cash on ammo to practice... it will benefit a fella more in the long run... but I never have been one to pay for what I can't see... funny that way I guess.

280_ACKLEY
Click to expand...

I gotta say, in my opinion the best advice so far...
Once you get to the price range of a VXII range scope, the differences are really numbers on paper, and dollars. Most hunters (clearly defined) cannot clearly see a discernable difference between most scopes in this price range unless you really spend the time to compare side by side. I dont think any guy looking down the scope at a Deer, Moose, bear, or what have you would think to themself "I sure wish I had my "conquest" not this "VXII" to see this animal better at 250 yards." The reality of it is, all of these scopes will work just damn fine...
I personally wouldnt drop for a VXIII new over a VXII and further for a zeiss or Khales, Sworavski( or how ever U spell it:confused: ). The difference in my eyes is really a moot point. The difference in price for me would buy me a quality pair of Prescription Shooting glasses or Sound enhancing earmuffs and some ammo.
IMHO, money better spent.
I have a bunch of different good scopes and have never really thought "I wish I could see it a bit better". Once you spend the bucks to buy a good scope, its not a big advantage unless you have eyes like an eagle.

I think its more about bragging rights than practical advantage for the amount of time in life spent looking down the tube of a scope,
I know Im gonna get slack on this one...
 
Last edited:
DarrylDB said:
I gotta say, in my opinion the best advice so far...
Once you get to the price range of a VXII range scope, the differences are really numbers on paper, and dollars. Most hunters (clearly defined) cannot clearly see a discernable difference between most scopes in this price range unless you really spend the time to compare side by side. I dont think any guy looking down the scope at a Deer, Moose, bear, or what have you would think to themself "I sure wish I had my "conquest" not this "VXII" to see this animal better at 250 yards." The reality of it is, all of these scopes will work just damn fine...
I personally wouldnt drop for a VXIII new over a VXII and further for a zeiss or Khales, Sworavski( or how ever U spell it:confused: ). The difference in my eyes is really a moot point. The difference in price for me would buy me a quality pair of Prescription Shooting glasses or Sound enhancing earmuffs and some ammo.
IMHO, money better spent.
I have a bunch of different good scopes and have never really thought "I wish I could see it a bit better". Once you spend the bucks to buy a good scope, its not a big advantage unless you have eyes like an eagle.

I think its more about bragging rights than practical advantage for the amount of time in life spent looking down the tube of a scope,
I know Im gonna get slack on this one...
Click to expand...

In some cases you are right, however I've found some very impressive diferences between similar priced scopes during that first and last fifteen minutes of shooting light. My Leupold 2-7 VXIII has better optics than my 7x50 nikon binoculars under low light conditions and it beats every other scope that I own for light gathering at dusk and dawn.
That being said, my Nikon 7x50 binoculars (~$230.00) beat out Swarovski 8x42 (~$1500.00 or so the guy said) binoculars for low light clarity.
No one will ever see the diference between rifle scopes on a bright sunny day, but get into low light conditions and the diferences do stand out.
My friend has a Bushnell elite that is brighter than my Leupold at dusk and dawn but it is 2x the size and 30% more expensive.
With rifle scopes, sometimes you get a name, sometimes you get a superior scope, and occasionally you get both.
 
I posted a thread a while ago in this section about a new scope for my .30-.378, both the zeiss and the vx-III were on the list of scopes I asked for discussion on.

I ended up getting the VX-III with boone and crocket reticle in 3.5X10-40. I was away for work the last few months and only got to handel the rifle with the mounted scope (it's only bore sighted but that is going to change on the 26th!) todya!!. I'll tell you I'm not an expert on "hihger end" scopes by any means but I am impressed with this scope. I only have one other scope to compare it to, I perfer open sights, and it is 1/3 the price but it completly blows the doors off it in terms of brightness and clarity. As for if I could tell the difference between it and the zeiss I don't know.

