USA made conquest 3-12x56 mc vs German made diavari 3-12x56 T. Which one would you pic and why. I still there that much difference in the two. Not a ziess guy but looking at one of these before next deer season Any opinions or help is appreciated

Zeiss says cleaning lenses with anything other than their lens cleaner voids the warranty. I wouldn't buy a Zeiss magnifying glass on sale.

The diavari; if I’m hanging a Hubble, it’s going to be the best Hubble they offer.

While the 30mm Conquest 3-12x56 is a very nice scope and can handle just about any hunting situation, the Diavari with T* coatings offers better resolution and performs better in low light -- assuming both are in similar condition with no damage to the lenses or coatings. Honestly, though, you can't go wrong with either assuming they have a reticle that suits you.

You may just want to ask Zeiss directly if they have ever asked anyone what they used to clean the lenses and then voided the warranty as a result of the answer LOL. I've sent in Zeiss scopes for warranty work and for reticle changes and have NEVER been asked that.

By the way, I just looked at one of my Zeiss manuals, and NOWHERE does it state what you claim. I'm not saying it may not be in another product's manual, but I don't recall reading that in any of mine and have used Zeiss for decades.

FROM ZEISS MANUAL:

Care and maintenance
Your riflescope has ZEISS LotuTec ® coating. The effective protective coating for the lens surfaces noticeably reduces contamination of the lenses through an especially smooth surface and the resulting water-beading effect. All types of contamination stick less and can be quickly and easily removed without smearing. LotuTec® coating is durable and abrasion-resistant.

Your ZEISS riflescope requires no special maintenance. Do not wipe coarse particles (e. g. sand) from the lenses. Blow them off, or use a soft brush! Over time, fingerprints can corrode the lens surface. Breathing on the lens and polishing with a clean optical cleansing cloth/tissue is the easiest method of cleaning the lens surface.
-------------


I also just looked at a pre-Lotutec manual. Again, there is no mention of what you claim.

I got that straight from actual first hand experience dealing with Zeiss. You wouldn't expect it would you? That's the reason I bothered to type it.

There is a difference, but if you can’t tell, buy the cheapest scope.

Also don’t pay any attention to the guy behind the curtain saying you must use Zeiss tissues to clean your lenses.

I’m a sucker for Diavari scopes. Never been much of a Conquest fan

Another vote for the Diavari. IMO the last Zeiss scopes worth their full price. Kinda wish they would bring them back.

Show where that is written

Got both, like both. If you want to smile every time you look through, buy the Diavari. I sent my Diavari out for a cleaning/wellness check and it went back to the old country. Despite that, turnaround was quick and customer service was stellar.

The conquest is a fine scope too.

You should also see if you can find a Conquest Dl as well , they are outstanding . I would take the Diavari in a NY second over most lowlight scopes today.

Ignore the lens tissue comments. SMH

On Tuesday, December 1, 2020, 02:28:29 PM EST, Benjamin Martin <[email protected]> wrote:


Good afternoon,

Thank you for your inquiry into our Conquest MC product line. The only photo that came along with your e-mail is the serial number photo. The issue you have described is not a manufacturing defect with the lens coating. Unfortunately we do not cover lenses that are damaged due to improper lens care. We do not recommend using dish soap to clean your optic.

The manual states the following in terms of lens cleaning and care:
Do not under any circumstances wipe off coarse dirt particles(e.g. sand) from the lenses, but blow them off or remove them using a soft brush. If not removed, finger marks can damage the lens surface. The proper way to clean the lens surfaces is with a quality lens spray cleaner or moist lens tissue and then wipe them with a clean optics cleaning cloth.

In the event that you would like to replace your scope we need to inform you that your scope has been discontinued and is no longer repairable due to parts and tooling availability. However, if you send your scope in to our service department we can offer you a good will sale on a NEW optic at a significantly discounted price. We will need your scope before we can make this offer.

