Sightron SIII or Leupold VX3 or Zeiss Conquest
- Thread starter rookie7
- Start date
smith1559
New member
I have a few 6.5-20 ziess but only a 4.5-14 Leupold. Haven't looked through a sightron. But between the luepold and ziess I say the ziess has a little edge on glass but if you are just doing target and bench the luepold I believe has more internall adjustment. But I like the more positive turret moves on the ziess. Of the 2 I have used (for bench and target) I would probley go with the luepold for more adjustment. That's assuming you get the LR with the 30mm tube..
Jason
Jason
Furhunter
New member
Ive owned the Zeiss and the VX3 and I just shot the SIII the last two days.
Of those the glass in the Leupold and the Zeiss is nice, probably a toss up really. The SIII glass is real nice up till about 20x then it starts to get fuzzy. I also noticed a bit of eye fatigue today from the SIII which I didnt care for. The side focus on the SIII was also hard to use, very tight.
Turrets,
The leupold and SIII turrets have a good feel to them. I like the SIII just a bit more but I know the Leupold turrets are quality and known good. The Zeiss turrets are soft and the turret marks are a ways away from the corresponding hash mark on the scope tube which makes it a bit funny to use. I never had problems with my conquest returning to zero.
Of those I would have to go with the VX3. The glass and turret combo is just a touch better all around.
Of those the glass in the Leupold and the Zeiss is nice, probably a toss up really. The SIII glass is real nice up till about 20x then it starts to get fuzzy. I also noticed a bit of eye fatigue today from the SIII which I didnt care for. The side focus on the SIII was also hard to use, very tight.
Turrets,
The leupold and SIII turrets have a good feel to them. I like the SIII just a bit more but I know the Leupold turrets are quality and known good. The Zeiss turrets are soft and the turret marks are a ways away from the corresponding hash mark on the scope tube which makes it a bit funny to use. I never had problems with my conquest returning to zero.
Of those I would have to go with the VX3. The glass and turret combo is just a touch better all around.
Based on Furhunter's assessment of the SIII I am going to eliminate it from the running. I have an SII Big Sky 4.5-14 and love it. However, the idea is to have the best GLASS possible within that price range with no eye fatigue.
If this helps, the rifle is a 700 .223 tac with 20" barrel sitting in a B&C varmint stock, and timney trigger. I have 30mm TPS steel rings on it right now, so if I go with the Zeiss I would have to get inserts. I have other 1" rings, but I really like the TPS rings. 0 moa base is on it as well.
Most of the time, my shooting will be 200 yds or less. Sometimes I will be able to stretch it out to 500. Anything past that I need a different caliber, and I have a .243win.
I like the 30mm tube on the Leupold, but I want the best glass possible at all powers. If it is the VX-3, then that is what I will get. All in all the 2 scopes are going to be within $30 of each other with inserts and shipping. The Leupold will be $30 more b/c I have found great deals on both.
Looking to get a duplex reticle in both. 99.9% of my shooting is at known distances, so I really don't need a ranging reticle. Plus, (and a whole different discussion) I have read multiple times that actually using a reticle to range an object is a perishable skill that has to be practiced frequently. I don't have that time.
The turrets on the Zeiss turning opposite from the American scopes don't bother me at all.
I have a conquest 3-9x40 and a VX-3 1.5-5. They aren't an exact comparison, so that is why I am asking for evaluations from those of you who actually own both or have at least spent time behind both at the range.
If I do get to go prairie dog hunting this summer this rifle will be my primary one.
Thanks
If this helps, the rifle is a 700 .223 tac with 20" barrel sitting in a B&C varmint stock, and timney trigger. I have 30mm TPS steel rings on it right now, so if I go with the Zeiss I would have to get inserts. I have other 1" rings, but I really like the TPS rings. 0 moa base is on it as well.
Most of the time, my shooting will be 200 yds or less. Sometimes I will be able to stretch it out to 500. Anything past that I need a different caliber, and I have a .243win.
I like the 30mm tube on the Leupold, but I want the best glass possible at all powers. If it is the VX-3, then that is what I will get. All in all the 2 scopes are going to be within $30 of each other with inserts and shipping. The Leupold will be $30 more b/c I have found great deals on both.
Looking to get a duplex reticle in both. 99.9% of my shooting is at known distances, so I really don't need a ranging reticle. Plus, (and a whole different discussion) I have read multiple times that actually using a reticle to range an object is a perishable skill that has to be practiced frequently. I don't have that time.
The turrets on the Zeiss turning opposite from the American scopes don't bother me at all.
I have a conquest 3-9x40 and a VX-3 1.5-5. They aren't an exact comparison, so that is why I am asking for evaluations from those of you who actually own both or have at least spent time behind both at the range.
If I do get to go prairie dog hunting this summer this rifle will be my primary one.
