Zeiss Conquest HD vs anything else

[roberteifert12]

Been scanning the threads and many people seem to either love or hate these.

Some people say they are pretty much equal to SLC which would make them a great buy at $750-$1000.

Some people say that aren’t any better than a BX-4 pro guide (which I currently use).

At this point in my hunting career, its hard to justify swaro prices when i still need to accumulate other quality gear. But i would like to know i have “the best“ in my current price range (sub $1000).

Haven’t found a set anywhere near me to try so wanted to get y’all’s thoughts, particularly on their low light capabilities

 

[JGRaider]

I'd take a Tract Toric over the Conquest HD's every day.

 

[Forest]

I love my conquests, my only complaint with them is the focus wheel moves too easily.

Optically they are a step above the bx4 for sure. My dad has a pair of the bx4, and while they are decent the conquests are definitely better.

I've used the slc a fair bit, they are marginally better than the conquests optically but definitely fit and finish is better in the slc. However I don't really feel they are worth the extra $$. Swaro is never money spent wrong though.

Meopta is the best bang for the buck in this price range hands down to me. They aren't enough better than the conquests to justify an upgrade, but starting from scratch it wouldn't be a whole lot of a decision for me.



Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I have the conquest 8x42s and I like them.

 

[CCH]

Sorry, my side by side comparisons won't help you. My friends run Swaro ELs that I just won't look through. Anyway, my Conquest 10x42s have been all that I've looked for. My first binos are what you'd consider Zeiss Classics, so that's what I "upgraded" from. I moved from really good to better. Did not go from Bushnell's finest Black Friday Special to these.

You could spend more, and not gain much. You could spend the same and get less. I don't think you could spend less and get more. I think they hit a sweet spot. Since I only upgrade every 30 years or so, I can't tell you what I think will be the next step. If I had to do it now, it would be ELs.

 

[realunlucky]

I had a pair and compared them to a bunch of buddies glass. For what it's worth I now have SLC's even though they cost significantly more than my previous conquests. In that price range I liked the vortex razor better

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[Maverick1]

I tried out the Conquest 8x42 and ended up returning them.

FOR ME - the blackout / "kidney bean" issue was a significant problem. I was not aware this was an issue for some users, but it happened to me right away when I put them up to my eyes.

I called Zeiss and they sent me replacement extended eye cups (free, no charge!), and they helped reduce the blackout issue quite a bit, but it was still there and a problem.

The image quality was great, and I really wanted to like them, but I just could not get a consistent image when I put them up to my eyes. If I held them a little bit away from my eyes, they were perfect. But, I really didn't want to have to remember to hold them away from my face when using them, or deal with the blackout areas for the next several years, so I just sent them back.

Both sets of eye cups were a bit stiff to turn; not a big deal, I imagine they would break in and become easier to use with time.

Something to consider. From what I've read, this issue doesn't happen to all users, but it was certainly there for me, and something I couldn't just "look past". <--- "see" what I did there? Very proud of myself. LOL

Good luck!

 

[CoStick]

I had a hard time with the fast focus. The extended cups helped but never felt comfortable with them. Lucked out and scored 2012 SLC.

 

[JGRaider]

I had a hard time with the fast focus. The extended cups helped but never felt comfortable with them. Lucked out and scored 2012 SLC.

Yep, the two biggest reasons I don't like the Conquest HD's.......eyecups are terrible, which is why Zeiss elected to make these extended versions and provide them free of charge, and the super fact/finicky focus mechanism. It's a huge no go for me. Fast focus is a birdwatcher's main criteria, IMO, not a big game hunter's.

 

[Rbohno]

I had a Conquest HD 5 that wouldn’t hold zero so they just last month sent me a V4 to replace it. The glass is awesome , I have a Swarovski Z5 and it’s just as good or better with light transmissio.

 

[Bater]

I had a Conquest HD 5 that wouldn’t hold zero so they just last month sent me a V4 to replace it. The glass is awesome , I have a Swarovski Z5 and it’s just as good or better with light transmissio.

Neat, but we're talking about binos......

 

[Rbohno]

Sorry my bad…. need more coffee

 

[Maverick1]

Neat, but we're talking about binos......

Tape two scopes together and make your own binos?

 

[Rbohno]

What can I say I am a FNG, LOL

 

[Bater]

All good, just giving you sh#t

 

[roberteifert12]

So seems like the main problems folks have with the Conquests is the fitment of the eye cups. But the glass quality for the price is about as good as it gets.

