Zeiss or Leupold
 

Which scope do you think is better in terms of durability and clarity, the Zeiss Conquest 3-9X40mm or the Leupold VX-III 3.5-10X40mm? I'm looking at purchasing a good quality scope for my soon-to-be rifle-scope combo..................... (hopefully);)

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Zeiss

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Zeiss,

I couldn't be happier with my Conquest 3-9x40.

Also keep in mind that the Leopold is in reality a 3.3-9.6x40, soit does not really have any meaningfulmagnification advantages.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

I have no complaints about my Leupolds for durabilty and optically they aren't no slouches either. However both my most used hunting firearms now wear Zeiss and they have the loopy when it comes to clarity, brightness. I also like some of the features the conquest has like Constant Eye relief andz-plex reticle. I have only had the Zeiss for a few years but they have been rock solid in every facet.

I would pick the Zeiss but your best to judge them yourself and then make your pick. Either one are good quality optics and should serve you very well.

Enjoy and good luck with your new setup:)

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Matt, check the poll on the guns forum. That about says it all. Leupold.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Sniper,

Unfortunately your mixing apples and oranges with that one. Matthews question was concerning quality, not popularity......I would be willing to bet that 80% of the people who responded to that poll have never even owned a Zeiss, let alone purchased a 400 dollar scope. That pretty much negates any revelence of that poll to to Matts question....IMHO

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Zeiss.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Leupold!:D

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Sniper, he is comparing quality not popularity.;)

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

I've owned examples of both. The Zeiss Conquest would easily be my choice.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Hey guys, easy on Sniper, he has a right to an opinion just like you. Maybe he doesn't agree with the popularity theory you have Rebel. Maybe I don't.

As for me, I like both. I have both. Don't have a problem with either. I have had probably a dozen Leupolds and have had one with fog issues that they had to fix.

As far as optics qualities, neck and neck. You could line up 10 ziess's and 10 leupolds and pick the worst and best of them all. And it would be one and half dozen of one and 18 of the other.

What Ziess does have over the Leupolds VX line is a solid one piece tube. I wrote John Barshness on this and he tried to tellme, that that doesn't matter. But any machinist might say different. I know at my company alone we are in Cost Reducing mode and have been for some time. And some corners can be cut, but you won't really know until the system hits the field in large quanities. John tried to tell me Leupold wouldn't let it out the door if it didn't match the Vari-X III line.

But the bottom line is he doesnn't know. He hasn't performed any stress tests or EOL (end of life) tests. He's going on word of mouth. And truthfully, I don't either.

I have a few VX's and have to admit thier optical qualities are excellent. Better than Vari Xs. Thier index matching coating is very good.

But so is Ziess's. But when someone tries to tell me,now that they got a Ziess on thier gun, they can hunt 1/2 later than everyone else with Leupolds,I knowjust towalk away.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

The lead-free arsenic-free glass allows for non-distorted light, which is allegedly more perceptible and usable by the human eye. Carl Zeiss started making lenses in 1846. All the bombing lenses on the German bombers were the best in the world and still are.
Bc, my consideration on zeiss is based on what I see and what eye doctors tell me. I have one in the family and all his comrades in the buisness have Zeiss equipment also. I would'nt go to a gun store and ask the guy behind the counter what he taught on this subject.
I can care less what the other guy wants to buy, to each his own. I'm not going to buy something justbecause it's popular. I understand, a man has to buy what he can afford.

Sniper, if I offened you in anyway, I apologize!

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Well, he asked for opinions what is better.

As an optics engineer, I know optometrist don't know quality of lenses over anyone else. They are experts on what we call classical optics and theory which is the same for your lenses. They are experts on physical anotomys.Butas I have many discussions about optics with my eye doctor too,he asks several questions, and admits he has only messed with the equipment we use whenin physicsin undergraduate school. Don't get me wrong, they worked hard to get where they are. But unless you are in the R&D of the medical field and service the equipment that cuts the lenses from the sphere, you never touch it, you never qualify it or test it. But I agree with your doctor, as we do alot of business with all the Euopean optics suppliers. They are top notch. Nobodies saying they ain't. But the sad truth is, that the Asians have caught up with them. And as my company finds out, its almost half the cost in some quotes.

What you are talking about is what we call Back Reflection, dispersion and Loss (dB).

Now, on this page, popularity is the same as opinions or a poll. Unless people on here work for Ziess or Leupold in thier R&D, what they post is just that opinions. So his basis, for posting that about Leupold, has about the same wieght as anyone posting thier opinons, including myself, as anyone else.

Hey man I love em both, just thought you gave him a tough time.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

:D:DBro. it's no big deal. I was'nt talking about optometrist. I was talking about
eye surgeons.If they prefer Zeiss lenses tooperate on eyes, that's the lenses I
want on my scopes.

I apologized to Sniper!