Eye relief shouldn't really be an issue the VX-III has plenty as does the zeiss, the constant eye relief of the zeiss is neat though.

One thing to consider is customer service. Leupold has an outstanding reputation in this department. You may want to find out exactly what kind of support there is in canada for a zeiss scope. The lgs couldn't ansewer that question right off for me so it was one of reasons I went with the VXIII.

Either way you can't go wrong and both are about the same price. What decided it for me was the:

1. recticle choice
2. dealer support
3. availiblilty (would have taken the lgs much longer for the zeiss)
 
stubblejumper said:
Leupold does not make a 3x9 scope.It is actually 3.3x8.6..Of course the field of veiw will be larger at 8.6 that at a true 9x like the conquest.
Click to expand...
Now you are just guessing Stubs.... do you know what the actual magnification of the Conquest is.... no you don't... because they don't list the actual magnification anywhere in thier specs.
And the difference in field of view is not relative to .4 magnification. Field-of-view is a function of magnification and the focal lengths of the objective and eyepiece lenses.
You need to go to Scope school Stubs....:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Taken from the ziess website for the 3x9x40 conquest.As you can see they do state the magnification as being from 3x to 9x.Or do you believe that they are lying?


Technical Data
Magnification 3-9x
Objective (mm) 40
Tube diameter (inches) 1
Field of view (ft at 100 yds) 33.90-11.01
Parallax (yards) 100
50 Shotgun
Reticle Image Plane (Magnifying) 2nd
(no)
Exit pupil (mm) 13.3-4.4
Eye relief (inches) 4.02
Length (inches) 12.99
Weight (ounces) 15.17
MOA 1/4
Windage/Elevation Adjustment (inches) 64.08
Diopter Adj +2/-3
 
Last edited:
BIGREDD said:
Now you are just guessing Stubs.... do you know what the actual magnification of the Conquest is.... no you don't... because they don't list the actual magnification anywhere in thier specs.
And the difference in field of view is not relative to .4 magnification. Field-of-view is a function of magnification and the focal lengths of the objective and eyepiece lenses.
You need to go to Scope school Stubs....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


I don;t pretend to be an expert, but I have read that one of the reason's Leupold scopes have much smaller FOV's than their competitors is the excellent eye releif they have. Zeiss has figured out a way to give you both, Leupold Not So.
 
I have hunted for many years and for the most part with a leupold vxIII and it has never failed me. Recently I have purchased a sauer 202 outback and a Styer scout and have outfitted them with Zeiss scopes that are of the Diavari (sp) series. In low light conditions and brightness or crispness they are far better than the leupold.

just my two cents
 
Stubs... Nobody said anything about lying... its called "marketing".
They do not "have" to state what the "actual magnification" is... and rest assured that few, if any variables are actually what the power rings say.
The manufacturers will round the numbers up or down for "convenience".
All erectors are a little different the same goes for focal distances.
I think Zeiss Scopes are great but I buy what will give me the best product for the best value. I wish that the European Scopes were priced in line with the better North American Scopes!
The import duties keep the European scopes higher in price and give an artificial semblance of quality.
 
I think Zeiss Scopes are great but I buy what will give me the best product for the best value. I wish that the European Scopes were priced in line with the better North American Scopes!
The import duties keep the European scopes higher in price and give an artificial semblance of quality.
Click to expand...

Actually the vxiii 3.5x10x40 and the 3x9x40 conquest are almost identically priced.
 
Not one of you guys mentioned the rifle it's going on, a 338.06.I have a 338.06,mine has a 2x7 on it,but a better choice would be 1.5x6 or less.Also is the rifle a heavy one or light packing ,quick pointing one. Where will this be hunted? I looked at the Bushnell 4200 1.5x6 but it was too big.

Leupold has very good service,I know I used it on 2 out of the 3 new Leupolds I bought.They must have gotten a bad bunch of springs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom