 |
|
Request Opinions: Conquest vs Swarovski A-Line |
Post Reply 
|
Page 123 5> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Delicious Digg Facebook Furl Google Boomarks Google Buzz MySpace Newsvine reddit StumbleUpon Translate Twitter Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Mojo 
Optics Journeyman 
All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Online Status: Offline Posts: 478 |
 Post Options
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Request Opinions: Conquest vs Swarovski A-LinePosted: December/26/2007 at 13:43 |
|
Looking at Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10X 44mm or Swarovski A-Line 3-10X 42mm. I am not sure that I am receiving value for my dolllar by spending $400 more for the Swarovski. There may be opinions about that, so fire away! 3-9 will not do, so the Kahles supporters will not be able to get me to join their club. Need a 1" tube for my fancy one piece rings that I already have.
But.....if I take a look over at the Sample list....about $100 more would buy that Swarovski. There are ring marks and warranty issues to consider. Is a "not new" Swarovski a better deal than a new Conquest with warranty? Let the opining begin!
|
|
|
MOJO
|
|
|
|
|
TheDrakeTaker
Optics Apprentice 
Joined: July/21/2007 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 201 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/26/2007 at 15:17 |
|
Why won't 3-9 do? It's a shame because you are missing out one some great optics. (Kahles)
|
|
|
Robert
|
|
|
|
|
|
Focus
Optics Master 
Conquistador!! Joined: June/05/2007 Location: Maine Online Status: Offline Posts: 1006 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/26/2007 at 17:47 |
|
The scopes aren't in the same league......thats why it takes a used swaro to be close to a new conquest.
Focus |
|
|
I Can See Clearly Now......<><
If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting...... |
|
|
|
|
|
Mojo
Optics Journeyman
All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Online Status: Offline Posts: 478 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/26/2007 at 20:17 |
|
Going up only 1 power from my present 2.5-8 didn't seem to be enough of a change considering that I was not satisfied with the 8 power, hence the decision to go to 10 power, without getting involved with side focus, and/or AO, which adds more weight.
I have no issues with the Kahles line at all, who obviously have an excellent scope!
|
|
|
MOJO
|
|
|
|
|
|
martin3175
Optics Master Extraordinaire 
Joined: January/19/2005 Location: Maryland Online Status: Offline Posts: 3319 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/27/2007 at 08:41 |
|
I have the Swarovski 3x10x42 you are looking at -It is an awesome optic. If you can find a place to look through both that might help. If you can pull it off - I'd go Swarovski , but you honestly couldn't go wrong either way. The extra money is your decision to make in the balance of the money vs the reward .
|
|
|
|
|
|
crimsontide
Optics GrassHopper
Joined: July/06/2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 23 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/27/2007 at 15:55 |
|
If you can fit it in your budget, I would suggest that you go with the Swarovski.
|
|
|
Crimsontide
|
|
|
|
|
|
mwyates
Optics Master
Joined: June/15/2004 Location: Texas Online Status: Offline Posts: 1192 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/27/2007 at 17:48 |
|
IF 9X isn't enough different from 8X, then 10X probably won't get it either. Think about 12 or 14X. You can get a Kahles 3-12X56 for the same money as the Swaro. Duh!!!!! IF that's too heavy look at the Leupold VXIII 4.5-14.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mojo
Optics Journeyman
All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Online Status: Offline Posts: 478 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/27/2007 at 18:35 |
|
Thanks for your candor! You don't sound the least bit left out that you don't have a Kahles.
|
|
|
MOJO
|
|
|
|
|
|
crimsontide
Optics GrassHopper
Joined: July/06/2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 23 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/27/2007 at 18:46 |
|
I heard Kahles is owned by Swarovski. IF that's true, then I guess a Kahles is ALMOST a Swarovski. ( Just kidding you Kahles fans. It's all in fun and Kahles are fine scopes) |
|
|
Crimsontide
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mojo
Optics Journeyman
All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Online Status: Offline Posts: 478 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/27/2007 at 18:52 |
|
I admire the loyalty of those Kahles owners. I am already going from a 36mm objective to a 42mm or 44mm. I am not a fan of the larger 50mm much less 56mm. Just me, folks. Also I wanted to stay on the lighter side with 16 oz. maximum as one of my criteria. I hate to think what Focus might say if I started making comparisons between a Swaro and a Leupy. I already have a Leupy. Thanks for making me look again though! |
|
|
MOJO
|
|
|
|
|
|
PaJack
Optics GrassHopper
Joined: December/23/2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/27/2007 at 19:00 |
|
This is my first post here!! I own a 3-9-50mm and a 4.5-14-44mm Conquest and they are excelent scopes. I have a Leupold on other guns but the Zeiss are much better in my opinion...
|
|
|
Jack
|
|
|
|
|
|
Focus
Optics Master
Conquistador!! Joined: June/05/2007 Location: Maine Online Status: Offline Posts: 1006 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: December/28/2007 at 06:25 |
|
Focus would say.....between a swaro and a leupold.......get the swaro...between a conquest and a swaro.....get the swaro......... and don't bother to look back....just look thru your new scope :>)!
Focus Edited by Focus - December/28/2007 at 06:30 |
|
|
I Can See Clearly Now......<><
If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting...... |
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 123 5> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.