Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Zeiss Conquest - Opinions

Maalox
I am looking for a scope to put on my 20" AR. I will use this rifle to target shoot in the 200-500 yd range and maybe the odd hunting trip for varmints. I was browsing through a Gander Mountain store yesterday and saw a Zeiss Conquest scope. Anyone have experience with this particular scope or the conquest line in general?

http://www.zeiss.com/c1256bcf0020be5f/Contents-Frame/e785ff5c55c1761485256d130076a363
0

Comments

10 comments

Date Votes
  • He Dog
    Generally speaking, Zeiss is overpriced for what you get. IOR Valdada is a better scope for the money as is Burris and Nightforce.
    0
  • Maalox
    quote:Originally posted by He Dog
    Generally speaking, Zeiss is overpriced for what you get. IOR Valdada is a better scope for the money as is Burris and Nightforce.


    I like the Nightforce NXS, but have found them very expensive. The 3.5-15 X 50 is $1500 while the Zeiss 4.5-14 X 44 is only $750. Is the Nightforce that much better?
    0
  • zink
    quote:Originally posted by Maalox
    quote:Originally posted by He Dog
    Generally speaking, Zeiss is overpriced for what you get. IOR Valdada is a better scope for the money as is Burris and Nightforce.


    I like the Nightforce NXS, but have found them very expensive. The 3.5-15 X 50 is $1500 while the Zeiss 4.5-14 X 44 is only $750. Is the Nightforce that much better?


    Yes it is. The Zeiss Conquest is their "economy" line and in my opinion Zeiss is overated to begin with.

    Lance
    0
  • robert smith
    i have a zeiss on my .270. it has been there for several years and gone through some rough treatment. i have not had a problem with it. i think it is worth the money. i have not tried any $1500 scopes. i cant afford them.
    0
  • He Dog
    quote:Originally posted by Maalox
    quote:Originally posted by He Dog
    Generally speaking, Zeiss is overpriced for what you get. IOR Valdada is a better scope for the money as is Burris and Nightforce.


    I like the Nightforce NXS, but have found them very expensive. The 3.5-15 X 50 is $1500 while the Zeiss 4.5-14 X 44 is only $750. Is the Nightforce that much better?


    In a word, yes. Out of my range too. Burris will serve you better for the price than Zeiss.
    0
  • FEENIX
    Take all the advice seriously and go get the scope that best suits your eyes (try them all at varying conditions if you can), needs, and budget ... then make your decision from there.

    Check out the website below, sometimes they have very good deals ...

    http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f40/

    Good luck!
    0
  • Donovan Kirkpatrick
    I have tried Nikon, Zeiss, Leupold, Burris, old Redfields, B&L, Kahles, Swarovski and old Tascos. I prefer a 30mm tube Zeiss or Leupold. I do not think you can go wrong with either. However, regardless of what you get, do not skimp on scope. You will wind up paying twice.
    0
  • JustC
    in a side by side test, under heavy mirage, I found the Weaver Grand Slam to be better at resolving mirage than the conquest. I find them to be overpriced, just as the others have stated.

    I would spend $500 for a Burris Signature 4-16x44 with the balistic plex reticle and save the extra money over the zeiss. I have never had an issue at dark with the Burris scopes. (I have been known to pull some very late shots[}:)]) I often hear the guys at the lodge say they were just getting back to the lodge from their stands, when they heard me shoot[;)]

    Other than Burris, I say IOR Valdada, and ultimately, Nightforce NXS.
    0
  • Maalox
    Thanks for all the suggestions. I am not familiar with IOR Valdada and I will check them out.

    I watch the used for sale ads on longrangehunting and a couple other sites. You need to be quick though as the used scopes go quick.

    Thanks again
    0
  • zink
    +1 on the Burris, that is all my rifles will wear!

    Lance
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity