Has anyone used or looked thru both,not in a store but real field use.Thinking of trying a conquest 3-9x40 or v-x111 3-9x40 on my 375 h&h. I have a v-x111 1.75-6 but i want more magnification.I am using leupold QR mounts,need a leatherman to remove or install , any other quick detach mounts that work well?
zeiss conquest vs leupold v-x 111
- Thread starter boatdoc
- Start date
boatdoc,
I've got a 3.5-10 VX111 on a CZ .375. The 3-9 is a VX11 BTW. It would work too. Since I think of the .375 as a hunting rifle, not a DGR, the 3.5-10 a good fit. Despite what a lot of people find, the low range variables don't do much for me. Anything under 3 is a waste to me, as I've had them and never used the lowest powers.
I have a 3-9 Zeiss Dia-vari on another .375, this one a Remington. So far I have gotten away with it, but the eye-relief is right on the edge of safety.
I also have a 3-9 Conquest and it doesn't hold a candle to the Dia-vari. That one sits on a .308 and will stay there. That bulbous occular bell takes up a lot space that I need, so I've been grazed by that little pop-gun. Of your choices I'd go with the Leupold. Stubblejumper will be along shortly to say the opposite.
Which Leupold rings do you have that you need a leatherman? I have Leupold Qds on one .375 and Warnes on a couple big guns. No problems with either.
I've got a 3.5-10 VX111 on a CZ .375. The 3-9 is a VX11 BTW. It would work too. Since I think of the .375 as a hunting rifle, not a DGR, the 3.5-10 a good fit. Despite what a lot of people find, the low range variables don't do much for me. Anything under 3 is a waste to me, as I've had them and never used the lowest powers.
I have a 3-9 Zeiss Dia-vari on another .375, this one a Remington. So far I have gotten away with it, but the eye-relief is right on the edge of safety.
I also have a 3-9 Conquest and it doesn't hold a candle to the Dia-vari. That one sits on a .308 and will stay there. That bulbous occular bell takes up a lot space that I need, so I've been grazed by that little pop-gun. Of your choices I'd go with the Leupold. Stubblejumper will be along shortly to say the opposite.
Which Leupold rings do you have that you need a leatherman? I have Leupold Qds on one .375 and Warnes on a couple big guns. No problems with either.
Last edited:
dogleg,
I bought the low power variable for grizzly hunting ,no long shots. I would like to use this gun for moose and the 6power just don't cut it .Sounds like the conquests eye releaf is short and not forgiving,your not the first to say so.I have the QR leupold rings with the short little levers that are hard to move.
I bought the low power variable for grizzly hunting ,no long shots. I would like to use this gun for moose and the 6power just don't cut it .Sounds like the conquests eye releaf is short and not forgiving,your not the first to say so.I have the QR leupold rings with the short little levers that are hard to move.
Boatdoc,
The Warnes seem to tighten up with use the same as the Leupolds. They can take a pretty good twist to get them off, but I prefer that to loosening up on their own. Personally I don't picture taking them off in a hunting situation.
I have a 2.5X fixed Leupold on my .416, chosen for loooong eye-relief and short occular bell. I really would have prefered a 3X but they don't make it anymore.
The Warnes seem to tighten up with use the same as the Leupolds. They can take a pretty good twist to get them off, but I prefer that to loosening up on their own. Personally I don't picture taking them off in a hunting situation.
I have a 2.5X fixed Leupold on my .416, chosen for loooong eye-relief and short occular bell. I really would have prefered a 3X but they don't make it anymore.
I am just the opposite I find I use the lower powers more than the upper's. Especially in the larger calibers. I would look at something like the Leupold VX-III 2.5-8x36mm Very nice scope and a lot lighter than the Ziess.Dogleg said:boatdoc,
I've got a 3.5-10 VX111 on a CZ .375. The 3-9 is a VX11 BTW. It would work too. Since I think of the .375 as a hunting rifle, not a DGR, the 3.5-10 a good fit. Despite what a lot of people find, the low range variables don't do much for me. Anything under 3 is a waste to me, as I've had them and never used the lowest powers.
I have a 3-9 Zeiss Dia-vari on another .375, this one a Remington. So far I have gotten away with it, but the eye-relief is right on the edge of safety.
I also have a 3-9 Conquest and it doesn't hold a candle to the Dia-vari. That one sits on a .308 and will stay there. That bulbous occular bell takes up a lot space that I need, so I've been grazed by that little pop-gun. Of your choices I'd go with the Leupold. Stubblejumper will be along shortly to say the opposite.
Which Leupold rings do you have that you need a leatherman? I have Leupold Qds on one .375 and Warnes on a couple big guns. No problems with either.
Win/64,
Just for curiosity do you shoot with one eye or two? I shoot with two eyes open and don't need the lowest powers at all. I have a 2.5-8 VariX 111 that I run on a 30-06 BAR that eats lessor scopes like popcorn. It's a good scope, but the eye-relief is a little shorter than some of the other Leupolds like the 3.5-10. I like it more than the 1.75-6X, which is a 3-6 if I own it. I had some 1.5-4.5s for a while, basically they could have been fixed fours because that's where they sat all the time. That's just me though.
Just for curiosity do you shoot with one eye or two? I shoot with two eyes open and don't need the lowest powers at all. I have a 2.5-8 VariX 111 that I run on a 30-06 BAR that eats lessor scopes like popcorn. It's a good scope, but the eye-relief is a little shorter than some of the other Leupolds like the 3.5-10. I like it more than the 1.75-6X, which is a 3-6 if I own it. I had some 1.5-4.5s for a while, basically they could have been fixed fours because that's where they sat all the time. That's just me though.
Having actually owned and hunted with both,I find the conquest brighter than the vxIII in low light conditions.I have had no eye relief issues with the conquest,even on my 338x8mmremmag.I do also prefer the much more constant eye relief of the conquest,as compared to the vxIII.I have also owned the diavari 3x9,and yes I prefer it to the conquest.The one advantage the vxIII offers is that it is a few ounces lighter than the conquest if that is a huge priority for you.I have actually mounted all of my hunting rifles with the swarovski av 3x10x42 which offers even better optics than the conquest,yet it is smaller and weighs less than a comparable vxIII.
I have a conquest on my Sako 300 mag, It's my favourite scope. Dogleg is right thoug, the eyepeice is quite large compared to a leupold, on the Sako it can create issues being able to mount the scope far enough forward for me. Sako's aren't drilled and tapped, all rings have to fit the dovetails and the base can interfere with moving the scope far enough ahead.
IMHO and way superior scope to a VX111 leupold in just about every way.
IMHO and way superior scope to a VX111 leupold in just about every way.
