Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Zeiss Conquest HD5 3-15x42

Anyone shooting an HD5 and this one specifically - no one I know has one and none of the stores seem eager to stock them.

Would like real world experience - it's a fairly heavy scope and it would be used for hunting

I'm using this one with the target turrets. Very good optics. Lockable turrets with zero stop which are nice features on a hunting rig.

I'm using this one with the target turrets. Very good optics. Lockable turrets with zero stop which are nice features on a hunting rig.

So far I really like mine-also with target turrets.We were hunting northeast Nevada in December and the weather was minus 11 and no issues.

I have the 2-10 rapid Z 600. I like the glass. Unless you are getting a good deal on one you might consider a Swaro Z5 also. Regular price on the HD5 and a discounted Z5 are within about $200.

I have one - it has a highly curved field of view on low magnifications. Strongly suggest that you find a way to look through one before you buy to see if it is an issue for you. Mechanics and reticle are excellent.

I'm using an HD5 3-15x42 with the Rapid Z600 reticle, on a pre-64 std. grade 30-06. The optics are great and the ballistic reticle is fast. I used it last season hunting antelope in WY, shots from 150-300 yards. It worked well!

My best group to date was shot with this scope.

Eric

A few more pics:

Nice group! Tell the truth now; you normally shoot 5-shot groups, but when you saw that 3-shot bug-hole you weren't about to try and put another one in there and possibly ruin a truly impressive group.

Eric you got the scope to clear the bolt handle OK with that set up?

Is yours the 3-15? My 2-10 has a very slight curvature just at the edges on 2X and is nearly impossible to see at 2.5 and completely gone at 3X. It is in no way a hindrance at 2X and I like the wide FOV.

I have the rapid Z 600 and what I don't like is that the resolution isn't perfect at 100 yards on 10X. It's still fine to see bullet holes but it is much sharper if you turn it down to 7X-8X. It's because the parallax is set for 300 yards. This makes it an all around great scope for any range from 0-600 yards but it doesn't excel at 100 as a target gun. It is however just about perfect as a hunting scope. I really wish the 2-10 had an adjustable parallax which would make it absolutely perfect.

That was exactly it!
I knew the pressure was on after center punching the second shot into the first. After nailing the third I did a little Irish jig and called it good. lol. I normally like to shoot 5-shot groups.


Bob, no issues at all! I'm using a Redfield one piece base in Low.

Eric

I had purchased a swaro z3 4-12x50 and an hd5 3-15x42. I had both at the same time and was able to compare extensively at all times of the day. The zeiss is a great optic and you wouldn't be limited in any way using it, but the swaro beat it in just about every way. The swaro lasted longer in the dark, was noticeably crisper and clearer. I kept the swaro and sent the zeiss back.

Great minds think alike! You did exactly what I have done more times than I can remember. If I have a bug-hole at shot #3 I see no rational reason to shoot one or even two more rounds and take the chance of screwing up a fantastic group. It's not that I've shot some many groups under 0.15 MOA(very, very impressive!), it's that my memory ain't what it used to be.

I wish I could write like Bob. That man has an uncanny ability to write a post that is a pleasure to read, and in fact, pulls you into his post to read it...especially if he's taken the time to write a long post.

I bought one of these this year. Started looking at the 2-10 but also looked at the 3-15...compared it extensively looking at the vx6 and z3 (3.5-10) offerings. All were the 40 or 42mm versions, 50mm versions of the Zeiss were not out yet, so comparing the Swaro 50 would probably give it an edge, as would the new Zeiss 50's.

To my eyes, there was not all that much of a difference, with the vx6 being my least favorite, but it's so close that it's subjective. What was different was the weight...swaro wins hands down. But eye relief is another matter. Though the numbers on paper suggest otherwise, I found the Zeiss to have the most apparent eye-relief due to it's generous eyebox..the Swaro had the smallest. That was really important to me because I was mounting it on a 7.4 pound 375...and my last Swaro sometimes hit me in the head due to insufficient eye relief.

In the end, I moved to the 3-15 level for this reason: if I am going to hunt with adjustable turrets, I want them to lock. This was suggested to me as very important by some very experienced people, some of whom had bad experiences with turrets that got moved inadvertantly while rough hunting. They all told me, if it's a use-anywhere under all conditions hunting rifles, the turrets better be covered or lock.

That put the HD5 with lock plex on it's own if I wanted turrets, so that clinched it. I got more mag than i wanted, and less width...but I find that I really don't need less than 3x and I actually use the 15x for load dev etc. Parallax adjustment is okay, I guess, it's needed at that level of mag but it's not numbered and I just wish it was not needed. But otherwise, love the scope. Love the precision of the adjustments, the locks, I have used it at night and have been very impressed.

A 50 would be even better, except it's too big for my taste, and too heavy. Using the 42, I was able to mount them in Talley lows and still clear the bolt on my model 70. Overall, it balances well, looks a lot like the previous post of the pre-64 as mine is the new Alaskan.