Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Zeiss Conquest 1.8-5.5x: First Impressions and Comparisons (Leupld, Trijicon)

Just got my Zeiss Conquest 1.8-5.5 scope in the mail from Doug at Cameraland and three things came to mind, immediately:

1. Dang, this is a big scope.
2. Wow, this is a heavy scope.
3. I should have bought two!!

This is a big scope, and it has more mounting area than any other scope I own, with the exception of my Leupold M8 3x's. Since I'm in the middle of a scope shuffle at the moment, here is a comparison picture: from left to right--Zeiss Conquest 1.8-5.5, Trijicon Accupoint 3-9x40, Leupold Vari XIII 2.5-8, Leupold M8 3x



As can be seen, the Zeiss is the biggest of them. It is also the heaviest; although I didn't weigh them to see exactly what they weighed, the Zeiss felt notably heavier in the hand than the Trijicon. The Zeiss also has a very large rear objective bell which will prevent it from being mounted as low as other scopes of comparable power. For instance, although the front objective of the Zeiss is only 2mm larger than the Leupold 2.5-8 (38mm vs. 36mm) the rear objective of the Zeiss will require it to use rings higher than those required by the Leupold. This matters to me because I like to have my scopes mounted as low as possible. However, given the eye relief and optical quality of the Zeiss I'm happy to make the trade-off and only use this scope on guns where I'm using medium height scope rings anyway, like my CZ 550 9.3x62.

Here's another picture showing the usable mounting surface of the Zeiss, compared to a Leupold M8 3x. If you have a problem with ring spacing, this scope can solve it:



Here's the clearance between the rear objective bell and the bolt handle on my CZ 550 using medium rings; if the rings were any lower, this scope wouldn't work. Something to keep in mind.



Here's a picture of the scope mounted; with the long, constant, eye relief I was able to mount it very far forward which I like. This way the weight of the scope is almost entirely over the action, concentrating the weight of the gun, when loaded, between my hands. Because the rear objective is so large, it is also heavy so mounting the scope further back would alter the balance of the gun. All told, this scope, although heavy, doesn't diminish the handling qualities of this rifle because of the latitude afforded by the large mounting surface.



Another picture:



Conclusion: I wish I'd have bought two. According to Doug these are sold out and for $299 shipped I can see why. I haven't tested the optics against my other scopes yet but, just from casual comparison I can say that the Zeiss (set at 3x) is sharper and brigher than the M8 Leupold, about on par with the Vari XIII (when set to 2.5) and just a shade less color-saturated than the Trijicon (when set to 3x). All that said, even if the glass wasn't great, which it is, this scope will still fill a niche for those needing a long tubed, variable powered scope for use with standard rings on long actions, or for forward mounting on standard actions.