Thanks
Last edited:
nightcaller
Active member
I've had both the leupold and the ziess. I now have two zeiss and no leupold. for my eyes the zeiss is significantly better. however, if you want to use a fine crosshair the leupold has a better selection of crosshairs. I think my zeiss duplex works well to over 500 yds on p-dogs so I'm fine with it. I'd run to a store and look through both to see how your eyes like them. for me the turning point was looking at gravel. the leup looked like a picture where the zeiss had some depth. tube size shouldn't be an issue if you're only going to 500.
millerjq
Member
Originally Posted By: FurhunterIve owned the Zeiss and the VX3 and I just shot the SIII the last two days.
Of those the glass in the Leupold and the Zeiss is nice, probably a toss up really. The SIII glass is real nice up till about 20x then it starts to get fuzzy. I also noticed a bit of eye fatigue today from the SIII which I didnt care for. The side focus on the SIII was also hard to use, very tight.
Turrets,
The leupold and SIII turrets have a good feel to them. I like the SIII just a bit more but I know the Leupold turrets are quality and known good. The Zeiss turrets are soft and the turret marks are a ways away from the corresponding hash mark on the scope tube which makes it a bit funny to use. I never had problems with my conquest returning to zero.
Of those I would have to go with the VX3. The glass and turret combo is just a touch better all around.
Furhunter always has good advice on optics, and is 100% correct on the SIII. I recently bought an SIII because it was an awesome deal, and good gosh it is the tightest focus adjustment I've ever felt. I thought I was going to break something... Besides that, it has been great so far. But if I have the cash to drop on any one of those, I would go with the VX-3 as well.
Of those the glass in the Leupold and the Zeiss is nice, probably a toss up really. The SIII glass is real nice up till about 20x then it starts to get fuzzy. I also noticed a bit of eye fatigue today from the SIII which I didnt care for. The side focus on the SIII was also hard to use, very tight.
Turrets,
The leupold and SIII turrets have a good feel to them. I like the SIII just a bit more but I know the Leupold turrets are quality and known good. The Zeiss turrets are soft and the turret marks are a ways away from the corresponding hash mark on the scope tube which makes it a bit funny to use. I never had problems with my conquest returning to zero.
Of those I would have to go with the VX3. The glass and turret combo is just a touch better all around.
Furhunter always has good advice on optics, and is 100% correct on the SIII. I recently bought an SIII because it was an awesome deal, and good gosh it is the tightest focus adjustment I've ever felt. I thought I was going to break something... Besides that, it has been great so far. But if I have the cash to drop on any one of those, I would go with the VX-3 as well.
2muchgun
New member
The new VX3s are better than any Conquest, in every way, IMO. MOF, I truly think the new VX2s are also better. Compared them side by side, more than once.
I just bought(and sold) yet another Conquest. Good riddance. The higher power you go, the worse they get. Tunnel vision, crappy turrets, too heavy.
The lower powered models are pretty decent, and not bad for the money. Nice glass. Even the 3-9x40s are too heavy though, IMO. Turrets suck and Leupolds are FAR better.
Zeiss makes some truly great scopes. But they don't say Conquest or Terra on them. I truly think Conquests are one of the more over-rated scopes by the "internet experts". They ain't all that IMO. But I've only owned a few hundred scopes in which to compare.......
I just bought(and sold) yet another Conquest. Good riddance. The higher power you go, the worse they get. Tunnel vision, crappy turrets, too heavy.
The lower powered models are pretty decent, and not bad for the money. Nice glass. Even the 3-9x40s are too heavy though, IMO. Turrets suck and Leupolds are FAR better.
Zeiss makes some truly great scopes. But they don't say Conquest or Terra on them. I truly think Conquests are one of the more over-rated scopes by the "internet experts". They ain't all that IMO. But I've only owned a few hundred scopes in which to compare.......
nightcaller
Active member
Huh, I guess some eyes see differently than others. I never thought there was much question on glass comparison between the vx3 and conquest but apparently someone sees better through the vx3. As far as turrets go...they're both lacking in comparison to "quality" turrets. Second rate is second rate and I've never had a real problem with either functioning as they should. As far as weight; I believe there is around 6oz difference. I heard a quote once: interesting to hear people complain about ozs when they're 50lbs overweight. Just saying most people will not notice a difference in a couple of ozs.
After owning a few vx iiis & vx3s and a few conquests I'll never own another vx3. (All of them were 20x+ on the top end)
After owning a few vx iiis & vx3s and a few conquests I'll never own another vx3. (All of them were 20x+ on the top end)
TripleDeuce660
Active member
Can't stand no locking ring on the ocular focus. The means u can throw the conquest in the trash IMHO. I like my vx3 but I also liked my sightron big sky 3-12.
