New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Another Conquest Report
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Another Conquest Report

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/13/2008 at 20:29
sakomato View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: February/28/2008
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Points: 1085
Yesterday I was at the range shooting 3 guns, 2 of them had Kahles CL MultiZero 4x12x52's and the other had a Zeiss Conquest 4.5x14x44 RapidZ 800. 
 
I took a shot with the 300 win mag that had one of the Kahles on it and I could not see where the bullet hole was.  I was using those targets that have 8 individual targets with the black boxes like this
 
 
The next rifle up was the gun with the Conquest on it.  That bullet hole was as clear as could be.  I have noticed this before.  I also have a 3x9x50 Conquest that is capable of the same thing. 
 
Anyway, IMO the Conquests beat all comers for resolution and clarity.  The 2 Conquests I have are both better than the 2 Kahles CL MultiZero's and my Zeiss Diavari 2.5x10x50 VM/V T*.  I do think the Kahles and the Diavari gather more light  though.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/13/2008 at 20:38
Lawnfella View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/02/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 67
What distance were you shooting? I have a 3x10 50 CL and a 3.5x10 44 Conquest that I need to compare side by side.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/13/2008 at 22:04
sakomato View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: February/28/2008
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Points: 1085
I was shooting at 100 yards.  If you don't have something like the black square to hide the hole it may be harder to tell the difference.
 
Or you can see which one you can count the splits in the paper around the hole with!  Big%20Grin
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 07:22
trigger29 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
X = 180 Y = 90 (X+Pyro)+(Y-Pyro) = ?

Joined: September/29/2007
Location: South Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 4292
You guys just HAVE to make me buy a Kahles to compare to my Conquest don't you..........Oh my wife's gonna be pissed.  Oh well, she'll get over it........or just be mad for a really long time. Either way I'll have a multizero and be happy.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 08:59
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7180
I noticed the difference in darker situations. This is where the Kahles shine. But Unless you are on the hunt of a lifetime. the difference would not be double the price between the 3-9 Zeiss to the 3-10 Kahles. I will always be glad the Kahles was purchased, and it is best suited for the rifle it is sitting on.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 09:21
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
Lord Of The Flies

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 5753
I have to ask: Did you use them all at the same magnification? I can see bullet holes with a Leupold 3,5-10x40 at 100yds. Surely all the above scopes on 10x or more are capable of that?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 12:25
antleraddiction View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: January/27/2008
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 137
Originally posted by 8shots 8shots wrote:

I have to ask: Did you use them all at the same magnification? I can see bullet holes with a Leupold 3,5-10x40 at 100yds. Surely all the above scopes on 10x or more are capable of that?
 
Would have to agree................
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 13:06
Tip69 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Tip Stick

Joined: September/27/2005
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Sounds to me like your Kahles aren't focused quite right!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 13:11
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
Originally posted by Tip69 Tip69 wrote:

Sounds to me like your Kahles aren't focused quite right!
 
I agree. It is easy to adjust, too.
Thanks for the report.


Edited by tahqua - March/14/2008 at 13:11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 13:16
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7180
Originally posted by trigger29 trigger29 wrote:

You guys just HAVE to make me buy a Kahles to compare to my Conquest don't you..........Oh my wife's gonna be pissed.  Oh well, she'll get over it........or just be mad for a really long time. Either way I'll have a multizero and be happy.
 
I let my wife get another embrodery sewing machine. Then she is happy. I get neat shirts. WIN WIN!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 13:23
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
I have no problem seeing my bullet holes @ 100 yards set on 9x with my 3x9 4200!....But cannot with a Kahles?? Same backgrounds?.......Conquest all over a Kahles??? Something isn`t right here folks!!!! Shocked
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 15:47
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Online
Points: 20473
Originally posted by sakomato sakomato wrote:

Anyway, IMO the Conquests beat all comers for resolution and clarity.  The 2 Conquests I have are both better than the 2 Kahles CL MultiZero's and my Zeiss Diavari 2.5x10x50 VM/V T*.
 
