zeiss conquest

Actually, neither of those 2 scopes would cut it for long range use. (Mirage/elevation, etc) For low-light visibility under hunting conditions (first/last light), the Zeiss Conquest is light years ahead of the 3200. As for "magical picture of the target", the better quality lens WILL help. Grab an "el-cheapo" scope and boost it to max power... what do you see? Milky image, distortion or an extremely reduced eye relief.
Now what would you like to be looking through when that huge buck/moose you've been chasing since summer shows up at last light? Myself, I'd prefer the Zeiss....

- Jason
 
Mount Sweetness said:
$800 for a conquest, no thanks
Click to expand...
I would over pay for a quality scope that I will be satisfied with for a long time then buy a cheper scope and need to replace it in a couple seasons. from what I have looked threw in the price range they are comparibal. When I drop down to a 400 dollar range I can see the diffrence
 
Mount Sweetness said:
$800 for a conquest, no thanks
Click to expand...
I would over pay for a quality scope that I will be satisfied with for a long time then buy a cheper scope and need to replace it in a couple seasons. from what I have looked threw in the price range they are comparibal. When I drop down to a 400 dollar range I can see the diffrence
 
regulate34 said:
I would over pay for a quality scope that I will be satisfied with for a long time then buy a cheper scope and need to replace it in a couple seasons. from what I have looked threw in the price range they are comparibal. When I drop down to a 400 dollar range I can see the diffrence
Click to expand...

invest $20 in a dictionary / spell-checker :p
 
The Conquest in a 50mm is an amazing example of what quality optics are.You will be impressed.Even from 44mm to 50mm in Zeiss I noticed an extreme increase in clarity and light transmission.

The clarity of this glass in an $800.00 scope is comparable to some much higher end optics.Not a thing wrong with the choice you made.Don't worry about the guys that read reviews and watch videos on them, the guys that use them in the field are the ones to trust.

If anything these scopes are under priced for the repeatability , quality of glass and constant eye relief they offer.Let's just hope they stay in the price range they are. That price is on par though and don't second guess it, that scope will do you well.

An old rule of thumb is scope price = rifle price, within reason of course.




regulate34 said:
thanks for all the input guys. i do agree the zeiss is nicer then the 3200.
i have decided to go with a 3.5x10x50 conquest. they are on sale for 779.95. i think is not a bad price. hell the winchester m70 sporter is the same. i just have to find the proper rins/mounts. was looking at the tally 2 peice. but unsure whats better but construction 1 or two peice. i would imagine 1 but i may be wrong.
Click to expand...
 
Bushnell are junk, even the 6500 not even in the same leauge as the Ziess line of scopes, I realize that the conquest are not the top of the line Ziess but bushnell dosent even make a scope that costs anywhere close to the same and you get what you pay for..........
 
I realize that the conquest are not the top of the line Ziess but bushnell dosent even make a scope that costs anywhere close to the same and you get what you pay for....
Click to expand...

Actually some Bushnell scopes are priced higher than some Conquests.
 
the bushnell 6500 series look quite good from what i saw today, but nobody beats Zeiss' Rapid-Z reticle!!! man that thing is beautiful and so easy to grab with the eye
 
Zeiss conquest

I have used all the brands over the past several years, I am slowly replacing all my optics with Zeiss. Currently have 3 conquests. Absolutely the clearest for the price range and best I ever used in low light that I can afford.
 
Conquest rule their price range

Let the scope do the talking, it started for me at dusk when my store let me take a couple outside to look in low light. Now I have 3 Conquest. According to the store I buy from, the conquest is all german components including glass assembled in the U.S so there is no duty from europe to n.a. For distance get the rapid z reticle it is the best for ballistic compensation on the market bar none.
 
Teac said:
I have the Zeiss and a Bushnell 3200.

When compareed directly the image in the 3200 is better (subjectively) it looks clearer, more contrasts and just better.

The Zeiss has a lot of fringing and doesnt look as contrasty. The mechanical construction is possibly better on the zeiss. Apparently you can adjust the conquest 10 clicks left, down right and up and your zero will not have moved. I havent tried that though and dont know if thats the same with other quality scopes

Take in mind that the conquest is not a "real" zeiss, its cheaped down for the north american market.

I would buy a Bushnell 3200 over a Zeiss conquest but also wouldnt sell my conquest. Its not a bad scope.


Best thing is go to a store and compare them side by side and buy what you like better. Both have life time warranties.

Teac

Edit:

friend of mine has a 3 series leupold and really likes it. When it comes down to it you cant go wrong weither either Zeiss conquest, bushnell 3200/4200 or Leupold, none is really "better" than the other. Personal preference decides.
Click to expand...

Either your Zeiss is broken or you're on meth. I've owned both and currently only own the Zeiss. The glass in the Zeiss blows the 3200 out of the water. I picked mine up for $450 shipped and it's absolutly the best bang for you buck in that price range. Cannot be beat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom