Ok, so I am new to this sight and have been reading about these two scopes for the past hour. It seems to be that more people prefer the Zeiss and I have read that several people say it is cheaper. I am deciding between these two scopes, but I just looked on ebay, and the leupold is cheaper by almost $100 bucks. I have definitly decided on the 6.5-20x50 scope with the z 1000 reticle(zeiss) or the varmint reticle(leupold), but now I am so confused as to which to purchase. Has any owned both of these scopes? I wouldn't think there would be a huge difference, but any opinions will help, as I am easily swayed I was originally going with the leupold, but you guys are changing my mind, thanks.
The scope will be placed on a rem 700 VLS .22-250 and used for coyote hunting.
Sorry but I"™ll add to your confusion. While you"™re at it take a look at the Bushnell Tactical 4200 6-24 x 50 mm c/w the 30 mm tube. This a very nice scope. I did look at the Conquest 6.5-20 but had a change of heart.
I have that exact rifle in a 6 mm Rem. and like it allot. Good luck in your choice...
I have owned (and sold) a VariX III 6.5-20 and currently have a Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20 on my Sauer 202 Outback 22-250. In my opinion, optically speaking, the Conquest is worth whatever the price difference might be.
I have a bunch of Leupold's,nice scopes but the Zeiss Conquest is all that I'll buy now because of the quality! Now I only have a 3-9-50mm and a 4.5-14-44mm Conquest,if I could,I would get rid of all of my VX-III's and get the Zeiss...
Ok, so I am new to this sight and have been reading about these two scopes for the past hour. It seems to be that more people prefer the Zeiss and I have read that several people say it is cheaper. I am deciding between these two scopes, but I just looked on ebay, and the leupold is cheaper by almost $100 bucks. I have definitly decided on the 6.5-20x50 scope with the z 1000 reticle(zeiss) or the varmint reticle(leupold), but now I am so confused as to which to purchase. Has any owned both of these scopes? I wouldn't think there would be a huge difference, but any opinions will help, as I am easily swayed I was originally going with the leupold, but you guys are changing my mind, thanks.
The scope will be placed on a rem 700 VLS .22-250 and used for coyote hunting.
YOu might want to look Nikon,Bushnell,Sightron,Pentax(burris made with Pentax lense)and Burris as well. That will really clarify it for you(no pun intended)
__________________
"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come."
- Joseph Biden
Associated Press 11/18/93
"Be thankful that we're not getting all the government we are paying for." Will Rogers
I hate the fact that the eye relief changes so much when the magnification is changed on my VXIII 6.5x20.I have to actually move my head to maintain a proper sight picture.
Either one will do you fine. I own both but not the ziess in 50mm or that power. I have several. My only reservation these days is putting the leupold on very heavy recoiling guns since they have changed thier design to a three piece design tube.
But saying that, this year, my sluggun dropped 23ft with a VXII 2-7 and hit on its buttstock, and I climbed down, and that thing was still zero'd and no problems whatsoever. It hit so hard, it knocked the shell out of the chamber and bounced teh gun 2ft in the air. That was impressive.
The ziess has constant eye relief which is really nice. I just put a Nikon Monarch 6.5-20X44on my 204, and am very impressed with the clearness, brightness, and quality. I would stack it against the zeiss or leup any day of the week.
Dont purchase one these scopes online until you look through them. Go to local sporting goods store that sell the ones your looking at. Then you can decide which is best for you. I dont beleive that you would be disappointed with any of the scopes that have been mentioned, but you should look before you leap.
leupold vx-III or Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20X-50mm
I was originally going with the leupold, but you guys are changing my mind, thanks.
