schoolcraft

I've decided that I want to have a lightweight rifle built by either New Ultra Light Arms or Match Grade Arms.
I'm wanting a "average" weight scope to top it with, and I would like some feedback on these 2 models....

1. Leupold VX-3 3.5-10x40
I've used this model before and was very happy with it.

2. Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40
Have never owned one, but hear nothing but good about them.

Both will cover the magnification range I want, and I know both are built very well and backed by a great company/warranty.

The biggest thing that would sway me towards one vs. the other is LOW LIGHT PERFORMANCE.

Where I hunt, the bucks tend to be almost nocturnal....so if you get a shot at one it's usually withing the first or last 15 minutes of shooting light. We also have lots of hogs here and I hunt them almost all year. They also like to come out right at daylight or dark.

So, if any of you folks have used both of these to get a true "apples to apples" comparison of their light gathering abilities, I sure would appreciate any feedback you can give me on which one you felt was better.

SCHOOLCRAFT

wizzum69

The Conquest will come out ahead in:

Brighter overall view
Etched reticle will stay bolder in low light
The almost constant eye relief is really nice

Wayspr

Don't have a VX-3 but do have an older VariX III and a newer Conquest. The conquest is clearer and better in low light. Of the two, I'd go Conquest but in reality both are very similar in quality and warranty.

slowr1der

Conquest by far.

Sheridan

2. Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40
Have never owned one, but hear nothing but good about them.


+1

bugsNbows

Conquest for sure. My VX3 2.5-8 X 36 is decent, but the Zeiss is better. Another worthy consideration is the Meopta Meopro. Additionally, the Sightron Big Sky scopes are very good and have a "rainguard" type coating to boot. Bushnell Elites are doable too. Personally, I'm not a Nikon lover.

BOWHUNTERCOP

either way you go you will not go wrong, both are quality