New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Zeiss conquest question
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Zeiss conquest question

 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: August/04/2010 at 08:20
muleymaddness View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: May/04/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 112
I'm looking at the Zeiss Conquest for my 7mm Rem Mag in either the 3-9x40 or 3.5-10x44.  My first question, is the $300 extra between the 2 scopes worth the price? 
 
Secondly, do you feel that a 9x is plenty magnification for shots from 50 yards to 350-400 yards?
 
Any other recommendations?  Low light performance is not too important in that if I can't clearly judge the animal I'm going to take with my binocs (Meopta 10x42), I'm not going to take him anyway.  I don't squeeze off shots at dawn and dusk to walk up to a disappointment and mis-judgement.
 
I don't like big, bulky scopes. 
 
Thanks for your help.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 08:23
bugsNbows View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
bowsNbugs

Joined: March/10/2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 9298
IMO, the 3-9 X 40 is quite sufficient for your task. Good luck. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 08:24
SVT_Tactical View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
Chief Sackscratch

Joined: December/17/2009
Location: NorthCackalacky
Status: Offline
Points: 28768
I think the 3-9 would be sufficient.  that extra 1x on the top end and 4mm of objective wouldn't give me $300 worth of extra.  IMO  Especially when you already state your not to into dusk and dawn shots.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 08:28
DAVE44 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 652
Just so you know, the Z plex reticle in the 44mm has a much wider open area in the middle of the reticle than the 40mm Z plex.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 08:38
lucytuma View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: November/25/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 5389
I also think the 3-9x40 is the better value and if 9x isn't enough, 10x won't make a difference.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 11:46
Trays 7940 View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: August/09/2009
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 1149
I have the 3.5x10x50 conquest.  I have the larger size simply because I have always bought the bigger size.  The 3x9 will work great for what you are doing.  I don't think you will be disappointed...  and you will have saved enough to have your deer, or other game, processed....  Bandito
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 13:04
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18345
Already adequately stated, but just to chime in, the 3-9 will serve you admirably.  It is quite good for longer ranges at need. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 14:36
greywolf View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: April/25/2005
Status: Offline
Points: 310
I've had both - I actually prefered the 3-9x40 because the eyebox was a little more critical for proper eye relief on the 3.5-10x vs. the 3-9x - I think the eye relief also is .5" less on the 3.5-10x
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 15:17
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479
As previously stated, the 3-9x really is an ideal magnification. I had and loved the 3.5-10x44mm Connie.

Edited by cheaptrick - August/04/2010 at 15:17
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 16:18
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13882
I think it depends on how you hunt because a guy who is stalking needs lower power where a guy who hunts from a stand or has a solid rest can use a lot of magnification. Given my choice I would take a 4-14 or 4-16 over a 3-9 any day, because I like to get a closer look at the rack and you just cant do that at several hundred yards with 9x.  I also tend to like illuminated reticles and target - tactical knobs to dial in correction for trajectory or at least a balistic reticle, some system to get on target at 400 to 600 yds.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 18:04
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
even at 500yds a mule deer or an elk is fairly big in a scope on 9x. you get into the 14x or 16x then you have to have a side focus and thats just more garbage to screw with you when you need to be taking a shot. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/04/2010 at 21:28
muleymaddness View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: May/04/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 112
Thanks for all the replies.  Are there any other recommendations you'd have for me on a scope?  Meopta 4-12x42; Leupold 3-10x40; Swarovski 3-10x42; the new Nikon Monarch.....????
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/05/2010 at 07:07
SVT_Tactical View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
Chief Sackscratch

Joined: December/17/2009
Location: NorthCackalacky
Status: Offline
Points: 28768
Whats your price limit?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/05/2010 at 08:18
muleymaddness View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: May/04/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 112
I'd like to stay around $500; but could go up if I felt it was worth it.  Occasionaly I'll see a Swaro going for around $800 - so that's not out of the question.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/18/2010 at 09:27
cornhuskid View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: January/11/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 113
I had the same "problem" and could not see the difference looking through them side by side.  I bought the 3-9x40.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/18/2010 at 20:34
stickbow46 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/07/2009
Location: Benton, Pa
Status: Offline
Points: 4673

Think Bushnell Elite 6500 Jap glass or Minox Z5 German Schott glass.Both have a better mag box than the Conquest.Minox equalls Conquest glass/Elite has rainguard & fire fly.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/19/2010 at 12:14
fireroad View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/04/2009
Location: Idaho
Status: Offline
Points: 85
Originally posted by muleymaddness muleymaddness wrote:

I'm looking at the Zeiss Conquest for my 7mm Rem Mag in either the 3-9x40 or 3.5-10x44.  My first question, is the $300 extra between the 2 scopes worth the price? 
 