We appreciate your continued patronage,

Your ZEISS Customer Care Team
ZEISS Consumer Products
COP Repair Service

1050 Worldwide Blvd
Hebron, KY 41048
USA

Phone: (800) 441-3005
[email protected]
Web: www.zeiss.com/us

≠

I just bought the Zeiss mini packs of lens cleaning and use these on all my scopes. I think they cost $15.00 for 200 packs.

-------------------------------

Hah! You just proved my point!

NEVER did they say the warranty was voided by using non-Zeiss products -- and NOWHERE do they state you must use Zeiss products for cleaning. You damaged the lenses or coatings via your own methods and now want to use Zeiss as a scapegoat because they wouldn't fix what you screwed up. There's no need to spread lies because you have misdirected anger at a company for not giving you something for free. Find the fault and direct the anger where it belongs: with yourself.

Never owned a Conquest, but my 30mm 1.5-6x42 Diavari VM/V is my all time favorite whitetail scope. The low light gathering of that scope looks like someone is standing behind you with a spotlight and that one is only a 42mm. The only thing that I wish it had is 1/4" equivalent adjustments instead of one cm .394" adjustments, but I'm a set it and forget it guy, so it works for me.

You said that not Zeiss

I realize the Conquest are the domestic models. However, they've never let me down. The only other European scopes I own are S&B PMII and Meopta.

Well..............................

If you're going to use dishwashing liquid on a coated lens, why not give it a few rubs with a scouring pad while you're at it. You know, really show it who's the boss.................................

Nonsense. They said that in email and said zeiss products on the phone. If you choose to remain willfully ignorant that is your burden. Most people would care more for their own honor than sycophancy for a brand name.

They didn't say it in the email that you posted

No, that's email from Zeiss and they said that about specific product when I called to clarify.

Thus us what they said in the email that you posted

"The proper way to clean the lens surfaces is with a quality lens spray cleaner or moist lens tissue and then wipe them with a clean optics cleaning cloth."

Indeed, which they clarified verbally as meaning their brand. I'm not seeing how this is confusing. More to the point, you'd have to ask Zeiss specifically with those details to find out. It's a fact which I have shown with more documentation than you could reasonably expect.

None of you have anything specific to refute it. I wouldn't know had I not asked. Ask yourself.

No where in the info from Zeiss that you posted does it say only zeiss lens cleaning products

Well, if it's not written, then it's not a warranty exclusion/inclusion. It's not exactly rocket science. And nowhere have you shown that Zeiss specified the use of Zeiss-only products in their e-mail to you or in their literature. The hole is getting deep, so maybe it's time for you to stop digging LOL. After all, everyone here except you have grasped -- and understood -- this.

With all the input, is there anybody here who hasn't figured how to properly clean lenses, and why not? Ya think it's rocket science?

I have a 10 year old Conquest 3.5 x10 on a 22 250. It was and is still better glass than the equivalent Leupold. I did not look through the better glass that Zeiss offers. Have stayed away from high end glass for fear That I will only buy it going forward.

Stick uses Ziess... That is all you need to know for now. Laffin

Were some of the Diavari models made in the late 1990s assembled in the USA?

Although I don't completely trust my memory these days, I seem to recall owning a 3-9 model that had a noticeably short eye relief.

I have half dozen conquests with top end magnification 10-15X. Have had them for five or more years. Great scopes.

I've compared the D with the Victory.
I know you didn't ask, so I won't share details other than the following or you might be tempted to spend too much $.

I haven't compared to every top tier scope brand by any means. I will say this, you know that it is top tier by way of clarity, crispness and light gathering.
If you want an early to late hunting experience without going with a night vision, I'd think you would be a happy camper with a Zeiss set up in that range.

3-12 Will cover anything you can hunt in any part of the world.
56 is the biggest bell that lets in the most light.
Some say it's overkill and bigger than necessary. I say, maybe but who cares. At the cost of an extra ounce of weight, I'd go for it if I had the money and interested in a big tube to boot. Don't worry about lighted reticles or the fluoride lens unless its really important to you.

