Anybody have a chance to compare these two first hand? I've read positive reviews of both, interested in any 1st hand comparisons.

Thanks,

David

And maybe throw the other contender into the mix - Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44 BT?

Anybody?

Too soon?

David

I know the CDS and Swarovski BT are desigined to be caliber specific. The BT is changable depending on conditions and CDS requires different turrents when changing conditions or caliber. The Zeiss turrent to me would be just like any other target turrent and you would have to know the dope on your rifle.

Pretty sure the OP is interested in optics, adjustments, user friendliness, etc, etc, etc, not how turrets work.

You should be happy either way you go optically. Nobody here has the Zeiss in stock yet but if the vx-6 is close to the vx-7 then it will be real nice. I have read reviews that said the Swarovski was brighter and clearer during low light than the Leupold.

'zactly....

Swaro's not on my list - too many reliability issues.

This scope is going on a medium light hunting rifle (~7.25 pounds w/ scope) that will be shot a lot. Turrets will be twisted frequently. Repeatable, reliable turrets are #1 priority. CDS is nice, not mandatory. Ballistic reticle is nice, not mandatory (looks like Zeiss is not available w/ reticle and turrets?). I assume the glass at this level is going to be more than adequate for my needs regardless of which I choose, but obviously optics will be deciding factor if all else is equal.


David

I'd like to hear of said issues. I have a couple and haven't heard anything bad about them.

I'd be surprised if Zeiss made the "adjustments" worse on the new fancypants Conquests. They are very solid on the original ones. They go where pointed.

I must have the one good Swaro... lol... mine is great. I twist the turret all over; it just keeps hitting stuff.

Gotta agree with this too. My Conquests have all had great tracking, which is one reason why i'm so interested in the HD Conquest.

Maybe I've been lucky but my z3 and z5 have been great. Best lowlight scope I own and no issues with the BT tracking. I twist it all the time.
Love to hear your horror story as well!!

Your only decision you have to make is, do you want 1" tube or 30mm.....

I have a new Zeiss Conquest HD5 5-25x50 very nice scope, turrets click very nice,they also lock, more elevation than before 65 moa now, 45 moa on original conquest. Scope is 1.5 inches shorter than before. Also the scope feels more stoutly constructed, weighs a little more. I have shot clear to 1400 yards with several conquest and they always tracked extremely well

I also have. Hd5 5-25. It is a very nice scope. Tracks very well and has great glass. Very comparable to the swaro z5.

I own neither the Zeiss HD5 or the VX-6 the OP is questioning. I have however, had the opportunity to look thru both. Not sure that either has an edge over the other optically. To my eyes, the heavier reticle in the Zeiss HD puts it a small step ahead.

I will say that of all the brands I've looked through for a hunting scope the zeiss has the best reticle

The VX-6 is not the same glass as the VX-7 The VX 7 used the same Schott glass that is used in the top of the line zeiss and other euro optics. It was the only scope that leupold produced so far with that level of glass. I had a VX-7 and it was amazing glass, but I sold it as it was BIG and bulky and felt it should have had an etched glass reticle instead of shiny gold wire crosshairs. So I'm thinking the ziess will still have slightly better glass than the VX-6 but otherwise it's probably a tossup as far as reliability,function, ect...

The swarovski is 150% more cost than the ones the poster was interested in

Where did you get your information about VX6 versus VX7 glass?

From Leupold. I called and asked because I was on the fence between the VX-6, with it's wide magnification range, and the VX-7 because it was supposed to have Leupold's best glass yet.

They said the VX-6 is not the same glass but is still very good glass. I'm sure you probably wouldn't tell much difference until magnification got high and light went to dark

I'd be interested for Mule Deer to post his testing results of the VX6 and VX7. I'd guess, and it would purely be a guess, that the VX6 and Conquest HD5 would be a neck and neck horserace based on what I've seen with mine.

