I don't have much experience with the Conquest, but I have had them and the Pinnacle side by side. This is just my impression and should be taken as such. I think it is better than the Pinnacle. Not much, but enough that you can see it side by side. I'm not sure it is enough better to justify 2x price. But the Conquest is a good binocular and is certainly good enough for almost all uses.
I have not had it side by side to the SLC. Having said that, I think that with the SLC closeouts in advance of the new SLC HD, that the SLCneu would certainly have my attention, for not too much more than the Conquest. But frankly, that call you would find is best made by your own eyes.
The Conquest is not quite the glass of the Ziess FL, which is probably not surprising as it would seem sort of illogical for Ziess to come so close to the FL with the COnquest they hurt the FL sales. The main difference in the two Zeiss is mainly the presence of the high quality extra low dispersion flourite lenses in the FL. That stuff is expensive and it shows in the cost, especially GOOD ED/FL glass. That difference, aside from cost is likely to be the FL will have a bit better brightness and contrast and will be less prone to chromatic aberation (CA). Whether CA is a problem for you, you have to decide. If you have no idea what I'm talking about and don't see bright color fringes in high contrast backgrounds, that may not be an issue for you. The focuser arrangement is different in the Conquest and there are likely less complicated, hence less expensive, eye pieces in the Conquest. FOV is largely an ey epiece function and the Conquest has less FOV than the FL.