In your opinions what scope line has the better glass quality? I am looking into a scope upgrade and will most likely go with a Nightforce or a Ziess Conquest. Also possibly the new Sightron 3. Anyway I was offered a good deal on a Ziess on here a while back and i have lost the fellas contact info, so i may be out on that deal. I have shoot behind a couple nightforce scopes in the past and was pleased with what i saw. How does the conquest compare? Thanks Lee
Rifle Scopes Ziess VS Nightforce
- Thread starter skeetlee
- Start date
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
The Conquest may have wonderfull glass, but IMO glass is a small part of the package. NXS glass is great AND they have very few equals in the departments that matter- dependability, durability, tracking. Win/win.
The Conquest may have wonderfull glass, but IMO glass is a small part of the package. NXS glass is great AND they have very few equals in the departments that matter- dependability, durability, tracking. Win/win.
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
I just recently was given a new Zeiss 3x9x40 w/#4 reticle. I did not like the #4 and e-mailed Zeiss and they exchanged the scope for a RZ 600 reticle - FREE. I like the scope. I am especially enjoying the reticle.
This said, I think the NF vs. Conquest is a hands down winner for NF. Zeiss is good (for the $$$ clear, etc.), their customer service - superb (really, really good and fast ...) - but when speaking about "a Conquest" vs. a NF there is no comparison - IMO. Zeiss has good optics, but IMO has a mediocre tracking mechanism ... The NF is heavier that the Conquest - so if you are hunting that may be a consideration.
I hope this helps.
I just recently was given a new Zeiss 3x9x40 w/#4 reticle. I did not like the #4 and e-mailed Zeiss and they exchanged the scope for a RZ 600 reticle - FREE. I like the scope. I am especially enjoying the reticle.
This said, I think the NF vs. Conquest is a hands down winner for NF. Zeiss is good (for the $$$ clear, etc.), their customer service - superb (really, really good and fast ...) - but when speaking about "a Conquest" vs. a NF there is no comparison - IMO. Zeiss has good optics, but IMO has a mediocre tracking mechanism ... The NF is heavier that the Conquest - so if you are hunting that may be a consideration.
I hope this helps.
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
Also remember they are made for different uses.The Conquest is a 1" tube vs NF 30mm.This allows the NF to have more internal adjustment range, ie for looong range to get on paper ( or meat, depends on what you're shooting).I disagree that Zeiss has inferior tracking, it just was not made as a tactical scope.On a varmint rifle they are superb...
Also remember they are made for different uses.The Conquest is a 1" tube vs NF 30mm.This allows the NF to have more internal adjustment range, ie for looong range to get on paper ( or meat, depends on what you're shooting).I disagree that Zeiss has inferior tracking, it just was not made as a tactical scope.On a varmint rifle they are superb...
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
I use a Conquest on my hunting rig, and run NF on my comp rifles. The Conquest is a great hunting scope with great glass for the money, but does not compare to the NF. It does not have as much internal adjustments as the NF. This works well for a hunting rig where you normally will not take those extra long range shots (800-1K). Plus the NF is a tank, and I don't think the Conquest could take the abuse a NF could.
I use a Conquest on my hunting rig, and run NF on my comp rifles. The Conquest is a great hunting scope with great glass for the money, but does not compare to the NF. It does not have as much internal adjustments as the NF. This works well for a hunting rig where you normally will not take those extra long range shots (800-1K). Plus the NF is a tank, and I don't think the Conquest could take the abuse a NF could.
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
I shoot a Conquest 3X12X56mm it has a 30mm tube ffp. I use it shooting from 100y to 1000y. The Conquest reticle in my scope would be better suited for hunting. It just to wide when on max. power. I have looked thru NF, S&B, Sighton's, Hendsoit. The glass compares to all of them. I couldn't ask for better glass quality, but for reticles yes there is better. I have found the tracking on my Conquest to be repeatable no problem with it tracking is good to go.
If saving a little money is in mind give the Sighton's III a look. They can handle recoil a friend of mine has a 8X32X56 on a Barret 50bmg the auto verison and it's held it's on over about 600-700 rounds so far.