Brother, I thank you for your review and you'd be hard pressed to find a bigger Conquest fan than me, (Focus maybe), but that's a pretty bold statement. Especially concerning the VM/V.  
 
EDIT TO ADD:
I have never seen the Kahles CL, just the older Kahles scopes, but even the older ones were better optically than my Conquest.  
 
  


Edited by cheaptrick - March/14/2008 at 15:54
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 17:09
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24220
                Ed  Sharp%20Shooter                                                              Stick%20HorseSqueezer
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 17:53
sakomato View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: February/28/2008
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Points: 1085
Okay guys, I should have made it clear that I could not see the bullet hole that was in the corner of the black square and totally in the black.  Of course you can see bullet holes in the clear in the white but when they are in the black of the squares, lots of luck.
 
Don't know how to adjust a side focus Kahles??  Laugh  That means I'm trying to keep a good humor about that statement.
 
I have seen some scopes on friend's rifles where they could not even see the bullet holes in the white.  Most notably a Leupold VXIII 3.5x10x50.  He along with 2 other friends have since sold their old scopes and bought Conquests after looking through mine.
 
Yes, clearer than the Diavari (although it is 10 years old so maybe not the new Diavari's).
 
Again, I have 2 MultiZero's and they are the 4x12x52 models and they are wonderful scopes, just not quite as clear as the Conquests IME.
 
Flame away.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 17:56
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Online
Points: 20473
No flame intended, friend.
Just saying.....
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 18:09
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
No flame intended here either. I can see bullet holes in the black at 1000 yards with all of my Kahles Big%20Grin
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 18:21
antleraddiction View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: January/27/2008
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 137
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you own a Diavari VM/V T*, there is no way it is 10 years old............. If I remember correctly the T* coating came out just prior to Zeiss coming out with the Victory binos.  I purchased a pair somewhere around 03-04, if I remember correctly, I'll eat crow, if someone can prove me wrong but a Conquest should not be brighter or clearer than a Diavari under any condition.  Why would a company build a $1500 scope when a $400 scope will perform betterLoco?

Edited by antleraddiction - March/14/2008 at 18:31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 18:53
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24220
Originally posted by antleraddiction antleraddiction wrote:

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you own a Diavari VM/V T*, there is no way it is 10 years old............. If I remember correctly the T* coating came out just prior to Zeiss coming out with the Victory binos.  I purchased a pair somewhere around 03-04, if I remember correctly, I'll eat crow, if someone can prove me wrong but a Conquest should not be brighter or clearer than a Diavari under any condition.  Why would a company build a $1500 scope when a $400 scope will perform betterLoco?
 
No, the Zeiss T* coating has been around for a long time--like twenty five years. All the West German Zeiss scopes of the eighties had T* coatings on them. Zeiss camera lenses had T* coatings going back even before that--I know way back into the early seventies.
 
When Zeiss decided to start building scopes in the USA for the American market--the Americanized version of the Diavari 3X9X36--they began to use the new MC coating---which is a lesser coating--I think the T* coating is more into the blue spectrum, or something like that...[ Koshkin would know this....]  while the MC is different---but still outstanding. The T* is more expensive and is produced only in Germany on the high dollar stuff.  ( I remember you could buy a T* Zeiss 3X9 from Cencored in the early ninties for $500!!)  That was too much money for me in those days.....Sad                  --Ed 
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 19:16
sakomato View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: February/28/2008
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Points: 1085
Originally posted by antleraddiction antleraddiction wrote:

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you own a Diavari VM/V T*, there is no way it is 10 years old............. If I remember correctly the T* coating came out just prior to Zeiss coming out with the Victory binos.  I purchased a pair somewhere around 03-04, if I remember correctly, I'll eat crow, if someone can prove me wrong but a Conquest should not be brighter or clearer than a Diavari under any condition.  Why would a company build a $1500 scope when a $400 scope will perform betterLoco?
 
I may have made an error.  It is not a VM/V but just a regular V (is there a difference Question) but definitely is a T*
 
 
It now resides on my Mato 338 win mag, but I know that I purchased it somewhere around 1998 or so (give or take a year).
 
