Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold MK4 or Zeiss Conquest.

Assuming they are the same price should I go with a 6.5-20x50 MK4 with TMR retical or Zeiss conquest 6-20x50 with mildot or maybe z-plex. This will most likely go a a 260 or 6.5-06AI. I have a MK4 and numerous Leupolds (all VX3s and 30mm tubes) but I have never looked thru a zeiss. Need some help guys..Thanks, Trent

I had a MK4 4.5-14x50 mil dot scope, and was very happy with it.
I think the Zeiss is only a 1" tube and not 30mm so your ability to get out to a 1000 yards will be limited unless you used a 20 moa scope base. I was assuming you going long range by the caliber you listed. I heard the optics of the Zeiss is really good, but the tube size would stop me.

Steve

Unless you're just punching paper, do yourself a favor and skip both of these in favor of a first-focal plane scope.

I have a Zeiss conquest 6.5-20x50 with target turrets on a 338 edge. I am very pleased with it. Tracks excellent and the optics are outstanding.

Had a buddy get a Zeiss and I got a Leupold. Both 3.5-10 only difference is his has a 50mm obj. lens. I have been working up loads with both rifles and shooting mine and then his right after. Every time I notice how much clearer his Zeiss is than mine. I can't see the bullet holes with mine at 100 and his Zeiss they show up almost as good as my 6.5-20 Leupold. My next hunting scope is gonna be a Zeiss.

Why? I see not practical use for FFP unless your engaging multible targets at different distances at one time and using the Mils to range them.

I can see a focusing sermon coming shortly

That's what I was wondering. With 10X, any bullet hole should be easily seen at 100 yds. Just what sort of focusing procedure did he use ? E

Not even gonna take the bait on this one. The Zeiss is better plain and simple (to my eyes). The Leupold is bright and clear compared to just about any other standard hunting scope. The Zeiss is an honest step up from the Leupold.

Let's pretend Zeiss wasn't even mentioned. No bait, but a stand alone question:

How aren't you seeing bullet holes with a 10x Leupold?

i run a MK4 3.5-10 on one of my .223 AIs. love it. the TMR reticle is my favorite reticle of all time. the tiny gap at the intersection of the cross hairs is really nice IMO.

and, yes, it will spot .223 bullet holes @ 100...

3.5-10x M1 LR Duplex.

LRF.............

Dang! When did Kreskin join the campfire? That was a good call. How could you know? (grin)

Cardboard box with lettering on it. Totally okie but I was in a hurry, going right by the range and needed trigger time. Happy Mom?

The Leupold has twice the elevation adjustment that the Zeiss has (the two you are comparing). If you plan on spinning turrets at longer range, that will be something to consider.

My three new VX3's are as clear and bright at 400 as my Conquest's. MY eyes...

Nice.

I asked an honest question because I have no trouble seeing bullet holes at 100 with a single coated 6x Leupold, so I was wondering why 10x wasn't cutting it.

I was not arguing whether or not you see better with another scope.

m

That would depend on which Leupold. E

mathman,

I was going to ask the same question, but you beat me to it. I have a number of older single-coated 6x Leupolds and have no problem spotting bullet holes with them in any sort of half-decent light. My 10x and 6.5-20x Mark 4's just make it easier.

Conquests are excellent scopes but they aren't magic. Of the two scopes mentioned in the original post, I would go with the Mark 4 for the purpose stated, as the optics are very good and the adjustment range is much larger than the Conquest's.