High-Roller Name, Dirtbag Price: ZEISS Conquest V3 Riflescope Review

I’m not one to pack high-end rifles and scopes into the woods. I’ve had opportunities to use and hunt with the expensive stuff, but it’s not a must-have for me. For one, I can’t justify affording it, and I’m hard on gear. It’s a lot easier to stomach busting up, neglecting, and abusing something that isn’t worth more than my 20-year-old truck. What can I say? I’m a dirtbag.

On the other side, I generally don’t use the cheapest rifle setups. I prefer that sweet spot: solid enough to perform in hunting scenarios without any hiccups and accurate enough for reasonable hunting ranges. I’m not a gun bro. I’m a hunter who uses guns.

So, when I was invited to Oklahoma to test a new budget-friendly optic, the ZEISS Conquest V3, I was all in. The brand is synonymous with top-dollar, top-performing optics, often out of reach for the common man. But I was told this riflescope was designed specifically for hunters who need quality optics that perform in the field, without packing the usual ZEISS price tag. Right up my alley. I headed to Oklahoma for 3 days of testing.

In short: If you want a riflescope that you can trust in the field, without breaking the bank, the ZEISS Conquest V3 ($300-950) is a great choice. There’s a model for every type of hunter and loads of well-thought-out features and options. In testing, it outpaced the similarly priced competition, and I was ringing targets at 900 yards in no time. Most impressively, its low-light performance is the best I’ve seen in an optic in its class. What more could a hunter need?

ZEISS Conquest V3 Riflescope Review

The Zeiss Conquest V3 Features and Lineup

Over 3 days in Oklahoma, I had the opportunity to test the entire lineup of V3 riflescopes. I spent more time with some than others. As such, this review focuses more on the lineup’s features and its performance on the range, without getting into specifics on particular models.

As for pricing, the Conquest V3 certainly isn’t a “cheap” optic, in price or performance. Many much cheaper options are on the market. Compared to overall market prices, I’d say the V3 falls into the “lower mid-tier” range. It’s solid, quality glass that’s within reach for most hunters’ pocketbooks.

Models

The V3 is available in six different sizes. Those are as follows:

• 2.5-8X35 RF (Rimfire) ($300)
• 2.5-8X35 ($400)
• 3.5-10X42 ($500-700)
• 4.5-14X44 ($500-800)
• 4.5-14X50 ($600-850)
• 6-18X50 ($700-950)

Some sizes have different options/add-ons that affect the price; hence, the price ranges for some sizes. Overall, there are 21 different models to choose from, allowing hunters to find a riflescope that fits their budget and shooting and hunting needs.

Reticle Options

The V3 lineup is all second focal plane scopes. Depending on the model, there are four different reticle options: Plex-style – #6, which is a standard crosshair with no hashes; XRR – #84, which is the reticle pictured above; the SHR – #87, which has hashes all the way across the crosshair and all the way to the bottom; and the SHRi – #87, which is the same as the SHR, but is an illuminated reticle.

While shooting, I decided to focus on viewing the reticles through a hunter’s eyes. In that regard, I really came to love the XRR. It wasn’t so noisy that it was distracting, and I didn’t have to pause and count hashes while on target to be sure I was holding over the correct amount. There are just enough hashes to hold over at effective hunting ranges without having to click the elevation and windage knobs. It allows for fast shooting when needed.

But everyone has different reticle preferences. Fortunately, every size of scope except for the rimfire model has multiple reticle options, so you can select the one that suits you best.

Additional Features

Each scope uses ZEISS’s High Performance Glass, with a fully multicoated lens and a hydrophobic lens coating. In the ZEISS lineup, this is the lowest tier of glass, but don’t let that scare you away. Remember, ZEISS is a premium brand, and its lowest-tier glass is more akin to mid-priced options from other manufacturers.

Lower-powered models have a fixed parallax, while the 4.5-14 and higher-powered scopes offer a parallax adjustment knob that goes from 25 yards to infinity. Similarly, some models have a capped elevation turret, while others have an external elevation turret, with or without a ballistic stop.

As is standard for most optics, they’re all nitrogen-purged and waterproof, rated to be submerged up to 3.3 feet for 1 hour. All models have been shock-tested to well beyond what you can put a scope through, ensuring a durable rifle scope you can trust.

ZEISS Conquest V3 vs. Leupold and Vortex

After getting through all the nitty-gritty details with employees from ZEISS, it was time to get testing.

I have to give a huge shoutout to ZEISS for my favorite portion of testing we did. Of course, since the brand hosted the event, ZEISS employees did nothing but sing the praises of this new scope. But it’s my job as a reviewer to be unbiased and, to be frank, see if what ZEISS claims is B.S.

Let me tell you, ZEISS put its money where its mouth is. The team said they had the best scope in this price range, so they brought competitors’ equivalent scopes for me to test alongside the V3 to prove it. That, my friends, takes some guts and a high level of confidence.

I was able to stack the ZEISS Conquest V3 next to the Vortex Viper HD and the Leupold VX-3HD and run a series of tests on the scopes. All of the scopes were placed on tripods next to one another for quick viewing between the different scopes. These are the results:

‘Eye Box’ Test

The “eye box” of a scope refers to how much you can move your head around while still being able to view the reticle. Scopes with a small eye box quickly turn to black if you move your head off-center. Scopes with a large eye box allow a decent amount of movement without losing your sight picture.

I hate to admit it, but compared to the ZEISS and Vortex, the eye box of the Leupold was absolutely horrendous. It was such a stark contrast that it would almost completely eliminate the Leupold from the running if I were deciding which scope to purchase. There was absolutely zero forgiveness in head movement, which is a big deal in a rushed, adrenaline-fueled hunting situation.