I just recently got the Conquest 4.5x14x44 but I have had the Conquest 3x9x50 for a couple of years now and I have noticed the superior clarity before in that scope.  I thought that I had just gotten an exceptional one that was exactly focused at 100 yards.  Now with the side focus Conquest 4.5x14x44 I have noticed the superior clarity at the longer yardages also.
 
I also have a Kahles AH 3.5x10x50 and I can say that it has less clarity than the MultiZeros or the Diavari
 
JMO but in clarity I would rank the Conquests first, the MultiZero's second, the Diavari third and the Kahles AH fourth.  Various other scopes such as a Burris Black Diamond a couple of steps down.
 
If someone lives in the Houston area I would certainly be glad to meet them and demonstrate, until them next time you are at the range look for the minor superiority of the Conquests on clarity.
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 19:27
doctor duck View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: February/13/2008
Location: Ms.
Status: Offline
Points: 39
 I want to know what power you can see bullet holes in the black at 1000 yards. I don't mean any harm but I call B.S. on that one.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 19:48
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10963
Gentlemen, keep in mind that we all have different eyes and some scopes just fit our eyes better than others.  To my eyes, Kahles CL is notably better than the Conquest.  In most lighting conditions, I can see 6.5mm holes in the black with a 2-7x36 Kahles set to 7x.  Same for my CL that is 3-9x42.  However, it is entirely possible, that doctor duck's eyes just match Conquest better than the Kahles.

On T* coatings: they have been around for a long time, but Zeiss seems to have continuously improved them over the years.  T* coatings of today are likely not the same thing as T* coatings of 15 years ago.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 20:07
huntingtexas View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: March/03/2008
Location: duncanville, tx
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Originally posted by doctor duck doctor duck wrote:

 I want to know what power you can see bullet holes in the black at 1000 yards. I don't mean any harm but I call B.S. on that one.
 
  Notice the Big%20Grin after his post ...... he was kidding. When I shot with him that day we couldn't see the bulletholes past 950 yards Big%20Grin.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 20:13
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
Originally posted by huntingtexas huntingtexas wrote:

Originally posted by doctor duck doctor duck wrote:

 I want to know what power you can see bullet holes in the black at 1000 yards. I don't mean any harm but I call B.S. on that one.
 
  Notice the Big%20Grin after his post ...... he was kidding. When I shot with him that day we couldn't see the bulletholes past 950 yards Big%20Grin.
Looker           
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/14/2008 at 23:23
Tip69 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Tip Stick

Joined: September/27/2005
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
When I said there might be focus issues with the CL, it wasn't that I was doubting you knew how to use a side focus, but that it just wasn't totaly focused.  Might even be an issue with the scope.  I say this cause I have noticed with the fast focus style oculars, when the "target" is really clear, the reticle isn't so much.  I have only used my CL one time at the range and messing with it at home and I noticed this.  Since I am not trying to read something at 100 yds with it, I have the reticle focused.
 
Does this make sense and has anyone else noticed this?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: March/15/2008 at 00:20
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
Koshkin is right, maybe Doctor duck's eyes match the conquest better than the Kahles? I know that's true for me. To me, my conquest is the better scope when I compared it to my Kahles cl. To me it looked brighter (in all lighting conditions), clearer, and just gave me an overall better sight picture, all at half the price! I wanted the Kahles to be the better scope because I paid so much for it but if I am honest with myself - everything looks better through the Zeiss.   Bricat.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Another Conquest Report"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Conquest HD 10x42's bwilliams1848 Optics For Sale 0
Range Report For "Thunder" Ernie Bishop The Range Report 10
RANGE REPORT WEATHERBY XXll coyote95 The Range Report 4
2014 Rut Report Skylar McMahon General Hunting 23
900-1000 yd Range Report LRSMike The Range Report 15
My latest contribution..Action Report. 8shots General Hunting 3
Range Report: Weaver Tactical 3-15x50 EMDR torisdad Member's Tests and Reviews 15
Zeiss Victory 3-12x56, User report seawolf Rifle Scopes 13
April 3rd range report! armyhooah The Range Report 4
range report rjtfroggy The Range Report 10


This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.