Well I guess Leupold lied to me then when they told me the VX-6 was not the same glass and the glass for the VX-7 is Schott. the VX-7 was designed to compete with the high end euros. I would also think the VX-6 and Conquest will have similar clarity, light transmission, ect.. But I can not truely say on that one

I guess the question I'd want answered, how much better is the new Zeiss HD version than the older Conquest?

I have several Conquests and two VX-6's. I would put my VX-6 2-12 ahead of my Conquests. It gives my Z3 4-12x50 BT a serious run and pushes my Z5 3.5-18x44 BT pretty hard.

The new Zeiss HD would have to be pretty good to beat out the VX-6.

IMHO,

DF

Then Leupold didn't tell you it wasn't as good as the VX7, just that it's different, right? So in your opinion whatever it is can't be as good as schoot glass, right? Just trying to figure out where your coming from. If it's just your opinion, just say so and that's fine.

Dirt, I can say for absolute certainty my VX6 has better glass than my 3.5-10x44 Conquest.

ATTITUDE PROBLEM!! Leupold did tell me the VX-7 glass was higher quality. Don't know why your out to get me when I'm just trying to share information. You just decided to state that I'm wrong no matter where I got my information so I was just informing you where I got it.

Sorry, to the OP, I'll stop arguing with this guy now.

It's really no big deal. Sorry if I came across as attacking you. This place is a great source of info, but i get really tired of all the recommendations from the experts around here who've never seen what they recommend. It's amazing.

You two take a step back and chill!

Is the new Conquest HD reticle an etched glass reticle?

JG, please don't jump my schit, I've had a rough day.

Well,I was told something when my wife hosted a Leupold regional meeting that I'm not sure squares with what I've read here.

I was told that Leupold gets their glass from three major suppliers.one German,one Japanese,and one in Singapore.

Furthermore I was also told that they get every level of glass from all three suppliers. In other words they get VX1 glass from all three and VX6 or 7 from all three.

Therefore either my source from Leupold,at a Leupold meeting was wrong or not all VX7 glass came from Germany from Schott.

Not trying to stir anything up,but don't think Leupold intentionally mislead me about this topic.

That could be true. The guy I talked to might not have known everything he was talking about. He did make it a point to tell me the VX-7 was their best glass and that the VX-7 was supposed to compete with the higher end euros. The only scopes I got to compare the VX-7 with in various lighting conditions was a trijicon 3-9x40 and zeiss conquest 3-9x40. They were all very close to my eyes, but the Zeiss was a hair more clear than the trijicon and the VX-7 was so close to the zeiss it took a lot of looking at different things in low light to tell any difference if there was one. I wanna think the VX-7 was a hair brighter in low light, but not for sure.

I would probably handle the new conquest and VX-6 and make my choice by the reticle or if there was something that stood out that I didn't like about one or the other. I've been having a hard time finding VX-6 rifle scopes in the stores to look at though.
I like etched reticles way better than wire so that would be my deciding factor.

I don't have a clue where/what their glass sources are. All I know is, when I visited with Leupold's guys, they said the VX6 glass had a different prescription than the VX7 (whatever that means) but they felt it was just as good. I've never seen a VX7 so I can't say. As MD reminds us here, Schott has factories all over the world, including China. I also remember him saying the VX7 tested as bright and clear as any scope he has ever tested, including the euros. I don't remember if the VX6 was the same or very close in his test.

Yeah I get that. Example I can tell you how well a 375 H&H works on whitetail, but I don't know how well it works on bear.

I went back and looked up the optics tests via the Rifle Looney News.

RLN Volume 4, Issue 1 Leupold 2-12x42 VX-6 8
RLN Volume 3, Issue 2 2.5-10x45 Leupold VX-7 8

MD says in RLN (not trying to plagerize MD, just an FYI):

I�ve tested several dozen scopes over the years. So far all have rated between 5 (an uncoated Weaver from the 1950�s) to 8 (a few $1000+ scopes from Le- upold, Schmidt & Bender, Swarovski and Zeiss). Most modern multi-coated variables rate between 6 and 7. The test obviously doesn�t rate color rendition, and isn�t meant to, since individual humans see color differently. Instead it�s meant as an approximate gauge of optical sharpness and brightness.