The Vortex and the ZEISS were very similar. There was a crew of writers performing the same test, and the two scopes were so close that opinions differed on which was better. To me, it seemed like the Vortex had a slight edge over the ZEISS.

Field of View Test

For this test, we pointed the scopes at the exact same object to see how large the field of view was. We ensured that all the scopes were set at the same zoom power. I would also like to point out that an engineer informed us that at different levels of zoom, different scopes would perform better. I guess there’s some optimization at certain zooms for every scope because, you know, nerdy science stuff.

All that to say, it’s difficult to gauge completely fairly. But after looking at a few different zoom ranges, the Leupold was the clear loser in this category. Again, to me, the Vortex Viper HD barely edged out the ZEISS.

Low-Light Performance

For the last 30 minutes of daylight and into the dark, I spent time rapidly switching between the scopes to see just how long I felt like I could effectively hunt with them. To me, this was a very important test, as ZEISS is marketing low-light performance as the biggest selling point. After all, the motto of the V3 lineup is “Stay in the Hunt” in reference to being able to hunt effectively in lower light.

Let me tell you, the slogan was picked well. While the Vortex was holding its own and often outpacing the V3 in the other tests, the ZEISS ran away with this category. It was very clearly brighter than the other two scopes, especially in the last few minutes of what would be legal shooting light.

To me, that raised the question: if this is so good, is there a reason to upgrade to the Conquest V4, which I had previously hunted with and reviewed?

Fortunately, ZEISS had a V4 on hand for me to compare alongside the V3. I found that image brightness was the same on both. However, with the sun on the horizon, it was clear that the V3 was much more prone to glare than the V4. So, for those who demand the best and who have a few extra bucks lying around, the difference may be worth it. Like the V3, the Vortex and Leupold were also prone to glare, albeit much less bright than the V3.

For those shots on the edges of daylight, it’s the scope I’d want on my rifle.

Turret Adjustments

This test was less scientific and more dependent on personal preference. I just monkeyed around with the different turret adjustments to see which clicks I liked best.

For myself, ZEISS also won out in this test. The numbers on the elevation turret are much larger than those on the other two scopes. I like that, as in low light, I didn’t find myself squinting at the elevation turret to see where I was clicked to. The numbers are bold, giant, and plain as day.

The clicks are also very tactile, not too close together, and not spongy. Have you ever been viewing your target through the scope, tried to click slightly over, accidentally given it a bit too much, and said, “Oh crap. Was that five clicks or eight?” I have, and it’s not a good feeling. Both the Vortex and the Leupold were more prone to that issue.

Other Tests Were Inconclusive

We did test other performance categories like distortion, color pop, resolution, contrast, and color fringing. I’m opting not to include the results for two reasons.

First, among roughly 10 people, opinions varied on which scope performed best in each category. To me, that suggests each scope is too close to confidently say one is better. Or that everyone’s eyes see things differently. Seriously, the results were all over the place.

Second, I don’t know how important all those features are in a real-world hunting scenario. It suffices to say they’re all pretty close.

Range Performance of the ZEISS Conquest V3

All those tests are fine and dandy, but when push comes to shove, how does she shoot?

Across the board, all of the scopes shot fantastically. We spent two full days on a traditional range, shooting all manner of calibers at all sorts of distances. The rimfire model was a blast to shoot and is an excellent choice for anyone looking for a scope for a plinking gun.

The larger, more traditional hunting sizes were accurate as all get out. At the start, I had a three-shot group with all the rounds touching. With the proper dope, I could sit behind any of the V3 models mounted on a Ruger American and easily shoot out to 900 yards. I’m not a guy who spends a ton of time on a rifle range either. The scopes flat-out shoot, whether I was dialing in for distance and wind or holding over.

On the final day, we headed out to a simulated hunting course with life-sized steel targets. The first was an elk across a canyon, 400 yards away. I hit it three out of three times in the vitals. We also shot at much longer ranges, including a 700-yard–plus moose that proved problematic because of winds over 17 mph. I did not go three for three on that one, but I did hit it.

The point is, when it comes to hunting, the ZEISS Conquest V3 is probably more accurate than you need.

Is There Anything Not to Like?

Obviously, given the price, there are better rifle scopes on the market. Some have better coatings, better clarity, more adjustability, etc. But when viewed through the lens of more budget-friendly rifle scopes, I have only one real complaint.

I think it’s an ugly scope. To me, the Conquest V3 looks like something made on a 3D printer, or a prototype without the finishing aesthetic touches. Obviously, it wasn’t made in a 3D printer, but it looks cheap.

When I brought that up, the explanation was that, given the price ZEISS was trying to hit with this scope, the margin wasn’t there to make it look all fancy. Rather than sacrifice performance, ZEISS sacrificed looks.

I understand that, but really, how much money could we be talking about to put the classy blue ZEISS logo and a blue ring on it? Thirty to 50 bucks? I’d pay it. Without it, the curb appeal of the Conquest V3 is lacking. In its current form, the looks don’t do the scope’s performance justice.

Final Thoughts on the ZEISS Conquest V3

For hunters like myself, this is an excellent rifle scope. It’s not a cheap, clunky solution you slap on to get out hunting. It’s a quality product with features that make a real-world difference in the woods. Those extra features, in my eyes, justify the slight price jump over true budget scopes.

At the end of the day, it’s not going to impress gun bros at a long-distance shooting match. It’s not the best glass money can buy. But it will perform day in and day out, and the low-light performance is excellent, which is arguably the most important factor for hunters selecting a scope.

My final thought? It does everything I need it to. I’d be more than happy to slap the Conquest V3 on my .30-06 and hunt with it for the rest of my hunting career.