Anyone with thoughts on their low-light performance?

 

[Newtosavage]

Been scanning the threads and many people seem to either love or hate these.

Some people say they are pretty much equal to SLC which would make them a great buy at $750-$1000.

Some people say that aren’t any better than a BX-4 pro guide (which I currently use).

At this point in my hunting career, its hard to justify swaro prices when i still need to accumulate other quality gear. But i would like to know i have “the best“ in my current price range (sub $1000).

Haven’t found a set anywhere near me to try so wanted to get y’all’s thoughts, particularly on their low light capabilities

Since I've said both of these things in posts about the Conquest HD's (and I've owned 10x42, 10x32 and 8x32's in the Conquest HD) I'll chime in.

My observation that they out-resolve SLC's was based on direct comparison of two different pairs of Swaro SLC's that I owned over the course of 2 years directly against a pair of 10x42 Conquest HD's that I owned at the same time. (I actually owned SLC's, Conquest HD's, Trinovids, Meostars and Monarch HG's all at the same time) The SLC's and Conquest HD's were the closest in their ability to resolve detail. So close that it took me a half dozen local hunting trips over the course of a few weeks to make that call. A year later I still wasn't convinced so I bought another pair of SLC's and tried the test again. Once again, the Conquest HD's just ever so slightly out-resolved the SLC's. The final decision for me was made while observing a sitting Bobcat at 200 yards in drizzly rainy morning with very low light. I could see his whiskers with the Conquest HD's. I could not see them with the SLC's. It took that amount of a challenge to finally convince me.

Regarding the BX-4's, again, to my eyes they are incredibly good in the center resolution and pretty darn bright too. The biggest issue I had with those was the "tunnel vision" that I just couldn't get used to. But the handling and weight and build and comfort were all great. If you can't afford Conquest HD's, the BX-4's are the next best thing IMO.

What you'll gain by going to Conquest HD's is the field of view and some additional brightness. Yes, the "kidney bean" issue is there for people who don't wear glasses. My take on that is that Zeiss made a calculated decision to lean toward eyeglass users at the expense of too much eye relief for non-eyeglass users. If you consider the average age of someone who is looking to spend $1k on binoculars, it's probably a smart business decision. That said, the extended eyecups are a must for us non-eyeglass users and even then, yes, correct eye placement is essential for the x42's. However the 8x32's are excellent with the extended eyecups, and that is what I use now. Also, I spend a LOT of time with my bins on a tripod mount and when I do, I turn the eyecups in because it gives me the perception of a wider field of view and I can "look around" the image a bit more when I'm glassing.

What you'll gain by going to the SLC's is more weight, better resale value and that warm fuzzy feeling of owning a pair of Swaros that some people really need before they are convinced they have "the best." For those people, they are better off just getting the Swaros and being done with it because there is no convincing them that anything else measures up. For the rest of us, we'll spend the difference on another rifle or paying for a hunt or whatever, and just enjoy our Conquest HD's.

I am in a position financially (finally) that I can buy any pair of bins I want. I am 100% happy with my 8x32 Conquest HD's and don't even look at binoculars anymore which for me, is very weird. Because I was a binoholic for a long time.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. YMMV as they say. We all bring our own lenses to this game.

 

[roberteifert12]

Since I've said both of these things in posts about the Conquest HD's (and I've owned 10x42, 10x32 and 8x32's in the Conquest HD) I'll chime in.

My observation that they out-resolve SLC's was based on direct comparison of two different pairs of Swaro SLC's that I owned over the course of 2 years directly against a pair of 10x42 Conquest HD's that I owned at the same time. (I actually owned SLC's, Conquest HD's, Trinovids, Meostars and Monarch HG's all at the same time) The SLC's and Conquest HD's were the closest in their ability to resolve detail. So close that it took me a half dozen local hunting trips over the course of a few weeks to make that call. A year later I still wasn't convinced so I bought another pair of SLC's and tried the test again. Once again, the Conquest HD's just ever so slightly out-resolved the SLC's. The final decision for me was made while observing a sitting Bobcat at 200 yards in drizzly rainy morning with very low light. I could see his whiskers with the Conquest HD's. I could not see them with the SLC's. It took that amount of a challenge to finally convince me.

Regarding the BX-4's, again, to my eyes they are incredibly good in the center resolution and pretty darn bright too. The biggest issue I had with those was the "tunnel vision" that I just couldn't get used to. But the handling and weight and build and comfort were all great. If you can't afford Conquest HD's, the BX-4's are the next best thing IMO.