Light gathering LOL

I answered your query honestly, with pertinent facts. You want to play childish fanboy games. Next you'll ask for me to tap their phones or drag a Zeiss rep to your house and have them sign an affidavit. The fact is you are ignorant on this topic because you lack the direct experience to speak to it.

You appear comfortable in your little kool aid soaked world of self delusion. I will leave you to it and your scopes from a company which, when convenient, claims their coatings do not have integrity equal to a cheap pair of eyeglasses.

In case this wasn't obvious, the issue isn't cleaning methods. It's Zeiss will try to find a way out of their responsibility and so are not worth the cost for users who rely on warranties. If you are stretching your budget beyond what you can afford without missing it, Zeiss is a poor bet.

I've used Dawn on every lens I've ever had. No problem. It wasn't the problem with that Zeiss scope either. They just seized on that point to avoid covering a manufacturing defect.

I just remembered I have a pair of Zeiss lenses in eyeglasses that are several years old. Still good.

A Conquest 3-12x56MC weighs 25.8oz; my Diavari Victory 2.5-10x42 weighs 15.5oz. BIG difference; and I can see as late as I need to. Spectacular scope

Those 2.5-10x42 should be a standard offering from Zeiss. Yes they are spectacular scopes.

My Victory HT 2.5-10x50 weighed around 18 ounces.

urbaneruralite-

I've used just about every scope line Zeiss has offered . Before my health failed, they got treated rather roughly hunting in south central TX terrain. Never, ever has a coatings issue arisen, but then again, I clean optical glass the way it is meant to be cleaned. And I clean them OFTEN as I seem to be a bit obsessive when it comes to having lenses in pristine condition and free of any dirt, dust, etc.

I've gone through dozens upon dozens of scopes over the years. You can ask anyone who has ever bought one of my used scopes -- especially those of the Zeiss brand -- as to the condition of the lenses and whether coatings were compromised in any form or fashion.

UrbanRurallightinthe loafers


Typical liberal. Makes a mountain out of a molehill. Take up badminton, your party abhors hunting.

Assuming you actually have had "dozens upon dozens" of a product with nary a defect, and somehow had the time to use each of them more than a little, your experience still does not relate. The only way you'd know if Dawn compromised Zeiss coatings is if you'd used it and had a problem. If you have not, then you're trying to make a false correlation between cleaning methods and coating integrity.

"FALSE correlations"??? Are you kidding me? You are the only one here making false claims -- things you cannot substantiate at all. And yea, while I do not recommend it, I have used Dawn on a scope a few years ago. A member here advertised a Zeiss 2.5-10 in "as new" condition. When it arrived, I saw the most pitiful thing one could imagine. The lenses were so gunked over that I could not loosen the dirt and grime from that "as new" scope via my normal methods. So I ran it under warm water and made some progress and then used dish soap along with the warm water. It finally worked -- and I kept and that scope for several years without the slightest of hiccups.Despite all that grime, the lenses beneath it were actually pristine. But I just can't imagine someone having a nice scope in THAT sort of condition.

I know people that have used acetone to clean lenses. That is not something I would do but it did not harm the lense , I always run binos under tap water first and then clean them with alcohol .

So Dawn works fine for cleaning Zeiss? Go fig'.

This is an amazing thread--well, not actually, since it's on the optics forum.

Aside from the other essential BS, nobody has so far identified exactly which "Conquest" models are being compared. Conquests been made/assembled in several places around the world, with parts (including lenses) made in at least three countries.

OP said Zeiss Conquest 3-12x56 MC which would have been released in the early 2000's.

I read what you posted...there is something wrong with your comprehension.

Got a couple Conquest 3x9 a couple years ago ..wife's is om a 30/06,,,,, mine on a Model70 .300Win mag..Been to Africa twice with 0 problems plenty clear & adjust easy ..Love "em..

We chased that one in enough circles 'til it went to ground already.

Diavari were top of the line scopes with 30mm tube, best glass and coatings. Cost much more than Conquest which was a "budget" line for Zeiss. I have a couple of Diavari scopes, and they are great.