Rustydust
Active member
Originally Posted By: nightcallerHuh, I guess some eyes see differently than others. I never thought there was much question on glass comparison between the vx3 and conquest but apparently someone sees better through the vx3.
After owning a few vx iiis & vx3s and a few conquests I'll never own another vx3. (All of them were 20x+ on the top end)
I am with you on this one. Even though I own several Leupold scopes of different ages and magnifications (along with one Vari-X III and two VX-III 6.5-20X models) to me they simply cannot hold a candle to my one and only Zeiss Conquest of that same power configuration. Obviously I do enjoy the Leupolds but I paid far less for them than what a new Conquest cost these days. The Vari-X I have had for 20 years and sent it back to Leupold quite a few years ago to have a Varmint Hunter reticle installed on it. I sure do like it but as much as my Conquest? Nope.
When I first got the Conquest I let my shooting buddies all take turns looking though it at our local range. Went back and forth from my Leupold, another guy's Leupold (same power) and my Zeiss and there was no question- the Zeiss was the (no pun intended) clear winner.
A few years ago two of us where in Wyoming hunting prairie dogs northeast of Kemmerer. I saw something in the distance that I could not quite make out as being prairie dogs with my AR-15 varminter that had one the newer VX-III's mounted on it. I sat that gun back in the case and picked up my .223 AI which had the Conquest mounted on it. No, I couldn't count the whiskers or tell if there were boys or girls but now I could see that they were indeed prairie dogs. I got four of them between 670 and 705 yards in a matter of minutes.
Would I sell all my Leupolds and replace them with Conquest scopes? Nope. But would I swap them even-steven if someone asked? You better believe it.
After owning a few vx iiis & vx3s and a few conquests I'll never own another vx3. (All of them were 20x+ on the top end)
I am with you on this one. Even though I own several Leupold scopes of different ages and magnifications (along with one Vari-X III and two VX-III 6.5-20X models) to me they simply cannot hold a candle to my one and only Zeiss Conquest of that same power configuration. Obviously I do enjoy the Leupolds but I paid far less for them than what a new Conquest cost these days. The Vari-X I have had for 20 years and sent it back to Leupold quite a few years ago to have a Varmint Hunter reticle installed on it. I sure do like it but as much as my Conquest? Nope.
When I first got the Conquest I let my shooting buddies all take turns looking though it at our local range. Went back and forth from my Leupold, another guy's Leupold (same power) and my Zeiss and there was no question- the Zeiss was the (no pun intended) clear winner.
A few years ago two of us where in Wyoming hunting prairie dogs northeast of Kemmerer. I saw something in the distance that I could not quite make out as being prairie dogs with my AR-15 varminter that had one the newer VX-III's mounted on it. I sat that gun back in the case and picked up my .223 AI which had the Conquest mounted on it. No, I couldn't count the whiskers or tell if there were boys or girls but now I could see that they were indeed prairie dogs. I got four of them between 670 and 705 yards in a matter of minutes.
Would I sell all my Leupolds and replace them with Conquest scopes? Nope. But would I swap them even-steven if someone asked? You better believe it.
Rustydust
Active member
Originally Posted By: pahntr760You guys keep comparing the Conquest to a VX-III...not the VX-3. There is a HUGE difference in the VX-III and VX-3.
Your definition of "HUGE" is quite a bit different than mine I believe. While I have not personally owned any of the VX-3 models and most likely will not, those that I have looked through looked no better to me than the VX-III models. And apparently I am not the only one that thinks that. Here is a link that I copied from "Optics Talk" about them:
http://www.opticstalk.com/leupold-vx3-vx-vx-iii_topic18568.html
Your definition of "HUGE" is quite a bit different than mine I believe. While I have not personally owned any of the VX-3 models and most likely will not, those that I have looked through looked no better to me than the VX-III models. And apparently I am not the only one that thinks that. Here is a link that I copied from "Optics Talk" about them:
http://www.opticstalk.com/leupold-vx3-vx-vx-iii_topic18568.html
Furhunter
New member
Originally Posted By: pahntr760Well, you read it on the interwebs it must be true...right?
Having used Vari-X, VX-III and VX-3 side by side, same day...there is a difference. Better lense technology, better coatings, and better image resolution. Naturally, this is just my opinion...
It's not just yours.
Having used Vari-X, VX-III and VX-3 side by side, same day...there is a difference. Better lense technology, better coatings, and better image resolution. Naturally, this is just my opinion...
It's not just yours.
Rustydust
Active member
Originally Posted By: pahntr760Well, you read it on the interwebs it must be true...right?
Well, just the opinions of those that perhaps have a keener eye than I do. That's pretty dang good enough for me.
And just for the record, I think that Nightforce 5.5-22x50mm scopes are great too. But when you consider that you can almost buy three Sightron SIII 6-24X50 scopes for the price of one Nightforce and that very few people can tell the difference optically it starts to get a bit silly to spend money on something that you cannot really make use of.
