Zeiss Conquest vs Leupold VX-II?

[blackacres]

I have owned both in 3-9x40.

My eyes liked the Conquest a hair more than the Leupy, mainly because of the brightness/clarity, the Z-600 reticle and of course..........the cost!

My vote would go to the Conquest.

 

[joeyclimbing]

Not trying to interrupt this thread, but were you able to use a low mount on your 44mm Zeiss? I'm considering the same scope but want a low mount.
Thanks

I have a Zeiss 3.5-10x44. Absolutely love it. Can't beat Zeiss glass at that price point.

 

[phinton81]

Not disputing that the Conquest is brighter and clearer than the VX-II, but it is also quite a bit heavier which can count for quite a bit when you are putting together a rifle. I like light and durable and Leupolds are about as light as you can get, not to mention tough. I have never been in a hunting situation where I couldn't make an ethical shot with my VX-II's so all things considered my rough and tumble, carry all day guns have VX-II's on them. I really don't give a sh*t if they aren't as bright or sharp, they work great and their warranty is the best in the industry. Optical performance is a very important criteria for riflescopes, but so is build, function and toughness. Also, I find the duplex on the Conquest too fine, and the Z-plex is way too busy.

 

[stubblejumper]

Also, I find the duplex on the Conquest too fine, and the Z-plex is way too busy.

The Z-Plex is a single crosshairs,how is that too busy?

 

[phinton81]

The Z-Plex is a single crosshairs,how is that too busy?

Maybe I got them mixed up, I was referring to the Rapid-Z.