Leupold VX6 vs. duralyt vs. conquest HD

[c. schutte]

Hope this subject has not been covered too much but am wondering about the differences between them. Namely, if anyone knows if the erector lens in the VX6 and Duralyt are true 30 mm and how would you rate the glass between the three. Thanks................chs

 

[DrMike]

The glass in the Conquest HD is excellent. The VX6 is also quite good. I have only looked through one Duralyt, so I am unqualified to speak to it. I will say that if I had to make a choice between the VX6 and the Conquest HD, I would probably lean toward the Conquest HD.

 

[SJB358]

Same here Chuck. The HD5's are some nice glass. I've seen two of them and would like to have one.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I looked through an HD5 2-10x42 at Kesselring's about two weeks ago. I did not spend more than 60-90 seconds with the scope but I was impressed by the clarity and contrast. They now have the T* (Tessar) lenses with Luotec. They seemed to be more scope than my Conquest 3.5-10x44 and more like my Victory Diavari image-wise but as I said it was not an A to B to C comparison.

 

[c. schutte]

I looked through an HD5 2-10x42 at Kesselring's about two weeks ago. I did not spend more than 60-90 seconds with the scope but I was impressed by the clarity and contrast. They now have the T* (Tessar) lenses with Luotec. They seemed to be more scope than my Conquest 3.5-10x44 and more like my Victory Diavari image-wise but as I said it was not an A to B to C comparison.

I was kind of hoping the "professor" would stop by! I was just telling the spider monkey that I saw one today and compared it to a victory. The HD is not a victory! I also saw the terrible X and shoved it back at the salesman. Not impressed with that offering at all.

Have you spent any time with the Leupold VX6 and what is your opinion regarding it and the conquest HD? Also, if you have ever studied the duralyt? I would value your opinion there as well.

Good to see you still kicking!

chs

 

[Oldtrader3]

CHS, I need to get out more. The gun stores here are sooo... stripped of guns, ammo and scopes that I can't get to see anything anymore, even a can of powder. I need to drive 90 miles to Cabela's I guess in order to handle a VX-6. my Zeiss Diavari is almost 20 years old, I am not surprised that I does not compare to the new ones!

I may have to buy a Duralyte in order to see one in this neighborhood?

PS, Duralyte was the scope used as the design (at least for lenses) basis in the HD5 series. I would believe they would be quite similar except maybe for some exterior coatings?

 

[bullet]

When I can, I will own the Duralyte. Have been doing some comparisons with the Duralyte owned by a friend at our shooting club against some other scopes. I am going to get a Duralyte, outstanding scope, I really like how it looks. Of course all our eyes are different, but I know I like looking through the Duralyte. The one I have been looking through and shooting with my friends set up is the Duralyt 1.2-5x36.

 

[Oldtrader3]

Thanks Mike.

 

[c. schutte]

Bullet,

What scopes have you been comparing the duralyt against?

I asked Zeiss about the 30mm tube and the erector lens as to it's size and their response was that the lens assembly was a "real 30mm assembly and not some doctored up 1" erector".............

That's a plus so far. I need to take a look through one

Thanks...........chs

 

[bullet]

Bullet,

What scopes have you been comparing the duralyt against?

I asked Zeiss about the 30mm tube and the erector lens as to it's size and their response was that the lens assembly was a "real 30mm assembly and not some doctored up 1" erector".............

That's a plus so far. I need to take a look through one

Thanks...........chs

Against the Swarovski Z6 1-6x24, Kahles Helia KXi 3.5-10x50, Leupold VX6 1-6x24 CDS. Two of these cost much more and the VX6 cost just a little less but I actually like the Zeiss and the Leupold in these lower power scopes the best and the Zeiss I like over all of these. I have two friend down here who only put on upper line scopes on their rifles so it is a real treat for me to compare these and not spend a dime. Of course this is my opinion as I look through and shoot with the above mentioned scopes. As far as upper line scopes I have only owned Swarovski and Kahles and only one of each, but I am very impressed with the Zeiss.

 

[c. schutte]

In case anyone is interested................

For fun I went to Zeiss and asked the differences between the conquest HD, Duralyt and Victory. As usual they are fast to respond yet, will not offer any percentages or quantitative replies as a way to judge them but, reading between the lines I think it a very good optic designed for the European market. Based on what they did say I have learned the following about the duralyt:

Zeiss has different optical designs for all their series of scopes. The Duralyt is different from the conquest and the Victory. I guess we could call it "taint" because it is neither.

Zeiss also uses different glass within a series so some glass may serve more than one scope type. That said the victory's use HT glass and the duralyt or conquest does not.

The victory line up uses a 3 lens objective element whereas the other zeiss series have 2. This extra element makes a better system to correct light as it passes through the scope thus giving better resolution and color correction, especially in low light. Even if the duralyt had the same glass it would not be as good due to the 3rd element. This would be a great time for Charlie to comment.