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

My bad, I thought you were talking about optometrist. I prefer Leica microscopes myself when soldering and working on PC boards. But to each his own. All beutiful pieces of glass.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Guys, sorry if I sound like a arrogant butt about optics. But optics is pretty well half of what I do. Other half is electronics and software. Its really about the only thing I can contribute to alot of these forums besides personal opinions.

So unless I become a gunsmith, optics is all I can give. And even this, not much cause the quality of the scope has so little to do with the lenses, (at least for me), reliablity and the construction of the scope is what I would consider the domiant factor, which I am not a mechanical engineer and don't know beans about.

Hey I enjoy em.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Never used Leica and never considered it, but will do
some reseach on it. Thanks! You know I just looked
at my Sony Camera and it has aZeiss Lense. Made me
wonder why the Japs would use a German Zeiss on a
$1200 camera.;)

BC, you know we are talking big bucks here and most
of these guys are hard working family men who cannot
go for the best rifle's or scopes. No offence guys, BC and
I are just comparing thoughts!

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

I don't own either but have looked thru both. When I was looking for a scope for my 17hmr I looked at several brands of scopes around the 400 dollar mark. I personally liked the ziess better than the leupold. I thought the optics were clearer and the construction was better over all. The Zeiss scopes just felt better, more like camera optics. The leupold I looked at was stiff and gritty when you made adjustments to it.

I actually ended up getting an alaskan guide model from cabelas because it offered more features that I wanted for the price (higher power, A/O, and mildot).

But like I said, I am only going by what I saw in the store comparing them side by side.

And by the way, I have Carl Ziess lens coatings on my driving glasses. Walmart has a contract with them and offers it exclusively from what I understand. They seem a bit crisper than my reading glasses that are the plain poly lenses. Almost like I'm not wearing glasses. However glasses have improved greatly in the past 10 years or so any way from what I have seen. I don't know if it really helps or not, but it sounds cool.;)

Paul

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

You know something I like looking thru anymore more than riflescopes is binocs.

I have never held one, but would like to look at those schmidt and bender. Too much for my blood.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

This is my #1 issue with my Leupold VX-II 2-7x33....

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

No problem Reb, that's what this forum is all about. I guess I'm just partial to Leupold because they have worked flawlessly for me. The ability to rely on a product in adverse conditions has made me a believer. I do like the new Unertl though.:D

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

I have two leupolds and my next scope will be a zeiss if I can afford it

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Both are good scopes but the ziess does offer better lenses and coatings which results in a brighter scope in low light conditions.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

I was going to buy a VX-III until I went to the store and looked through it and then a Conquest 4.5-14x44. That's what sold it for me and I bought the Zeiss. So when I was looking at binos I went with the Zeiss too. More expensive than I wanted to spend but considering how much time and money I put into hunting it's worth it to not have to pass on an animal because you just couldn't ID it. Here you have to have 3 points on 1 side to shoot a buck and Elk are spike-only. There is a lot riding on proper ID of your target and without good "eyes" you'll end up letting a legal one go, or worse, shooting an illegal animal.

I had to let a spike elk go one year to later be shot by my brother-in-law. That was due to the Nikon scope and my cheap Bushnell binos. After than I saved all summer and bought the scope and last year bought the binos. It's been worth it for me.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

I use leupold VARIX II and VARIX III on my rifles now but my next one will be a Zeiss conquest 3x9x40.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

Power, sounds to me like you need resolution. For resolution, you should have looked at a 50mm scope.

You can have the best glass in the world with 100% index matching coatings, but if they are 20mm, even a cheap scope with huge objective would have better resolution.

I myself would never rely on my gun scope to ID animals. Just think its unsafe. Been scoped too many times. Didn't like it. I say id with a great set of binocs and then use your gun and scope to shoot the animal.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

I myself like to do a final ID through my scope to make sure the animal I'm shooting and have ID'd with my binos is the right one. Can't be sure how you shoot without doing a final ID of the animal through your scope.

Now if you were assuming I don't use binos and use my scope on my rifle to look around at everything you'd be wrong in your assumption.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

To be fail my situation was in referrence to a herd of elk, trying to pick out a spike among all the cows. Sure, you can ID the animal with your binos but when you pull up your rifle you need to find that spike again and be DANG SURE before you pull that trigger.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

You stated

"More expensive than I wanted to spend but considering how much time and money I put into hunting it's worth it to not have to pass on an animal because you just couldn't ID it. "

I was explaining it would be more econimical and be much more logical just to get a nice set of binocs, ID your animal, and shoot it with any scope you want. You don't have to see what color itseyes are to hit in the vitals,at least i don't. You were stating a need a for the percieved extra resolution for a rifle scope to reID an animal after you already "ID'd" the animal in the first place. Just giving a suggestion, might be better to actually id with good set of binocs or spotting scope. I understand the want for clear nice optics, I love em, just didn't understand your statement you need to pass on an animal.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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.

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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

RE: Zeiss or Leupold
 

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