Side-by-side comparison of Leup. and Zeiss

N

NativeCraft

New member
FWIW...
A couple of days ago I stopped by my local gunshop at dusk and was able to compare side-by-side my Leup. VX-3 2.5-10x40 w/AO to a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40.
Looking into dark shadows along a treeline, I am convinced that the Zeiss provided a clearer picture and showed details that the Leup. didn't. Not dramatically, though, not at all. Neither had a poor picture...but the Zeiss picture, in photography lingo, just "popped".
My rifle will be wearing a Zeiss Conquest next year.
 
Native,

I can't agree with you more.
I spend the last 10 months upgraded all my Leupold to Zeiss. I used to have 13 Leupold, now I only own 4.
One of the good things about the Leupold is, the hold their value well, I was able to get back 80~90% when I sold them. You just can't argue about the quality of European optic, they certainly are a cut above.

Buzz
 
Just can't get used to the crosshair in a zeiss, to big and bold especially for varmint hunting. I have been told you can special order a fine duplex in zeiss but haven't seen one. Leupolds reticle offerings are much better than the zeiss I've looked at.

I myself didn't see much difference in clarity or low light definition between the two. This was after insisting on taking the two out the front door of the store so I could actually make a fair comparison.

What reticle are you guys using?

Anyone had any experience with zeiss warranty service?
 
I lived and hunted in Germany for 6 years. Zeiss is a better scope than Leupold, but not by much and at a much higher cost than Leupold. German scopes are very high quality because of their hunting requirements. They hunt wild pigs and fox at night and need quality scopes to see in the middle of the night. While living there I ordered many VARX III's for my German hunting friends. They couln't believe the quality, performance and price. The Zeiss cost more than 3 times what I was buying the Leupolds for. In 2005, I went back to Germany and carried 4 Looey's, illuminated 3.5x10x50mm 30mm tubes. Two were for friends, one to trade for a hunting dog that I was bringing back, and the third I sold on Ebay there to help pay for my trip. If you have deep pockets buy Zeiss, but a Leupold VAR3's will meet hunting needs of North America.
 
The Zeiss Conquest is an outsatnding scope, especially when you consider the price ($399 for a 3-9x40. As good as Leupold's are, they are not quite as bright and clear as the Zeiss, and the Zeiss cost's less than a VX3.
 
Meopta claim they are better, but they are NOT and they are not any cheaper, but it's not just about the money, if they were better scope, I would've kept it.
I evaluated one from Midway when they had them on sale last spring, the problem I found with the Meopta is the tracking control is not very precise, in my testing, I click the windage adjustment 20 clicks to the left, then return it to the original setting (20 click to the right), I did that 4 time the POI is shifted by as much as 1/2", I didn’t even bother to test elevation after that, plus the parallax adjustment is no where near it should be, the gasket/seals under the caps are also questionable. But I would say their glass is superb, crystal clear edge to edge, Meopta claim they are better, I see no noticeable difference from the Zeiss, not with my eyes.
When judging a scope, I’m very, very , very, picky and it's not just the glass, I wish it was that easy, I look at the overall package. In my opinion I don't see Meopta being par, they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.... No cigar from me for this baby.
 
Quote:

What reticle are you guys using?
Anyone had any experience with zeiss warranty service?



I have both #20 and #8 reticle in the Zeiss, I like the #8 for lowlight and night, #20 for long range PD or target shooting.
The reason I kept the 4.5-14x50mm Leupold is because it had the heavy crosshair /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif.
 
i did the same test with my meopta and it preformed perfect.guess there is good and bad with them.did yours have the 1 inch tube are the 30mm.mine has the 30mm and it out shined the Zeiss Conquest hands down in low light conditions.the zeiss is better than the leupold.my nightforce puts them all to shame.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
i did the same test with my meopta and it preformed perfect.guess there is good and bad with them.did yours have the 1 inch tube are the 30mm.mine has the 30mm



I'm not aware of Meopta made a 1" tube, have you seen one?
 
Quote:
The Zeiss Conquest is an outsatnding scope, especially when you consider the price ($399 for a 3-9x40. As good as Leupold's are, they are not quite as bright and clear as the Zeiss, and the Zeiss cost's less than a VX3.



Just read an extensive high tech test on riflescopes in a past issue of one of the big outdoor magazines.

Leupold beat Zeiss. In fact Zeiss came in third place, Leupold was Second. First place winner surprised me, the Weaver Grand Slam /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif

The Burris Signature scopes were at the bottom of the pile and tied for second to last.
 
I have used and tested them all. A Weaver Grand Slam is not even it the same ball park as a Leupold or Zeiss. Whom ever tested that one must have got paid! How were they tested? I can agree on the Burris out come.

In testing scopes I have a box that can hold up to 6 scopes at one time. This is the best way to see how they perform as the picking up one rifle and then another and another can cause brain fade. Shift from one scope to another in seconds and back/forth is easy. What I do is eliminate them one by one. You can see the same object in a fair test.

Next, check resolution. This is done with a chart similar to the one you look at for an eye exam. Set it up at 100 yds and see how far down the line it goes. You need some different ones so you can't cheat from memory. After that, do the same in low light until one wins or you can't see. This gives you low light capability. Another is return to zero. Zero the rifle. Then turn the windage and elevation knobs as far as they will go one way and then as far as they will go the other. Then, return it to zero and fire a shot. Repeat this for 5 shots and check the group agains the first one. Most scopes will pass this test.

