Power

I think like most of us when we start hunting we generally spend more for a good scope before we finally "catch up" with our binos. That was my case, I had a decent scope but cheap binos. I had seen some elk far away and coming toward me. I suspected one was a spike but couldn't be sure with my crappy binos. Since my scope was of better quality I tried to do the final ID through the scope but just didn't have good enough glass to be able to be sure so I had to let him go.

You're right, if I'd had better binos or a good spotting scope (my next purchase when I can afford a good one - another topic I'm sure!) I could have ID'd him and then used my scope and rifle to shoot it.

I can think of times when you should have a good scope. If an animal flushes and runs away you might not have time to use your binos or spotting scope to ID it. Here in WA it's spike-only for elk and 3pt or better for deer. Much of the country is very open and far shots are common. Therefor there could be a time when your scope is all you have to decide if that escaping bull that just paused 250 yards away and is about to go up and over that saddle and into the next valley is a spike or a 2 point. If you had quality optics on your rifle you could harvest that bull. Without them you'd miss an opportunity.

Different for different people and circumstances I guess. My scenario isn't like many hunters in other regions of the world but I know a lot of the western hunters will understand what I'm saying.

bigcountry

Your right. I think most of us have been that direction. I know I did. I would fork out 500-600 for a scope but only 100 on binocs. I learned the hard way too. I have to admit, I was moose hunting, and my binocs wasn't very good, and then went to glass them thru my scope to decide whether to put a stalk on them. But that wasn't very convienent. Now, when people ask me about scopes and going Moose or Elk hunting, I stress its probably more important to invest in a good set of binocs. I know with cheap binocs, I have got the worst headacke after glassing all day.

stubblejumper

I ran into a similar situation on one of my hunts not long ago.I spotted a group of elk with my binoculars and identified the animal that I would shoot.However when I put down my binoculars and raised the rifle,I discovered that the elk in my scope didn't look right.Because I was using a very bright scope I was able to pick out the right elk in the scope and I then realized that the bull that I wanted had moved a couple of steps.I then shot the correct bull.I should mention that it was at first legal light and it was overcast so it was quite dark.A not so bright scope would not likelyhave allowed me to properly identify the right bull and I may have shot the wrong one not realizing that the bull that I wanted had moved.

okcmco

It's hard to beat tradition. Leupolds have been the most popular premium scope for years. BUT I DON"t HAVE ONE
I like zeiss but I prefer the premium made in germany zeiss (Diavari) Or Kahles. I consider the docter optic (east germany) superior to the Zeiss Conquest but not superior to the premium Zeiss.
okcmco

manitou210

I have shot out of a zeiss a few years back and it was clear, I have always used Leupolds not knowing cost diff from zeiss and Leupold LPS I just got in a 2.5 to10 but this LPS is some sharp scope, and I have a friend who took months to get his zeiss back from repairs we have a Leupold repair depo in Canada so that was a factor for me going with the Leupold
Just a canucks 2 cents worth.

jmfa1957

When I compared my first Zeiss to a Leupold VX-III in a side-by-side comparison at Cabela's, the Zeiss was better. I bought the Zeiss.

When I bought my second Zeiss, I ran the comparison again against the VX-III, this time at a different retailer under different lighting conditions. The Leupold was a fine scope, but I thought the Zeiss was better.

Jeff Ovington

I like this thread.
Zeiss or Leupold..Like comparing Mercades to a Rolls..
First off let me complement you on your choices..
Both are exceptional scopesas they retail at almost the same price..
I'm a Leupold fan myself but am leaning very heavily toward a Zeiss Conq
on my next scope purchase..

Leupolds Scopes.
3.5 inch eye relief..
They are very bright even in low light.
The wind and elv adjustments are firm but sure when turned by hand..
Its a very light scope..The only complaint is the fact that the Leupold does not come with scope caps or rubber eye guard ring..

Zeiss Scopes
4 inch eye relief.
superb low light performance
windage and elv adj very good.Loud sure clicks
Heavier Scope but it comes with scope covers..

The extra eye relief and scope cover caps are the deciding feature
for me to purchase Zeiss.

bigcountry

The only conquest I know with 4" eye relief is the 3-9X40. Rest have 3.5". Leupold VXIII are varible eye relieve with the 3.5-10 for instance is like 3.6-4.6". Thats the reason I pick Leupold cus of its longer eye relief.

Jeff Ovington

Sorry for confusion.Your right B.C.
The 3x9x40 Conquest..which has a 4" min eye relief
and the 3.5x10x40 Leupold VXiii which has a 3.5inch or maybe 3.6 inch min eye relief and max to 4.5 inches

shortmag2

Wow fellas I have 3 of 1 and 2 of the other and I've got to ask which way do you light a fire, a match or a lighter.You better have good eyes to see a difference1