Zeiss vs. Nightforce

[Buano]

Buano, Broz and Hunter....so what would you guys recomend for a guy who was a southeastern deer hunter hunting out of tower stands over big ag fields where ranges were inside 800 yds or so? Reason I am asking, is I am on the cusp of building a beanfield rig for our hunting club and am looking at the NF 5.5x22x56 NP-R1 and either the Zeiss Conquest in 4.5x14x50 with turrets or the 6.5x20x50 conquest with turrets. I COULD spend the 2k on the nighforce, but would rather not spend that if something cheaper will fit my needs.

If none of your shots will be close-up shots where deer suddenly appear, you can get away with the higher magnification of a 6.5-20. If you might need to use this gun for closer work, the 4.5-14 should be your maximum magnification. If I was building a dedicated "Bean field rifle" on a budget, I would look for a used scope and save a few hundred dollars. For a dedicated bean-field rifle I would lean towards Nightforce but any of the scopes you mention (and a few others) would work well. Actually, I would likely put a Leupold VX7 3.5-14x56 on it since I have one of those sitting about 6' from me & it's never been on a rifle. (I really should sell the scope since I haven't used it.)

 

[scottyd2506]

What about a zero stop? This is a great option for the NXS that Zeiss does not offer.
Jeff

I have to ask what is this zero stop, I mean what advantage does it have4? does Nightforce have a past problem with turrets not staying where they should, never had any of my NON zero stop Leupold's have turret problems, sounds like a gimmick to me.

Other wise you have valid points, they are two different scopes. for day time target shooting, the nightforce is king, for hunting in the day it may be even..

Shooting out past 1000 yards for most people who hunt is impossible, unless you are 600 lbs of muscle and can carry a 400 lb bench rest and items for s steady shot, the rare exception for those out west or in the mountains who can set heavy equipment up on hill not far from truck or lay prone out west, then I am wrong, but for the most part, using shooting stix, a tripod etc, 300-600 yards is enough, the Zeiss is fine for this, and with 20 moa bases 1000 yards would be do-able.

I guess it comes down to what kind of hunting do we do and where at.

out west, with little trees, there is really no need for a big high priced Zeiss, because hunting hours limit your low light hunting for deer etc, and no forests that get dark to need low light performance.

I mainly coyote hunt, and my state does not allow deer to be taken with rifle, although state below me does.

If i'm setting up for coyotes out to 500 yards, and none come in to the call at 6pm, I can wait a little longer and they come out by the 100's when it is just almost dark. So I'm trying to sight in on mr Coyote at 450 yard at dusk, can barely see him at 14-20 power, and it is getting darker..

I'm not complaining about my 1994 6.5-20x50mm VXII Leupold, I'll even wager the Nightforce 56mm is going to give me better light gathering.

But if I can just get another 15-20 minutes of time to hunt when it is a little darker and the coyotes are pouring out in the safety of low light, then what scope is going to make my hunting successful?

The Conquest 4-12x56mm for $1000 seems like a better performer than any Nightforce for any price in this situation. low light!


I know the conquest does not have the quality glass the Diavari does and esp the Hensoldt. the $3700 6-24 power by massive 72mm Zeiss Hensoldt with a huge 34mm tube is probably the king of kings when it comes to scopes,

Another reason for the Zeiss, would be out of state deer hunting, if I drive 120 miles to hunt, and I see a deer in the deep woods at 525 yards, I want clarity, the zero stop crap isn't going to let me see the deer any better.

If I lived out went in the open plains (Wish I did), and only hunt deer and elk I'd probably have a Nightforce for those 1200 yard shots.

the Zeiss high end scope optics are much better than Nightforce, but the conquest line is only just barely better, old tek Zeiss optics most likely.
So, not going to be noticeable in the daytime much.

For sure no one here is saying the Nightforce is low quality, not even the optics, probably better than Leupold, and Leupolds are not low quality.

I would trade my leupold for either one

 

[scottyd2506]

Buano, Broz and Hunter....so what would you guys recomend for a guy who was a southeastern deer hunter hunting out of tower stands over big ag fields where ranges were inside 800 yds or so? Reason I am asking, is I am on the cusp of building a beanfield rig for our hunting club and am looking at the NF 5.5x22x56 NP-R1 and either the Zeiss Conquest in 4.5x14x50 with turrets or the 6.5x20x50 conquest with turrets. I COULD spend the 2k on the nighforce, but would rather not spend that if something cheaper will fit my needs.

the Nightforce will fit the bll if all your doing is deer hunting, the Conquest 6-20x50 have a 1 inch tube, not sure how much better low light it is going to be over a Nightforce with a 56mm and 30mm tube. most people who have em sweat they are good scopes, but if your hunting deer and not prarrie dogs at 500-600 yards, and you can settle with 14 as max power, why not settle for 12 as max power, as the 3-12x56mm Zeiss Conquest is only $1000, and it has a 30mm tube. this is the only conquest that has a 30mm tube and 56mm objective.
if the 6-20x50 1 inch tube has better clarity and low light performance than a 5.5-22x56mm Nightforce with 30mm tube, then the 3-12x56mm and 30mm tube should really look good.

For $1000 a good Leu7pold VX3 6.5-20x50 is not a bad deal. just as clear as a 50mm Nightforce. and the warranty is 2nd to none.

