Which Scope?

D

dezmick

Beginner
Mar 5, 2011
173
0
I'm with FOTIS on the 50mm's...just don't like them, too much bulk and height with not enough return on the investment (the light transmission stuff is 95% marketing hype)...42-44mm is plenty.

I like the reticle on the Swaro better...I like thin reticles though.
 
I know, i really do not like 50 mm unless they are a 30 mm tube, but i want some kind of ballistic turrets and was not wanting to go with a Leupold, not that they are a bad scope, i just was wanting to try something other than them. I guess i could just save up some more money and go with this.

http://swfa.com/Swarovski-35-18x44-Z5-R ... 40825.aspx
 
dezmick":zggyvteu said:
I know, i really do not like 50 mm unless they are a 30 mm tube, but i want some kind of ballistic turrets and was not wanting to go with a Leupold, not that they are a bad scope, i just was wanting to try something other than them. I guess i could just save up some more money and go with this.

http://swfa.com/Swarovski-35-18x44-Z5-R ... 40825.aspx
Click to expand...

I like that...much better than the others (except the price, LOL)

Have you considered Vortex...the HS line might suit you, and they're a good bit more affordable...I have one and really like it, I doubt the glass is as good as the one linked above...but it is very good, plenty enough for a hunting scope...
 
I can sell you this like new in box for 725 shipped


Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x44 MilDot Reticle Riflescope with Target Turret
 
I currently have a Vortex HS 2.5-10x44 on the rifle, it seems like a pretty good scope, i just have not shot through it yet. I wish i would have got one with turrets though, it does seem to make getting on target at longer ranges much easier. Maybe i should just give the Vortex a chance and see how it shoots this weekend.
 
By all means try it first...if you decide you want more magnification you could likely sell it easily and upgrade to one of the others.

I would agree with wanting more magnification...mine is the 4-16x44mm, not the LR version though...I didn't want the exposed turret on a hunting rifle (the life of a hunting rifle can be a bit rough at times)...I figure if I need to dial the scope, its gonna be a long range shot...I'll have time to remove the cap.
 
I should add that I don't usually dial the turrets in a hunting situation unless the range is past 500 yards...holdover works for me in most hunting situations...kind of a mental picture...500 yard shot, 1/4 value wind at 10 mph...hold over appx. 3 feet and about 5" into the wind...squeeze.


Wouldn't work in long range competition...but seems to work for hunting.

You may have a different plan...if so, don't let me discourage you...some folks these days think "Kentucky windage" is impossible, its not...but it may not be "the best" way to do things in all situations.

Most of my hunting shots are 400 yards and less...but I will take a poke out to 600 or so if the opportunity presents itself.
 
In our collection we have 3 Zeiss Conquest scopes as well as 5 Vortex Vipers.
The Vortex scopes don't hold a candle to the Zeiss with regard to clarity or eyebox. I'd much rather find myself behind a Zeiss than the Vortex. In the last 2 months I've put a minimum of 200 rounds through our Weatherbys with these scopes so I've had plenty of experience recently.

The best deal is to find a demo - or better yet a refurb on the occasional time they sell them - through CameralandNY. Get the 4.5-14x44 with target turrets. Currently I use one of these refurbs on my 7mm Rem Sendero and it is probably my favorite scope.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/zeiss.pl?page=521430

Patrick
 
I like the looks of it...sleek and not flashy or bulky...Leica has a good rep, but I've never seen or looked through one myself.
 
dezmick":3ud5p8oa said:
Ok i am getting a new scope for my Tikka T3 270 WSM that i just added a Bell & Carlson stock to, and i am looking at getting one of these two scopes, if it was your money which one would you get and why, and if there is something else that you would get that is close to the same price that please feel free to mention it. Thanks: Mick

http://swfa.com/Zeiss-45-14x50-Conquest ... P6816.aspx

http://swfa.com/Swarovski-4-12x50-Z3-Ri ... 40821.aspx
Click to expand...


I would be inclined to get the Swarovski Z3. I have versions of both scopes and the Swarovski Z3 is superior in contrast and resolution over the Conquest by a fair amount. For the small differnce in money, the Z3 is alot more scope..
 
I purchased that same Leica scope from Doc it is a keeper & it does have a thin retical.
I hate to say this but the Leica has more clarity than the VX6.

Blessings,
Dan
 
I have Vortex, Conquest, Zeiss Diavari, Swaro and Kahles scopes, plus several generations of Leupolds. For shooting and reliablity, the Swaro (Z3-Z6 model) has is over the Conquest, Minox, leupold and most all Vortex models.

The Swaro contrast and clarity are famous and even exceed the Zeiss models up to the Diavari model. The Kahles is the only scope that I own which comes close to a Swaro Z6 or a Diavari. So is you really want quality, go with Swaro and you will not be sorry.
 
What did you end up with buddy?

Scope shopping is expensive, but I really dig them Leica's alot. Their optics have been 2nd to none that I have looked through..
 
I have a semi-hijacking sort of question here. In the OP, the choices were between a Conquest and Swaro. Aren't these two different leagues of optics? That being said (or asked) is there something different about the conquest in question from a quality standpoint to the 3-9 Conquests that are available under $400? If there isn't a difference I'd be very much inclined to suggest the Minox ZA5 3-15x42. Minox is optically right on par with the Conquest (at least the 3-9 Conquest). The ZA5 Minox I mentioned is available for under $400 from CLNY and the same scope with the side focus is well under $600. My thought is the Conquest and Minox are on par with one another, why spend the extra dough on the Conquest? Now factoring out price, I'd probably be leaning toward the Swaro between the those three.
 
According to the optical testing that I have done with the USAF test charts and so forth, they are pretty equal. I would go with that up to a point, that point being recoil. If you are going to put the scope on a.340 Weatherby or Ouch & Ouch, I would go with Conquest because they are known for being tough. I am sure that Minox is adaquate but maybe not up to being a big bore scope forever.

My ZA-5 2-10x40 has been on a .30-06 for the past 3 years. No issues no problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Help need a vintage scope
Replies
15
Views
5K
ldg397
L
D
Trying to decide on new scope.
Replies
5
Views
2K
FOTIS
FOTIS
R
Two Rifles and two scopes
Replies
7
Views
1K
Blkram
B
3
The Ultimate Survival Rifle Build
Replies
16
Views
4K
gldprimr
G
FOTIS
Scoping the Accumark in 6.5x300 Bee With Pictures
Replies
9
Views
2K
SJB358
S
AMMUNITIONAmmunition BULLETSBullets BRASSBrass FirearmsFirearms GearGear
Back
Top