Don't leave out Nikon if your not going far long range. They have pretty good glass also. And with the right mount you can get out to 1k with it. (Varible Gantry Mount it take the cheaper scope without the adjustment out to 1k no problem) Give it a search and check it out.
I shoot a Conquest 3X12X56mm it has a 30mm tube ffp. I use it shooting from 100y to 1000y. The Conquest reticle in my scope would be better suited for hunting. It just to wide when on max. power. I have looked thru NF, S&B, Sighton's, Hendsoit. The glass compares to all of them. I couldn't ask for better glass quality, but for reticles yes there is better. I have found the tracking on my Conquest to be repeatable no problem with it tracking is good to go.
If saving a little money is in mind give the Sighton's III a look. They can handle recoil a friend of mine has a 8X32X56 on a Barret 50bmg the auto verison and it's held it's on over about 600-700 rounds so far.
Don't leave out Nikon if your not going far long range. They have pretty good glass also. And with the right mount you can get out to 1k with it. (Varible Gantry Mount it take the cheaper scope without the adjustment out to 1k no problem) Give it a search and check it out.
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
skeetlee,
You gotten some good advise so far.
To summarize:
Zeiss Conquests are a nice line of hunting scopes. The Conquest line was not designed for tactical considerations (though they could be used in that capacity).
The NF line is designed for tactical applications, not for hunting (though any NF could be used for hunting).
So if you want a hunting scope buy a Zeiss Conquest. If you want Tactical Scope (that can also be used for hunting) buy a NF.
See simple.
As far as the Sightron SIII goes, it has excellent glass,and excellent adjustments, and features 1999 technology (SFP + MIL/MOA) in a 2009 scope; ala Leupold, abet at a better price point than Leupold, with better reliability. Ditto with Nikon.
Sort of a mixed bag. At least with NF you can get MIL/MIL to go with your SFP (or MOA/MOA for the MIL challenged), if you don't want to pony up for the F1.
If you really want FFP plus MIL/MIL and want to spend Sightron or Zeiss like dollars, but still get good glass, just buy a Super Sniper 3-9x42mm. Best scope $600. can buy in today's market.
See easy...
Bob
skeetlee,
You gotten some good advise so far.
To summarize:
Zeiss Conquests are a nice line of hunting scopes. The Conquest line was not designed for tactical considerations (though they could be used in that capacity).
The NF line is designed for tactical applications, not for hunting (though any NF could be used for hunting).
So if you want a hunting scope buy a Zeiss Conquest. If you want Tactical Scope (that can also be used for hunting) buy a NF.
See simple.
As far as the Sightron SIII goes, it has excellent glass,and excellent adjustments, and features 1999 technology (SFP + MIL/MOA) in a 2009 scope; ala Leupold, abet at a better price point than Leupold, with better reliability. Ditto with Nikon.
Sort of a mixed bag. At least with NF you can get MIL/MIL to go with your SFP (or MOA/MOA for the MIL challenged), if you don't want to pony up for the F1.
If you really want FFP plus MIL/MIL and want to spend Sightron or Zeiss like dollars, but still get good glass, just buy a Super Sniper 3-9x42mm. Best scope $600. can buy in today's market.
See easy...
Bob
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
What would the thoughts be on the NF Benchrest scope with the F1 or maybe F2 reticule on a tactical rifle? I need to keep my budget at this time to around 1000. Thanks Lee
What would the thoughts be on the NF Benchrest scope with the F1 or maybe F2 reticule on a tactical rifle? I need to keep my budget at this time to around 1000. Thanks Lee
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
Both are top notch glass, but as others have said, it comes down to what are you using it for. I have 2 Conquest, and these go on the rigs that I drag in the field and through the woods. If you want more of a tactical scope, without question, the NXS is your choice. I really enjoy shooting my Conquests, and for the money they are very hard to beat, but I would take my NXS first. The NXS is just heavier and beefier than the Zeiss, thus maybe making the Zeiss a better option for hunting.
Both are top notch glass, but as others have said, it comes down to what are you using it for. I have 2 Conquest, and these go on the rigs that I drag in the field and through the woods. If you want more of a tactical scope, without question, the NXS is your choice. I really enjoy shooting my Conquests, and for the money they are very hard to beat, but I would take my NXS first. The NXS is just heavier and beefier than the Zeiss, thus maybe making the Zeiss a better option for hunting.
Re: Ziess VS Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: skeetlee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What would the thoughts be on the NF Benchrest scope with the F1 or maybe F2 reticule on a tactical rifle? I need to keep my budget at this time to around 1000. Thanks Lee </div></div>
Skeetlee,
A NF Benchrest Scope on a Tactical Rifle? Ok, in my view only, scopes come in three flavors:
Hunting
Tactical
Benchrest
A good hunting scopes main virtues are light weight(or portability if you will), ruggedness, and simplicity; are in stark contrast to a benchrest scope virtues, which are: precision, repeatability, and clarity.
All scopes of course, regardless how they are used, need to be precise, repeatable, and clear. But in a benchrest scope everything is sacrificed to the altar of precision. Portability, ruggedness and simplicity are after thoughts to the main goal of precision. Further, benchrest as a discipline is shot at known ranges, so that the scopes design elements do not have to be capable to adjust to moving targets quickly or targets that might appear at unknown ranges.
A tactical scope, to be a successful design, must incorporate the virtues of both hunting and benchrest scopes, and still keep the whole package, rugged and man portable.
So a tactical scope needs to be precise, but not a precise as a benchrest scope. That why benchresters have 0.125" adjustments and tacticals have, 0.25", 0.36", 0.50" and 1".
Further, tactical scopes must be easy and quickly adjusted to hit targets that appear at unknown range. In benchrest, there is no such thing as unknown range.
So in buying a benchrest scope for tactical use may work, but you are really buying features that you don't need, and sacrificing elements you may.
None of this is to say that NF benchrest scopes are not great. Or that a NF tactical scope used on a benchrest rifle is a bad idea. It is just that the designers did not plan for them to be used in that way.
Putting it another way, a Corvette may be a great car; but if I want to cross a tundra without a road, a Hummer would be better.....
Bob
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: skeetlee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What would the thoughts be on the NF Benchrest scope with the F1 or maybe F2 reticule on a tactical rifle? I need to keep my budget at this time to around 1000. Thanks Lee </div></div>
Skeetlee,
A NF Benchrest Scope on a Tactical Rifle? Ok, in my view only, scopes come in three flavors:
Hunting
Tactical
Benchrest
A good hunting scopes main virtues are light weight(or portability if you will), ruggedness, and simplicity; are in stark contrast to a benchrest scope virtues, which are: precision, repeatability, and clarity.
All scopes of course, regardless how they are used, need to be precise, repeatable, and clear. But in a benchrest scope everything is sacrificed to the altar of precision. Portability, ruggedness and simplicity are after thoughts to the main goal of precision. Further, benchrest as a discipline is shot at known ranges, so that the scopes design elements do not have to be capable to adjust to moving targets quickly or targets that might appear at unknown ranges.
A tactical scope, to be a successful design, must incorporate the virtues of both hunting and benchrest scopes, and still keep the whole package, rugged and man portable.
So a tactical scope needs to be precise, but not a precise as a benchrest scope. That why benchresters have 0.125" adjustments and tacticals have, 0.25", 0.36", 0.50" and 1".
Further, tactical scopes must be easy and quickly adjusted to hit targets that appear at unknown range. In benchrest, there is no such thing as unknown range.
So in buying a benchrest scope for tactical use may work, but you are really buying features that you don't need, and sacrificing elements you may.
None of this is to say that NF benchrest scopes are not great. Or that a NF tactical scope used on a benchrest rifle is a bad idea. It is just that the designers did not plan for them to be used in that way.
Putting it another way, a Corvette may be a great car; but if I want to cross a tundra without a road, a Hummer would be better.....
Bob