 

[Broz]

I have to ask what is this zero stop, I mean what advantage does it have4? , sounds like a gimmick to me.


I see a deer in the deep woods at 525 yards, I want clarity, the zero stop crap isn't going to let me see the deer any better.

Maybe , just maybe, you should get a clue as to what the Zero Stop even is, and what it offers to long range hunting before you call it a gimmick and crap.

Holy cow I am so done here.

Jeff

 

[COBrad]

I used my Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14 to shoot numerous marmots from over 500, to as far as 749 lazed yards. The optics were up to the task, and on that particular scope, the turrets were too. I ran out of elevation adjustment just short of 800 yards, well within what the OP specified.
I chose to go with the NF on my latest rifle because only one out of 3 Conquests I owned had turrets that worked, and I wanted something I knew I could count on right out of the box. IMO, if you are going to be twisting turrets to adjust for elevation the best glass is useless if the turrets aren't calibrated correctly and tracking is the same, every time.

 

[COBrad]

As usual, I am a step behind here. Shouldn't stop in the middle of a post to watch a movie.
Scotty, your posts do not sound like the voice of experience to me. Sounds more like a voice of opinion. I think if you were an experienced long range shooter you would have a better understanding of the value of the zero stop feature.
As far as shooting out only to 600 instead of 1000 or more yards, turrets still need to be right if your adjustments are going to be right. Accurate and repeatable turrets are essential at any range requiring an elevation adjustment. If one is using a ballistic reticle that matches one's load closely turrets may not be so critical, but in even a medium range scope I still maintain that flawless turret function trumps the best glass, if you only get one or the other.

 

[robert6715]

Maybe , just maybe, you should get a clue as to what the Zero Stop even is, and what it offers to long range hunting before you call it a gimmick and crap.

Holy cow I am so done here.

Jeff

I dont blame ya,I am surprised you hung in there this long.

Rob

 

[bryguy]

Thanks for the assist guys. I just think I will go with the nightforce and be done with it.

 

[bryguy]

the Nightforce will fit the bll if all your doing is deer hunting, the Conquest 6-20x50 have a 1 inch tube, not sure how much better low light it is going to be over a Nightforce with a 56mm and 30mm tube. most people who have em sweat they are good scopes, but if your hunting deer and not prairie dogs at 500-600 yards, and you can settle with 14 as max power, why not settle for 12 as max power, as the 3-12x56mm Zeiss Conquest is only $1000, and it has a 30mm tube. this is the only conquest that has a 30mm tube and 56mm objective.
if the 6-20x50 1 inch tube has better clarity and low light performance than a 5.5-22x56mm Nightforce with 30mm tube, then the 3-12x56mm and 30mm tube should really look good.

For $1000 a good Leupold VX3 6.5-20x50 is not a bad deal. just as clear as a 50mm Nightforce. and the warranty is 2nd to none.

Well, the 3-12x56 Zeiss does not have what I would call 'field adjustable turrets' and is not available with a ballistic reticle(that I could find) and I would actually prefer the 3-12 Duralyt, but it suffers from the same issue as the the other conquest(no turrets, no B plex). Leupolds are out because of the unreliable turrets and in the higher powers(other than the tactical stuff) they do not have a suitable reticle for hunting, other than their varmint hunters plex, which I do not care for. I have several of the VX3's in lower magnification, and they are good scopes, but IF I went leupold, it would be a MK4, not a VX3. And if I am going to spend $1700 on a MK4, I think I will just spend the extra $300 and get a nightforce.

 

[Hunter2678]

Notice, he didn't say WHICH Zeiss. With an unlimited budget, I would also choose Zeiss over Nightforce for a long-range rig, but I would be looking at a $4,000 Hensoldt — not a Conquest.

I like Zeiss but if no $$ limit...its S&B time

 

[Caleb]

You're nuts dude

Absolutely! But my experience is limited too. I always try to shoot short of the horizon. I've never handled Nightforce. I'm sure if I did, I could be sold.

 

[scottyd2506]

Maybe , just maybe, you should get a clue as to what the Zero Stop even is, and what it offers to long range hunting before you call it a gimmick and crap.

Holy cow I am so done here.

Jeff

Oh, I've heard of Zero stop, but do not fall for every new gadget that comes out,


If it is not a gimmick, then by all means, enlighten me on the advantages it has over non zero stop scopes in hunting situations.

oh wait, I know, it is going to give me a 1/8 inch 10 shot group at 2000 yards!

 

[scottyd2506]

I went leupold, it would be a MK4, not a VX3. And if I am going to spend $1700 on a MK4, I think I will just spend the extra $300 and get a nightforce.

Yeah if I was going to spend 1700-1900 for a scope I'd also get the Nightforce over Leupold, no debate there. That is why I said for $1000 the VXIII. but for that you can get a votex 6-20-50mm.

What is going on with Leupold? are the new scopes in the past 10 years getting that low on quality?

 

[bryguy]

What is going on with Leupold? are the new scopes in the past 10 years getting that low on quality?

I think it is just a numbers game. The more items you produce, the more you have issues with. I think the internet has given the perception that their overall quality is down. They have never been know for reapeatability on their turrets, but from what I have heard, they are reworking some of their erector assemblies and adding additional springs to aid repeatability. I have several Leupolds, and have only had one issue with one, and it was fixed and back to me within a week or so.