salukipv1

VX-III were alright, haven't personally handled/looked through the new VX-3, can't imagine they're that much better than the vx-iii

I assume the vx-7 are nice but for that kind of money I'd be looking at swaro, etc...

vx-i and vx-ii are pretty much junk

my zeiss conquest is nicer in every way imaginable than a vx-iii

stapher1

What problems have you had with them?

fritz1

Both the VXI and the VXII have better eye relief than your Ziess Conquest. The only Ziess Conquest that even has decent eye relief is the 3x9, it has 4" the rest have 3.5" and under. Another thing I can say in favor of the Leupold, they are not made using ANY plastic parts, unlike the Ziess. But that is your own opinion, which I respect, but in my opinion the Leupold VXIII is a waaaay better scope.

bugsNbows

The VX 3 units are a step (albeit small) above the VXIII units. The 7's are being discontinued to be replaced by the new (soon to be out) VX6's. Leupy's are ok IMO, they do have a wide array of reticle options and a good warranty. The trouble is you pay for it. There are tons of great choices out there that rival and better Leupold at many price points. I only have one Leupy left as I've upgraded most everything to much better optics.

salukipv1

every leupold I've owned, finish has been poor, vx-i, vx-ii, I mostly have vx-iii,

knobs are hard to turn, ie the mag adjustment, on 1 I'm gonna have to send it back, it's ridiculous!

quality control must not be what it once was or they just don't care anymore.

even my vx-III's while easier to turn adjust are rougher.

compared to my conquests which are like swaros compared to a leupold IMO, everything is tight, compact, smooth,

I've never had eye relief problems with any of my scopes.... I'm not sure how much more a leupold 4.5-14x40 has over a 4.5-14x44 conquest, I assume it's less than 1/2"

Nikons aren't aesthetically looking as the leupolds IMO, but at least the finish, quality control seems higher.

I would say a conquest is closer to a swaro, where as a leupold is closer to a nikon, with a large gap in between the two camps.

So yup, I've bought my last leupold.

of course when I buy my 375 or 458 I really don't want to spend swaro money on a scope, and conquest doesn't offer a lower power option, but if it were today I'd just have to fork out the cash and buy a swaro.

salukipv1

the vx-6 appear to be nice...just googled them.

be curious to see how reviews are.

fritz1

Actually the Ziess 4.5-14x44 Conquest has 3.5" of eye relief versus the Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40 has 5". If you have a hard kicking gun, you will wish you had that Leupold with the extra eye relief. I have Leupolds, Nightforce's and Bushnell Elite 4200's and 6500's. The Leupold in my opinion makes the best all arround hunting scope.

stapher1

+1, I tried Nikon (3 buckmasters & 1 Monarch) and all of them won't adjust (windage or elevation) without tapping on the turrets to get them to move and that doesn't always work.

warbirdlover

I had one of the first Nikon Monarchs to come out (3-9 X 40). Compared it in the store to all the Leupold models. I was going to buy the best scope (other then big $$$ German) and ended up with the Nikon.

Those were the truest adjustment knobs I ever had. Precise clicks that moved the poi exactly what it was supposed to. The horizontal adjustment did not interfere (change) the vertical adjustment and vice versa. NEVER heard of having to "tap" them to make them move.

I had that scope for 15 years. Still is one of the best I've seen. My brother has it on his best rifle right now.

South33

I love every Leupold I have ever owned. They have proven themselves over the years to be a dependable & accurate scope for any application. But the Ziess & other scopes of comparable price are super nice to. In my opinion you cant beat Huskemaw optics (check em out); a little pricey though; better than any Leupold or Swaro IMO.

-South