Duralyt is made in Germany with the european hunter in mind who as I believe, is very concerned with low light hunting, more so than in America so the duralyt to be accepted has to be an excellent low light scope. More so than Conquest.

Duralyt does not have Lotutec but victory and conquest HD does.

Coatings are similar between the duralyt and victory other than Lotutec. "similar" to me leavs plenty of room though.

The glass and coatings applications are "keyed" to low light hunting. That means to me that the duralyt is better in low light than conquest. That may be simply due to the 30mm erector though.


Based on all that was communicated from zeiss the duralyt was for European hunters that did not much care for the conquest series. Since they would not say it I suspect that the duralyt is pretty darn close to the victory in low light with the exception of resolution and color correction.....and that difference might be pretty minor. Although, it might not. That and they just could not see fit to add the lotutec coating like they did to the HD. They also have the 1/3 MOA adjustments and there is not as much elevation/windage adjustment.

All the folks who have them and swear that they are about the same as a victory might have some ground to stand on excluding a small amount of resolution and color. It may be so close that most can't tell the difference. I can't wait to find one locally and see how it looks with a victory, HD and VX6 side by side.

 

[Oldtrader3]

In case anyone is interested................

For fun I went to Zeiss and asked the differences between the conquest HD, Duralyt and Victory. As usual they are fast to respond yet, will not offer any percentages or quantitative replies as a way to judge them but, reading between the lines I think it a very good optic designed for the European market. Based on what they did say I have learned the following about the duralyt:

The victory line up uses a 3 lens objective element whereas the other zeiss series have 2. This extra element makes a better system to correct light as it passes through the scope thus giving better resolution and color correction, especially in low light. Even if the duralyt had the same glass it would not be as good due to the 3rd element. This would be a great time for Charlie to comment.


Based on all that was communicated from zeiss the duralyt was for European hunters that did not much care for the conquest series. Since they would not say it I suspect that the duralyt is pretty darn close to the victory in low light with the exception of resolution and color correction.....and that difference might be pretty minor. Although, it might not. That and they just could not see fit to add the lotutec coating like they did to the HD. They also have the 1/3 MOA adjustments and there is not as much elevation/windage adjustment.

All the folks who have them and swear that they are about the same as a victory might have some ground to stand on excluding a small amount of resolution and color. It may be so close that most can't tell the difference. I can't wait to find one locally and see how it looks with a victory, HD and VX6 side by side.

Charles: I believe that the need for three objective elements is for correction of color fringing with each of the three primary colors. The lens refraction index angle is slightly different for each one of the three primary colors which requires a slight difference in the lens grind curvature and lens coating refraction angle filtering and color correction to eliminate color fringing. I would guess that in the less expensive scopes with only two lenses, probably correct the cyan (blue) and magenta (red) fringing and ignore yellow. The three lens victory scopes probably have higher contrast and resolution as well, being more highly corrected with the extra lens. Just supposing somewhat?

Most Europeans are used shooting with 30mm scope tubes and erectors. Plus Europeans often hunt at night from a box stand for deer and boar. Americans are used to the 1 inch erector and scope tubes, plus our laws do not allow game hunting at night except pigs. Hence the greater popularity of the Duralyte in Europe and the Conquest in the US. Germans like the spun/ Anodized Aluminum finish on stuff as well.

Some European manufacturers were using their slight yellow color cast in scopes as an asset in hunting (Marketing) because of slight heightening of the brown coloration due to not fully correcting the yellow caste in the glass, which supposedly heightened brown fur appearance in low light since brown contains yellow tint.

 

[tddeangelo]

Charles,

Thank you very much for the research. I am filing this one away for future reference.

 

[Oldtrader3]

Welcome, I have been critically thinking about some of this optical technology lately and some is my supposition.

 

[c. schutte]

Charlie,

The local Bass Pro has an older victory 3-12x56 going for $1699.00.......................really tempted.

 

[Oldtrader3]

The Victory that I have sold for about that when I bought it. I suppose though, given today's pricing and markets, this is an okay price. I think you typo'ed the magnification though?

 

[c. schutte]

Yep, sure did. I also think it to be the old style victories because the new ones with the HT gass are about $2500.00.

Charlie,

Being a 3-12x56 it won't be all that long of a scope so do you think that I could mount one using medium tallley's or would I have to go high?

 

[Oldtrader3]

I have used medium Talley's for a 50mm objective with about 3-4mm barrel clearance. It will be close but I do not think medium Talley's will be high enough?

 

[c. schutte]

That may be cutting it way too close with mediums and that scope and considering flex during recoil. That means a 50 is my limit for a medium mount and a medium is tall enough.

 

[Oldtrader3]

Think so Charles.