What is the comparison between the Bushnell Elite 4200 and the Zeiss Conquest? I have a 4200 that I am very pleased with on my 7mm-08. I am thinking of getting a .375 for some future elk, moose, and bear hunting (never hunted these yet) and am interested in maybe going with a Zeiss scope for it. I've heard some fine comments about the Zeiss, but I have never used one. Your thoughts?
I own a lot of scopes old Redfields(no light gathering ability) Simmons, Sightron, Nikon, old Bushnell with compensator on top retical adj. ring very accuate out to 500yds on 6mm, Nikko Sterling w/illuminated retical (good), Burris, Leupold VX-L (good), Pentax, 4 Muellers w/illuminated retical (great for the money), Millet, Swift, Bushnell 4200 (least liked because of min. eye relief, optic good), Zeiss worth every penny clear and good relief, NightForce great and Trijicon. but none of them are forever good and on unless some one knows what they are doin when they mount the scope. Proper ring alignment so tube has no flex pressure on it, Proper tourque so as not to egg shape the tube (like only 15 to 23
in.lb. and hone the rings so you have 100% contact on the scope tube, perfectly round. Your scope no matter what the cost is only as good as your mounting sooner or latter. But I sure like my NightForce and Zeiss's for clearity and Muellers for price. Just a poor boys opinion who shots a lot and collects a lot of guns. Thanks guys for your opinions to I enjoyed the read.
