+1 dtspoke.
The conquests provided a terrific cost/benefit point even if they were $100 more than what they were selling at. A 1"-American-flavored-baby-Zeiss. The ounce or two extra and larger eyepiece were noticed but minor compared to jumping up to 30mm Diavari.
The Terra's getting panned as a step backwards. The HD5, even if as good as the conquest, is larger, heavier, and not offered in any fixed, nor any variable choices I'm even interested in. I read the ad copy as to what was improved upon, and shrug. (A smaller eyepiece, #4 reticles in fixed powers, a 6x offering, shave an ounce... those would be constructive improvements.) But anyway I can have an "improved" HD5... for double the price of the old conquest. Don't see me reaching for my wallet, do you?
Not sure who's waving goodbye to who, but this relationship has turned sour.
(Aside: Had to hunt for a 2.5-10x42 Victory when you canceled that venerable scope, too. Sheesh.)
And while I appreciate MJensen's participation and candor, this little bit is just embarassing:
The Terra was never intended to be a Conquest, it was built for an entirely different reason, a bread and butter, no frills, good quality scope to support the shooter that needed to be supported with a top brand at this price level.
So, we couldn't afford to sell the conquest at it's price point, nor see fit to re-label it and simply raise the price accordingly. But we
can build a mediocre scope at that price point and plan for people's vanity will draw them to pick the Zeiss-labeled mediocre scope over the comparable xyz-labeled mediocre competition? It's genius! (sarcasm) Gag.
