ORIGINAL: Solitary Man
ORIGINAL: bigcountry
Ok, first things first. Optics 101. With all things equal, the resolving power of a scope, microscope, camera lens or a 100mm telescope is proportional to the objective size. So biggest factor with resolution was which scope had a larger objective?
The scopes I compared all had 40mm objectivesand improper focusing was eliminated as a cause of the disparity. The Leupold was a VX III 3.5-10x40. The two Conquests were 3-9x40. I think it just boils down to Zeiss using a slightly higher quality glass (Schott) than what Leupold's Japanese source provides.
Maybe, but I have compared classic optics parts from Asia to Europe. And hate to say it, but the Asians matching thier specs, plus at 1/2 the price. As a company, at firstwe wouldbuy only the best, not matter the price. But 10 years later, things in the optics world have getten so competitive, we have been forced to put out specifications and take bids, and Asia wins most of the time now. Difference I see now, is if they don't continually meet those specs, we have a hard time forcing them to take responsibility.