The last test is the biggie! Very few scopes can pass this at all. It is called a square test. Friction dials on most scopes will not even be close along with most click versions. Target models are in the same boat as about 4 models total can pass this one. What you are doing here is checking the repeatable tracking of the click adjustments.

Schmidt & Bender has the best glass. Leupolds are generally within 95% of a Schmidt for about 1/2 the price. Night Force is about the same as a Schmidt in price. Schmidt won the US Marine Corp test to replace the Unertle. This was a highly sought after contract. All the others did not make it.
 
Quote:
First place winner surprised me, the Weaver Grand Slam /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif



Gimme a break! I may have believed portions of that article up until they claimed that.
 
there are many scopes in use with the military units,...leupold, Nightfroce, S&B, USO, and even a Tasco model (now made by SWFA). The NXS is still the best IMHO,..they use the dual flat ground springs like S&B, and therefore have one of the worlds best adjustment systems for integrity.

The S&B is not enough better than the NXS to justify the price increase. A TACTICAL S&B is closing on $2900 as opposed to $1500 for the NXS.

I have seen Leupy dissapear from my safe as I have found better optics over the years. That test is obviously set up to be skewed, because the Burris Signature beats the crap out of every VXIII I have ever owned,..Hence the reason I switched over.

The Grand Slam when I have taken them outside the store and compared them side by side with leupold, Sightron, and zeiss conquest was one of the best of the bunch. I was able to pick up more mirage, and focus to (for me) a clearer/sharper image. The Micro Trac adjustment system in IMHO better than anything leupold has until you get to their tactical scopes.

YMMV
 
In the test the leupold had by far the best resolution of any scope tested.

The Burris Signature tied for second to last with the Tasco.

I myself don't like the Burris and will not mount one on any rifle I use. The Burris doesn't come close to beating the Leupold in any category accept weight. A comparison might be made for the lowend Leupold rifleman scopes against the Burris, but thats about as close as Burris would would come to a Leupold.

I have never even held one of the newer Weaver scopes so I can't comment on them.
 
maybe in the areas where other members hunt the air density and humidity make a difference, but here on the lowland with high humidity,..the Burris Signature has been clearer and MUCH better at low light than the leupys. 2 of us set them side by side and both agreed we were switching. I have never looked back. yes they are heavier,..but not enough for us to care. I carried a Burris on a Sendero for 5 days in WY,..so weight isn't the deal breaker for me,...but then again I also have been know to carry a rifle with a #8 tube and an NXS on top of it(grin)

also, the adjustment integrity of the Burris is better (from our shooting). They aren't as prone to "backlash" as the leupolds are. Again YMMV,....but my first signature on my sendero has NEVER wandered zero in the 9yrs it has been there. I shoot 2 rnds before each season, for 1 little hole right above the bull,...just the way I left it. I have a lot of confidence in my Signatures,..they are always light enough to pull that late shot, and always hold zero.

I have one leupy vari-x II left and one LR 8.5-25x50 (that is because I sold the gun for a guy and only had to pay him $350 for the scope) laughing all the way to the bank. One day, that scope will be sold to be replaced at the request of the NXS GODS hehehehe

Leupold IMHO has become only a contestant in the game,.where they used to be more of a champion. Sadly for them,..the other companies have listened to customers and improved upon things such as lense coatings and adjustment integrity as well as specified reticles which with the exception of the $1000+ rigs, used to be a rarity.

Also,..try the newer IOR stuff,...beats Leupy and Zeiss hands down (zeiss coatings on better quality glass) and adjustment integrity that far exceeds either of them.

You learn after a while what a real "click" should feel like, then everything else just seems cheap!!
 
The little test that surprised me the most was performed right in our local sporting goods store. I went outside at in cloudy conditions, with poor light. I looked through both a Leupold VXIII and a high end Sightron. A large coin that nearly closed the bell end of the scope was placed in each. I could see clearly through the Leupold, even though it was 95% blocked with the coin. The Sightron could not be looked through to make a shot. When I thought about snow blocking my scope, or anything that might block the view, the Leupold won hands down. I have no data for the Zeiss in this kind of test, but I would sure check it before I proclaimed it better than a Leupold. It might not matter much on a coyote, but in the brush after whitetails, or in the timber after elk, things happen too fast to be clearing my scope of snow etc. Just another way to look at things.
 
I don't think that resolution is a good way to judge the quality of a scope. Most lense's, as I understand it, are made by a small number of companies. Nikon doesn't even make their own camera lenses anymore! What changes is the coatings and would be awful hard to detect a positive difference by looking thru most of them given each was properly focused.

I think a better judge of quality in a scope would be the accuracy of the adjustment's, their repeatability, the "O" rings seal's ect. The finest optics in the world would be rendered junk on a bad scope.

I recently tried a Bushnell 3-12 scope and found that after centering the crosshairs then elevating to shoot at 400 yds just one time, I could no longer shoot consistent group's. Perhaps just one bad scope that got thru, perhaps a badly engenieered scope! Now I have a Nikon 4.5-14 on that rifle and the problem went away. I can notice no difference in resolution between either. Which is to say that the quality of lense's today is far better than the ability of the human eye to detect the difference. Any advantage in one scope over another is in the mechanic's, not the glass!
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top