-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Nikon Mornarch x or Zeiss Conquest??
- Thread starter astrinko
- Start date
Re: Nikon Mornarch x or Zeiss Conquest??
I picked up a zeiss conquest with the drop compensating reticle for my custom .260 deer rifle.
Great theory but in practice it's too busy to use at the magic few minutes before sunset. Those hashmarks fade right out.
I'd get a more standard reticle if I had to buy again.
I picked up a zeiss conquest with the drop compensating reticle for my custom .260 deer rifle.
Great theory but in practice it's too busy to use at the magic few minutes before sunset. Those hashmarks fade right out.
I'd get a more standard reticle if I had to buy again.
Re: Nikon Mornarch x or Zeiss Conquest??
both are great, but the monarch x with 30mm tube seems to perform a little better for me in low light
both are great, but the monarch x with 30mm tube seems to perform a little better for me in low light
Re: Nikon Mornarch x or Zeiss Conquest??
I have both and beleive that the Zeiss has better glass and is deffinetly better in low light conditions. This is comparing the 1" tube version of the Monarch, I have no experiece with the 30mm version.
I have both and beleive that the Zeiss has better glass and is deffinetly better in low light conditions. This is comparing the 1" tube version of the Monarch, I have no experiece with the 30mm version.
Re: Nikon Mornarch x or Zeiss Conquest??
I have one Nikon Monarch scope. It is on a 22 rifle. It is a 4X12 with the silly circles reticle(I do not care for the reticle). The scope is a pretty good scope. I bought it a few years ago on closeout for $249. the problem with Nikon is they change their scopes every other day. And the name Monarch has become "bastardized". Nikon changes things too much for me to take them seriously. I know two guys who had trouble with their CS. So I would consider buying a cheap one on sale for a rifle that is not important. But I would not consider a Nikon for my better rifles.
I have two of the Conquest 6.5X20's on varmint rifles. They are a pretty good bang for the buck. But then I also like the new Leupold VX3, and saying something good about Leupold is taboo on here. Tom.
I have one Nikon Monarch scope. It is on a 22 rifle. It is a 4X12 with the silly circles reticle(I do not care for the reticle). The scope is a pretty good scope. I bought it a few years ago on closeout for $249. the problem with Nikon is they change their scopes every other day. And the name Monarch has become "bastardized". Nikon changes things too much for me to take them seriously. I know two guys who had trouble with their CS. So I would consider buying a cheap one on sale for a rifle that is not important. But I would not consider a Nikon for my better rifles.
I have two of the Conquest 6.5X20's on varmint rifles. They are a pretty good bang for the buck. But then I also like the new Leupold VX3, and saying something good about Leupold is taboo on here. Tom.
Re: Nikon Mornarch x or Zeiss Conquest??
I think you would be very very happy with the Zeiss. Like the other suggestion above, avoid the Rapid Z reticle (good theory, but not a great practical application).
Zeiss is easily comparable to the scopes that are priced around 1000-1800 price mark. You cant go wrong!
Good Luck
I think you would be very very happy with the Zeiss. Like the other suggestion above, avoid the Rapid Z reticle (good theory, but not a great practical application).
Zeiss is easily comparable to the scopes that are priced around 1000-1800 price mark. You cant go wrong!
Good Luck
Re: Nikon Mornarch x or Zeiss Conquest??
Well I'm new to the forum but I do have experience with the older (late 2008) Nikon Monarch UCC 6.5 X 20 with fine cross hair and 1/8" target dot scope. The new Monarch in this style is a 4X eye box technology scope. That means that the magnification is multiplied by 4, so 4 X 16, 6 X 24 etc.with a constant eye relief.The current Nikon in this set up sells for around $575 and the Carl Zeiss in same fashion for around $999.00 or so give or take.
I have had good results with my 66 year old eyes at shooting 100 yard 1 " red stick on targets with a Savage VLP in .223 with factory new Black Hills 52 grain Match SPs. with most well within the 1" target using the Monarch 6.5 X 20 older scope. BUT... How can you compare the two scopes?? One is $400 more expensive and without trying the Zeiss myself reputation alone seems to put it into a different category from the very good Nikon.
I would also appreciate an explanation from someone that has owned both scopes that are in a similar configuration IE same power range, same reticle to explain how the two can be compared. The Nikon Monarch is a very good scope for the money but it should not equal a Zeiss, Night Force, March, and a few others. If in fact they are similar then I got a very good deal on my Monarch late in 2008 for $409.
Please enlighten me....
Pete K.
Well I'm new to the forum but I do have experience with the older (late 2008) Nikon Monarch UCC 6.5 X 20 with fine cross hair and 1/8" target dot scope. The new Monarch in this style is a 4X eye box technology scope. That means that the magnification is multiplied by 4, so 4 X 16, 6 X 24 etc.with a constant eye relief.The current Nikon in this set up sells for around $575 and the Carl Zeiss in same fashion for around $999.00 or so give or take.
I have had good results with my 66 year old eyes at shooting 100 yard 1 " red stick on targets with a Savage VLP in .223 with factory new Black Hills 52 grain Match SPs. with most well within the 1" target using the Monarch 6.5 X 20 older scope. BUT... How can you compare the two scopes?? One is $400 more expensive and without trying the Zeiss myself reputation alone seems to put it into a different category from the very good Nikon.
I would also appreciate an explanation from someone that has owned both scopes that are in a similar configuration IE same power range, same reticle to explain how the two can be compared. The Nikon Monarch is a very good scope for the money but it should not equal a Zeiss, Night Force, March, and a few others. If in fact they are similar then I got a very good deal on my Monarch late in 2008 for $409.
Please enlighten me....
Pete K.
