Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Zeiss 4.5x14 |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Tulie
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/31/2007 Location: New Mexico Status: Offline Points: 87 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: February/16/2010 at 07:52 |
I just had to post this after receiving a Zeiss 4.5x14. I have a 3x9 Conquest and just got the 4.5x14, the 3x9 is nice, very nice but this 4.5x14 puts the 3x9 to shame. The optics are a big step up. Not sure why and maybe others have seen this too but it sure surprised me. The clarity is a big improvement and I don't think it's just the small difference in objective size. Anyway, anybody else seen this?
|
|
Foxman
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/04/2010 Location: Marietta, Ga. Status: Offline Points: 11 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
What's the objective size, 44 or 50? If the 3x9 is a 40 and your new one is a 44 or 50, that could be why.
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
not suprized here, I had an early 4.5x14 with plain reticle, and later got a z800 which had not only better optics, but was better built all around.
|
|
Tulie
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/31/2007 Location: New Mexico Status: Offline Points: 87 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The 4.5x14 is a 44 mm and the 3x9 is a 40 so not much difference there. The 4.5x14 does have the Z800 reticle in it but it's a lot more than just light gathering, just everything is sharper, clear and seems better color to me. Not that the 3x9 is bad, it's just I wasn't expecting the 4.5x14 to be that much better. Pleasant surprise for a change!
|
|
anweis
Optics Master Joined: January/29/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1148 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You did twist the eyepiece to adjust focus and obtain sharp images and reticle, right?
|
|
Tulie
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/31/2007 Location: New Mexico Status: Offline Points: 87 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yes. The 3x9 is nice but the 4.5 is really amazing to me. Maybe not as sharp as some of the Kahles I've looked through or a Swarovski but not very far behind! To me the 3x9 was about like a good Leupold, maybe a tad bit better but not much.
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
the difference between the early conquests 6 or so years and the later ones about 2 years is readily seen, ao work better, better glass, mag adjustment is more precise with the numbers, numbered in fractions etc, (same plastic turrets though)
|
|
okc4956
Optics Apprentice Joined: October/13/2009 Location: Oklahoma City Status: Offline Points: 135 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I just got my first Zeiss Conquest 4.5 x 14 x 44 with the Z800 reticle and I'm really impressed at dusk and dawn. I was really considering a Swaro, and it's probably not the scope a Swaro is but for $800 less....I'm happy. Very nice scope for what I wanted.
|
|
Tulie
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/31/2007 Location: New Mexico Status: Offline Points: 87 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yeah, I agree. The only Swaro stuff I've had was some older bino's and they were amazing. However, for the cost vs. the difference I'm not sold that it's worth it to me. I'm using Zeiss Classic bino's now, the older ones that are discontinued and they work great for me. This scope sure impressed me and I wouldn't hesitate to get another 3x9.
|
|
tjtjwdad
Optics Journeyman Joined: December/11/2007 Status: Offline Points: 365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have a both a 3.5-10x44 and a 4.5-14x50 (Zeiss Conquest). In broad daylight they're a draw. In low light, the 50mm is clearly superior, regardless of the power setting. 6mm isn't much but it sure is a world of difference to my eyes.
HTH,
|
|
bagderRed
Optics Apprentice Joined: May/17/2004 Status: Offline Points: 159 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Could be, I am very impressed with the 2.5-8x32 Conquest I picked up late last year.
|
|
Tulie
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/31/2007 Location: New Mexico Status: Offline Points: 87 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That 2.5x8 is an interesting one and I wish they hadn't discontinued it. It would have fit nicely on a heavy recoiling dangerous game rifle.
|
|
architect
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/16/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 6 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have 2 of the 4.5 x 14. One on a 30-06 Winchester the other on a Kimber 270 WSM. Both have taken Mule Deer at 300 yards. Target practice at the gun club is 400 and 600 yards without a problem.
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |