- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 12/1/12 at 1:38 pm to braindeadboxer
Lots of good scopes out there. I like fixed fours and 2x7s. I like a trim, lightweight scope that doesn't destroy the lines or balance of the rifle. I hate nice trim rifles with a grat big Hubble telescope on top.
Leupies, Burris, and Weaver get the most use from me.
Leupies, Burris, and Weaver get the most use from me.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 1:38 pm to KingRanch
I like how you've got a cold one just hanging out in the background. 
Nice rifle and scope setup. It make only be a cheap brand but that stainless looks really good!
Nice rifle and scope setup. It make only be a cheap brand but that stainless looks really good!
Posted on 12/1/12 at 1:39 pm to Icansee4miles
Thank ya sir
Posted on 12/1/12 at 1:40 pm to bapple
You know it's a miller lite!
And I just looked back through my amazon history. It was $89
And I just looked back through my amazon history. It was $89
Posted on 12/1/12 at 1:47 pm to KingRanch
quote:
You know it's a miller lite!
Love the taste of horse piss in the morning.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 1:50 pm to bapple
amazing
Posted on 12/1/12 at 1:51 pm to bapple
Zeiss conquest for me. Love it.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 4:40 pm to nathannb22
quote:
Zeiss conquest
Looked real hard at this one but had to go with what I'm familiar with.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 4:55 pm to braindeadboxer
quote:
Looked real hard at this one but had to go with what I'm familiar with.
I think that, plus the price, turns a lot of people off, but if you're ever looking for a $1000 scope, the 3-12x56 and 5-20x50 Zeiss Conquests would be hard to beat.
I have the 3-12x56 and the light gathering is ridiculous.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 5:10 pm to prostyleoffensetime
I've never had the opportunity to look through one so I couldn't justify spending the extra money on it. If I knew that it would be a huge step up I'd have gotten it. I just didn't see the need to spend 500 extra on something that wasn't an enormous improvement. So far I'm thrilled with my new Nikon. If its legal shooting hours, or actually 20-30 minutes after legal hours, I can see it.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 5:27 pm to braindeadboxer
Yeah I get what you're saying. I have a Monarch that's 2.5-10x50 and it's no comparison. The Monarch is a very good scope, but I was having trouble with clarity of crosshairs on animals. You could make the animals out, but I was just disappointed with the clarity in low light. It's incredible with the 56 mm Zeiss. I still use the Monarch on my 270 wsm for coyotes and hogs on the farm. It and the BDC work great for that.
I will say for $400-500 it's hard to beat a Monarch because you get so many options in that range. I think the 3-9x40 Conquest is $400. I'd take a top notch Monarch over a low end Conquest.
I will say for $400-500 it's hard to beat a Monarch because you get so many options in that range. I think the 3-9x40 Conquest is $400. I'd take a top notch Monarch over a low end Conquest.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 7:13 pm to prostyleoffensetime
What do you mean "low end Conquest?" All Conquests are built the same and to the same standard.
By the way actually focusing your scope will do wonders for those blurry crosshairs on the Monarchs.
By the way actually focusing your scope will do wonders for those blurry crosshairs on the Monarchs.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 8:42 pm to Hawgon
quote:
What do you mean "low end Conquest?" All Conquests are built the same and to the same standard.
3-9x40. It's not low end quality. It's on the low end of the price spectrum. I'm saying I would buy a 4-16x50 Monarch before I bought a 3-9x40 Conquest. They're the same price at Cabela's.
quote:
By the way actually focusing your scope will do wonders for those blurry crosshairs on the Monarchs.
I'm fully capable of focusing a scope. The crosshairs should never be out of focus on any scope. That's my bad on the wording. So let me try to clean that up... The glass in a Monarch isn't as clear as in the Conquest, so sometimes it's tougher to be exactly sure where your crosshairs are on the animal. That's getting pretty ticky, but I like to know exactly what I'm shooting at, and we live in the South. Deer are going to come to food plots late. And sometimes you're trying to put black crosshairs on a dark brown animal, with a dark background. That's when light gathering and clarity are most important. When you compare the two with similar specs in those conditions, the Zeiss will win. Sorry about the confusion.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 8:50 pm to prostyleoffensetime
Shot a doe at 5:42 this evening. Can't tell how good the new scope was as she was only 15 yards away. Fwiw I hit her perfect and she dropped. Crystal clear, but 20 yards isn't much of a test.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 9:12 pm to braindeadboxer
3x9x50 Leupold vari-x II
Posted on 12/1/12 at 9:18 pm to prostyleoffensetime
quote:
I'd take a top notch Monarch over a low end Conquest.
Delete, just read your last post.
Zeiss is clearer.
This post was edited on 12/1/12 at 9:19 pm
Posted on 12/1/12 at 9:27 pm to prostyleoffensetime
Actually it has little to do with the glass. The Zeiss has a first focal plane reticle.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News