Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Zeiss Conquest VS Leupold VX3

WOW.. 9.7 actuall magnication.Big diff. 3 tenths of a power..

I also DOUBT Zeiss scopes are all the actual mags listed on the scope itself.

Most rifle scopes are not.

Droptine,
Understand the jing factor all to well.Seeing as your from the pig hunting capital of the world.And most people I know in Texas arn't clock watchers when deer hunting.I feel its in your best interest to stay away from optics that.---

Rely on 1930s focusing technology.Hard to believe they still are selling outdated chit like that.Really highlights just how far behind they are in technology.

Johnney cant seem to get the power ingraved on the power ring in the proper location.Several years ago on Sniperhide there was a post on the optics board.Hunderds of posts.Seems law inforcement all over the country were finding out that mil-dots were not at the right spacing because of poor QC at the big L.
If you were to just read this board.All you would hear is that lupies Xs are low and are at a disadvantage in low light.Actually becaues of very poor QC there all over the lot.Some are high and some are low.This explanes the wide difference in how lupies "look" from scope to scope .Think snow flakes here.Everyone is different.

Only the latest scopes should be tested.Oddly enough I kinda agree with this one.Tasco had fully multi coated glass before lupie did.You dont have to go back that far to find a turd lupie without full coatings and trust me,they are pathetic.The tiny invisible scratchs we hear about so much are very simple to explain.Lupies MC4 coating is a mass market,cheep,very low quality coating that degrades pretty quickly over time.Whether you clean it or not.Hard use make the view go south even faster.
Your talking about Zeiss "T" coating against MC4? Nuff said.

dave