Secondly, do you feel that a 9x is plenty magnification for shots from 50 yards to 350-400 yards?
 

I'm in the same boat as you, trying to decide between the two. My question to everyone is if you are shooting out to 500 yards for antelope is the 3-9 still a better deal? What if the price difference was only $150? I'm looking at the rapid z 600 reticle.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/19/2010 at 12:24
tjtjwdad View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: December/11/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Originally posted by pyro6999 pyro6999 wrote:

even at 500yds a mule deer or an elk is fairly big in a scope on 9x. you get into the 14x or 16x then you have to have a side focus and thats just more garbage to screw with you when you need to be taking a shot. 
Just a thought; Zeiss sets their parallax @ 100 yds on their non-adjustable Conquest line.  At least with SF (Or AO on other brands) there is the option to take some of that parallax out for those longer shots.
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/19/2010 at 12:26
Alan Robertson View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/31/2009
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 1724
fwiw... thinkin' about selling my 3.5-10X44 z-plex... will post it in 'optics for sale'  if anyone interested

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/19/2010 at 12:30
Alan Robertson View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/31/2009
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 1724
I really like the Z600 reticle in my 3-9... not that I'll ever shoot anything other than paper at that distance. Maybe I'm just a gadget guy.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/19/2010 at 12:37
fireroad View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/04/2009
Location: Idaho
Status: Offline
Points: 85
Alan - Sounds like you have both models. Can you elaborate on what you feel the true or noticeable difference are between the two?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/24/2010 at 13:25
eman308 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/30/2009
Location: Co.
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Id luv to hear your thoughts too.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/24/2010 at 20:35
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
Originally posted by tjtjwdad tjtjwdad wrote:

Originally posted by pyro6999 pyro6999 wrote:

even at 500yds a mule deer or an elk is fairly big in a scope on 9x. you get into the 14x or 16x then you have to have a side focus and thats just more garbage to screw with you when you need to be taking a shot. 
Just a thought; Zeiss sets their parallax @ 100 yds on their non-adjustable Conquest line.  At least with SF (Or AO on other brands) there is the option to take some of that parallax out for those longer shots.
 
 

yeah and as soon as you get a scope with a sf or and ao you have set up  to be clear at 400 yds and the deer shows up at 25yds and by the time you adjust your scope he is gone. k.i.s.s.!!!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/25/2010 at 13:52
Alan Robertson View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/31/2009
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 1724
Originally posted by fireroad fireroad wrote:

Alan - Sounds like you have both models. Can you elaborate on what you feel the true or noticeable difference are between the two?

I like them both very much.
The models are: 3-9x40 w/Z-600 reticle and 3.5-10X44 w/ Z-Plex.

Other than the reticles and magnification range, the biggest difference between them has to do with the sight picture (sorry-don't know the technical term for this).
Since they both share the same large ocular,  the different eye- relief of each model gives a different sight picture. The 3-9 has 4" eye relief and a big sight picture- larger than my Elite 4200 with it's 3.3" eye relief. The 3.5-10, having a shorter 3.5" eye relief moves the ocular .5" closer to your eye, which gives it the largest sight picture I've ever seen. The difference between them would be like moving closer to the TV... or looking at a bigger monitor.
The 3.5's larger sight picture in no way affects the field of view, as they appear to have the same field of view at equal power settings. I've tried to tell a difference in field of view and they are the same, to me.
They are both really nice in low light, but my eyes may be too old to tell any real difference... I can see a difference between the Conquests and other brands/models I own, so I'll just say that both Conquests have about the same low-light performance... doing the math confirms what I see.

Before I got the Z600, I was resigned to losing low-light performance due to the thin reticle, but it turns out there was nothing to worry about, it works fine. If there is enough light to get the Z-Plex crosshairs on an object, I can get the Z600 on it, as well; not the ranging and holdover features, though.
I recently walked around with both scopes in a full moon and could see the Z600 reticle in all but the darkest nooks and crannies. Of course, the thick outer posts of the Z-Plex were bolder and faster to get on target. I'd never hunt when it's that dark anyway, so it's no big deal for me.