The VX7s that I looked at were very close to my Ziess Victory scopes. I haven't looked through a VX6.

My post wasn't really directed at you,but I was told by somebody on the phone at Leupold(that I don't know)that VX6 scopes are optically as good as VX7 but are not exactly the same in terms of coatings etc.

I know that the next scope that I buy will probably be a VX6 because I really like the CDS system that I've been running on a VX3 for the last year. It makes hitting stuff easier for me.

It does for me too doc. I probably won't shoot at game way out there, but the VX6 CDS with it's 20moa of adj per turn lets me have a hellalotta fun out to 900 yards with a 7mag. On a calm day it's easily done. The duplex in the VX6 is perfecto IMO.

I'm pretty sure they are. Every zeiss from bottom to top I've looked through were etched and it says they have the same reticles as the old conquests (which were all etched). I just like the etched because it always stays dark black where as wire can have a rainbow effect of black to gold when light hits it from behind you.

Thanks-that's what I was looking for.

Depends which market you are in - in Australia they are only about $150-$200 (10%) apart.

I just spent some time speaking with Leupold's canadian distributor. This is exactly what he told me. Essentially word for word. They buy the glass and then re-grade it when it gets to their Oregon plant.

I was kicking this same thing around last fall.

Zeiss makes their glass. I emailed leupold about theirs and some guy replied that their glass came from europe and/or pacific rim.

Replied back to him to be more specific as to where certain models were sourced from but he would not.

Not knocking leupolds but this was a deal breaker for me.

Ended up with a hd5 5-25x50 with rapid z800. Went on top of a 6.5x284.

Really liked magnification and clarity, though upper range was no good at the very last minutes of shooting. Found for me the happy medium was about 18x.

Will also add my hunting buddy got a leupold vx3 ( forgot exact power) with the cds to go on a 6.5 creedmore. He really loved the accuracy of the cds, but not some much the glass.

So the cds may be a deciding factor for you also.

Hate to break it to you BigDave, but Zeiss doesn't "make it's own glass". They may coat their own glass, as does Leupold, but neither one "makes" it. Nobody does. The VX6 is fantastic stuff.

Bad? I don't know about "bad". But it seems when there is a thread specifically about customer service Swarovski comes up as much as any other company. My experience with my z5 fits right in there.

When I first sighted it in the windage didn't move. Once it did it moved too much. After that it was fine and moved the correct amount. The elevation became a problem once I started practicing with the BT. I finally realized it was not returning to zero. The last straw was when the little hawk came back and hit me in the face under recoil.

Before it ever went on a hunting trip it went back for service. They told me it had a broken spring in the erector. When it came back it was what the engineer had in mind. Since the repairs it has been trouble free.

Talk about how to ruin domeones day


So i googled it, some say Schott glass ( owned by ziess) or meopta.

Still got that warm and fuzzy feeling though...

From what I know, which is far from anywhere near everything, the only two optics manufacturers that grind, polish, AND coat their own glass are S&B and Meopta. That's one reason I'm becoming a huge Meopta fan.

The only thing Leupold does regarding glass is buy it from vendors ground, polished and coated to their specs. Nothing glass wise is done in-house, except for the R&D. S&B, from what I understand, bought the glass maker of their lenses so I guess that makes them a jack of all trades. Have to idea about Meopta.

Roger that on Leupold. I do have an idea on Meopta, as I heard it straight from the horses' mouth, being Reinhard Seipp, head cheese of Meopta USA. Met him at DSC last January. That's one reason why Meopta was the OEM for so many different premium labels, including Zeiss and Leica, and now Nightforce spotters.

My dealings with meopta have been very good. Have both scope and binos.

Wish they would come out with either factory turrets or a rapid z type reticles