Author Topic: Which is better Zeiss conquest 3.9X40/elite 4200 2.5-10x40 (Read 987 times)

lurcher · « **on:** December 01, 2003, 09:21:03 AM »

Sorry for all these questions on scopes guys but I really appreciate the info as it's harder to get feed back on these products in New Zealand.....

Which of these two scopes would you prefer for low light hunting and why?

Zachary · « **Reply #1 on:** December 02, 2003, 03:55:48 AM »

Tough call as I have used both, but my vote would be for the Elite 4200 2.5x-10x-40mm. Heck, I just bought one from Jon at the optic zone last week.

The glass on the Elite 4200 is simply outstanding. In fact, I rate them as at least the same, if not a tad bit better, than the Conquest 3x-9x-40mm. In addition, the 4200 also has rainguard - which really works. In addition, the Elite 4200 is less expensive than the Conquest.

On the downside, the Conquest 3x-9x-40mm has 4" of eye relief, whereas the Elite 4200 2.5x-10x-40mm has 3.3 - but that may or may not be important to you - depending on the gun that you shoot. In addition, the Zeiss is a little bit lighter, but not by much - maybe 2 oz - if that matters to you.

I own several Elite 4200 scopes, and I love them all.

Zachary

longwinters · « **Reply #2 on:** December 02, 2003, 12:05:20 PM »

I think Zachary is right on line. I have a conquest 3.5x10 and really like it. I have looked thru the 4200's and they too are very good. My buddy has both and prefers the Conquest. But my next scope will be the 4200 because of the price. I can only afford one scope over $500.00.

long

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #3 on:** December 17, 2003, 10:51:26 PM »

Quote from: lurcher

Which of these two scopes would you prefer for low light hunting and why?

My eyes can tell no difference. I'd give a slight edge to the Elite 4200 as a hunting scope due to the Rainguard, titanium alloy tube, and better zoom range. But-- both are excellent.

woodseye · « **Reply #4 on:** December 21, 2003, 09:56:34 AM »

I think its a case of which your eyes prefer when looking thru them. I have used both for hunting and tested them with acuity and contrast charts right at dusk and dawn.......... they are a wash and I can't really see any difference in low light performance between the two( I believe they are the two brightest scopes right now in the mid-priced market).

As mentioned above weight - eye relief - reticle prominence - and how eye position critical they each are for your own eyes would be my deciding factors. Go somewhere that sells them both and see if they have a scope comparator that you can look thru both as if mounted and make your own decision (try to go at a low light period and see if the salesman will let you look outside towards a target a ways distant) this will help you a lot in doing a comparison. You really won't go wrong with either in my opinion.

woods

Graybeard · « **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2003, 05:16:05 PM »

Quote

I have used both for hunting and tested them with acuity and contrast charts

Whar ya get these? I've been looking for some and can't find any at a price I can justify.

GB

woodseye · « **Reply #6 on:** December 22, 2003, 10:05:14 AM »

I will post some up for ya as soon as I get your pic hosting figured and get a little time to find them in my files. Hang tight and I will try to get some up tonight.

woods