There is another difference between the two scopes which has more to do with the physics of long eye relief than anything else.  With all scopes, as you move your head/eye away from the direct centerline of the scopes axis, you will lose the sight picture- the scope will 'wink out'. The 3-9x40 with it's 4" eye relief will lose the sight picture (wink out) before the shorter eye relief 3.5-10.
The Conquest gives you plenty of warning and the loss doesn't happen abruptly, as it does in some other very good scopes which I won't mention.

A bit off topic- I've been a handloader for years and have always had lots of different powders/bullets/primers to play with. I've had a lot of fun doing things like loading Unique in frifle calibers for a sub-velocity toy and doing things like re-swaging bullets from a different, but close caliber in order to get a weight or ogive that's unavailable normally.
All that's changing since the Z600... all I've been interested in lately is having 1 load which I know inside and out and the Z600 doesn't let me down. I'm even using a heavier bullet than I ever considered before (Nosler .308 200gr. AB) because of it's superb ballistic coefficient and terminal performance.

Still the Z600 is a compromise, of sorts. There are better pure- hunting reticles, like the Z-Plex or the German #4. There are better long- range reticle schemes...maybe.
The Conquest with Z600 reticle is, for me, the best true multi- purpose scope for a 'one- size- fits- all- needs' rifle (Rem 700 .30-06) that I've found.
The Z600 works and works right now with no fuss or fiddlin' around under any circumstance I'm likely to encounter.

I'm starting to think that any fine reticle would do for true long range shooting as I'm starting to think that the most important thing for long distance shooting is not having a bunch of doodads in the sight picture, but instead having precise and repeatable turrets with a large adjustment range and a reticle that doesn't obscure the target. By the way, Conquests have firm, accurate and repeatable turrets... so far for me, at least.
 
The Conquests have plenty of elevation to reach way out there, if you want to shoot really long distance and mount them right- i.e., use a 20moa base or mount like I did with the Burris Signature rings... one can set a mount bias from 5- 30 moa with the Burris inserts.

From my experience with two Conquests, I'd say just pick the configuration that you want and go for it- you just about can't go wrong. The 3-9x40 with Z-Plex reticle is a screaming bargain.

I'm getting pretty salty with the Z600. I'll likely never take a shot at any living creature at 600 yards, but any zombies out there better not come 'round here...


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/25/2010 at 15:06
Lurchernz View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: December/05/2007
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 32
I have the 3.5-10x44 I agree that the etched reticle gives great low light performance. We do not have restricted shooting hours here in New Zealand. I do not have a 3-9X40 zeiss but have several others of those dimensions and at low power I feel that the Zeiss has a slighty wider field of view. Only thing I never like about the zeiss was the plastic turret caps. One thing I have heard of is that turret errectors are not as robust as say a leupy mark 4. I have heard of several guys out here who do a lot of long range shooting and crank the dials up and down a lot that have had issues. Won't be problem unless you are planning on doing a lot of adjusting.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Zeiss conquest question"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Zeiss Conquest question new vs old newmanuim Rifle Scopes 1 6/14/2007 11:19:22 AM
question about Zeiss Conquest subway Rifle Scopes 3 12/1/2006 5:12:01 PM
Nikon Monarch UCC or Zeiss Conquest eddy k Rifle Scopes 3 12/2/2006 10:25:13 AM
Zeiss 12X or 15 X Conquest’s RRMan03 Binoculars 2 12/22/2006 6:19:47 AM
Zeiss Conquest 3-12x56 Gunnar Rifle Scopes 8 1/7/2007 5:54:34 PM
Zeiss Conquest low power jimpenny Rifle Scopes 2 1/7/2007 1:02:31 PM
Bushnell 4200 vs. Zeiss Conquest 333_okh Rifle Scopes 6 11/21/2006 2:55:32 PM
Burris Signature Select vs Zeiss Conquest horsesandhorns Rifle Scopes 1 11/21/2006 3:33:18 PM
Zeiss Conquest Scopes RRMan03 Binoculars 1 1/14/2007 10:56:02 PM
Meopta vs zeiss conquest shoot4fun Rifle Scopes 15 2/14/2007 8:15:30 AM


This page was generated in 0.422 seconds.