What you'll gain by going to Conquest HD's is the field of view and some additional brightness. Yes, the "kidney bean" issue is there for people who don't wear glasses. My take on that is that Zeiss made a calculated decision to lean toward eyeglass users at the expense of too much eye relief for non-eyeglass users. If you consider the average age of someone who is looking to spend $1k on binoculars, it's probably a smart business decision. That said, the extended eyecups are a must for us non-eyeglass users and even then, yes, correct eye placement is essential for the x42's. However the 8x32's are excellent with the extended eyecups, and that is what I use now. Also, I spend a LOT of time with my bins on a tripod mount and when I do, I turn the eyecups in because it gives me the perception of a wider field of view and I can "look around" the image a bit more when I'm glassing.

What you'll gain by going to the SLC's is more weight, better resale value and that warm fuzzy feeling of owning a pair of Swaros that some people really need before they are convinced they have "the best." For those people, they are better off just getting the Swaros and being done with it because there is no convincing them that anything else measures up. For the rest of us, we'll spend the difference on another rifle or paying for a hunt or whatever, and just enjoy our Conquest HD's.

I am in a position financially (finally) that I can buy any pair of bins I want. I am 100% happy with my 8x32 Conquest HD's and don't even look at binoculars anymore which for me, is very weird. Because I was a binoholic for a long time.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. YMMV as they say. We all bring our own lenses to this game.

Love this insight. Why I keep coming back to this forum for help.

Looks like I need to get a set of conquests in hand and see if I have the eyecup trouble (no eyeglasses for me).

otherwise I will keep the bx-4s and spend $ elsewhere.

 

[CoStick]

Love this insight. Why I keep coming back to this forum for help.

Looks like I need to get a set of conquests in hand and see if I have the eyecup trouble (no eyeglasses for me).

otherwise I will keep the bx-4s and spend $ elsewhere.

Make sure you use them in hunting situations, I loved my 8x32 HD until I used them in the field and the quirks with eyecups and focus became apparent. The glass is excellent.

 

[Newtosavage]

Love this insight. Why I keep coming back to this forum for help.

Looks like I need to get a set of conquests in hand and see if I have the eyecup trouble (no eyeglasses for me).

otherwise I will keep the bx-4s and spend $ elsewhere.

Yes, always best to get them in hand and whenever possible, to have them to use for a little while. I also don't do any side-by-side optics comparisons without steady rests as it's too subjective when you're hand holding to decide anything other than ergonomics and fit and possibly brightness. But if you're looking at edge to edge sharpness, field of view and resolving power, you have to have a steady rest and a good high resolution target. (For years I used the air vent on a nearby school about 300 yards from my house, but in the case of the Conquest HD/SLC comparison, the whiskers on the Bobcat were the final vote for me).

I've lost track of how many pairs of bins I bought and sold when I was on my "quest" to find the right binocular for me. SLC's were as much as I was willing to pay for (warranty doesn't cover losing them or them being stolen) and I reached down to the "lowly" Bushnell Legend M's (which my wife loves and still uses) and most of the stuff in between.

Over the course of about 3 years I owned (not looked through but actually owned):

Nikon LX-L (their former top of the lines from the 90's)
Nikon Monarch HG
Nikon Monarch 7
Nikon EDG
Vortex Viper HD's
Vortex Razor HD's
Minox (can't recall the model)
Sightron SII 8x32's
Bushnell Legend (original. still have these in 8x32 for my backyard bird feeder bins)
Bushnell Legend Ultra HD
Bushnell Legend M 8x42 (my wife's bins that she picked over Conquest HD's and SLC's!)
Zeiss Conquest HD in 10x42, 8x42 and 8x32 (8x32 is the best of the lot IMO)
Zeiss 10x40 Classic B*T*
Swaro SLC in both 8x30 and 10x42 (2 pairs)
Swaro Companion in 8x30
Leupold Mojave
Leupold BX-4 Pro Guide in 8x42 and 10x42
Meopta Meostar 8x32
Meopta Meostar HD 10x42
Meopta Meostar (non HD) 10x42
Meopta Meopro HD in both 8x42 and 10x42
Leica Trinovid HD (latest) 10x42
Leica Trinovid (older model)
Khales 10x42
Pentax DFC ED 10x42
Maven 8x30
Maven C3 10x42
Zen Ray Prime 10x42

And surely a bunch more that were entirely forgettable.