And two of my 6.5-20X Luppys I bought after buying my one and only Conquest, so obviously I do like them. I just like the Conquest better. And after all, I am trying to please no one but me.
Well, just the opinions of those that perhaps have a keener eye than I do. That's pretty dang good enough for me.
And just for the record, I think that Nightforce 5.5-22x50mm scopes are great too. But when you consider that you can almost buy three Sightron SIII 6-24X50 scopes for the price of one Nightforce and that very few people can tell the difference optically it starts to get a bit silly to spend money on something that you cannot really make use of.
And two of my 6.5-20X Luppys I bought after buying my one and only Conquest, so obviously I do like them. I just like the Conquest better. And after all, I am trying to please no one but me.
Furhunter
New member
Originally Posted By: RustydustOriginally Posted By: pahntr760Well, you read it on the interwebs it must be true...right?
Well, just the opinions of those that perhaps have a keener eye than I do. That's pretty dang good enough for me.
And just for the record, I think that Nightforce 5.5-22x50mm scopes are great too. But when you consider that you can almost buy three Sightron SIII 6-24X50 scopes for the price of one Nightforce and that very few people can tell the difference optically it starts to get a bit silly to spend money on something that you cannot really make use of.
And two of my 6.5-20X Luppys I bought after buying my one and only Conquest, so obviously I do like them. I just like the Conquest better. And after all, I am trying to please no one but me.
But yet somehow the opinions from some here that may have a keener eye than you don't count? Is it just that site that bears members with keen sight?
Just for the record, I think the Nightforce BR series scopes have better glass in them than the NXS scopes do. I say that having owned both and shot both for years.
Well, just the opinions of those that perhaps have a keener eye than I do. That's pretty dang good enough for me.
And just for the record, I think that Nightforce 5.5-22x50mm scopes are great too. But when you consider that you can almost buy three Sightron SIII 6-24X50 scopes for the price of one Nightforce and that very few people can tell the difference optically it starts to get a bit silly to spend money on something that you cannot really make use of.
And two of my 6.5-20X Luppys I bought after buying my one and only Conquest, so obviously I do like them. I just like the Conquest better. And after all, I am trying to please no one but me.
But yet somehow the opinions from some here that may have a keener eye than you don't count? Is it just that site that bears members with keen sight?
Just for the record, I think the Nightforce BR series scopes have better glass in them than the NXS scopes do. I say that having owned both and shot both for years.
2muchgun
New member
There are more morons on Opticstalk than can be accurately accounted for, IMO.
Good glass is but one aspect of a quality scope. But it is completely worthless if the rest of the scope is not as good or better than said glass. Many seem to completely overlook this self-evident truth.
If you can't figure out /justify why a NF costs more than a Sightron, you probably don't need one.
Just sayin'......
Good glass is but one aspect of a quality scope. But it is completely worthless if the rest of the scope is not as good or better than said glass. Many seem to completely overlook this self-evident truth.
If you can't figure out /justify why a NF costs more than a Sightron, you probably don't need one.
Just sayin'......
Rustydust
Active member
Originally Posted By: 2muchgun
If you can't figure out /justify why a NF costs more than a Sightron, you probably don't need one.
Just sayin'......
Your absolutely 100% correct about this one. I don't need one. One of the guys I hunt with every year in Wyoming has had I don't know how many Nightforce scopes but now he has none. They are all sold now and he has bought Leupolds or Sightron S3's or Bushnell 6400 scopes and then spends the money that he saved on another rifle or reloading stuff.
And was I guess you know a lot more about Optics Talk than I do as I have not visited there when there was a post from an obvious moron. Most seem to be quite knowledgeable fellows. And Foxhunter- your input as well as everyone else's here is appreciated as well. But sometimes we like to seek out others for advice and when several people think the same thing as me that makes me feel good about what I have. And I have lots for rifle (as well as pistol) scopes from several different manufacturers and I enjoy them all. Some I enjoy more than the others however.
If you can't figure out /justify why a NF costs more than a Sightron, you probably don't need one.
Just sayin'......
Your absolutely 100% correct about this one. I don't need one. One of the guys I hunt with every year in Wyoming has had I don't know how many Nightforce scopes but now he has none. They are all sold now and he has bought Leupolds or Sightron S3's or Bushnell 6400 scopes and then spends the money that he saved on another rifle or reloading stuff.
And was I guess you know a lot more about Optics Talk than I do as I have not visited there when there was a post from an obvious moron. Most seem to be quite knowledgeable fellows. And Foxhunter- your input as well as everyone else's here is appreciated as well. But sometimes we like to seek out others for advice and when several people think the same thing as me that makes me feel good about what I have. And I have lots for rifle (as well as pistol) scopes from several different manufacturers and I enjoy them all. Some I enjoy more than the others however.