How much is in a name?

dimkave · Guest

We are all familar with the 'high end' manufactures. Names like Ziess, Swarovski, and Lieca comand premium prices. However when you try to compare these products feature by feature, to the 'other' high end manufactures, which happen to be much more affordable, such as Burris, Nikon, and Leupold, the advertising seems to get in the way and the information gets lost.
I am wondering if it is more than just the elitest in all of us. We all know Ferrari, Mercedies, and Porsche make us drool, more so than Ford, Chevy, or Mazda. However does their extra price correlate to extra perfomance, or just more admiration from our peers.
Long story short; I am interested in a premium 3x9-40mm Scope. Weight will be a consideration, it will be placed onto a Sako Finnlight in .243 Cal. I am looking at either a Ziess Conquest or a Burris Fullfield II, could you give me a feature by feature breakdown, and perhaps suggest a product I have not considered. THANKS dimkave

ranburr · Guest

I like both of these scopes. I have half a dozen of the exact Conquest scopes that you are talking about and I own a couple of FFIIs. Side by side the Conquest is obviously superior. In a store they both look great, you need to compare them outdoors under various conditions. They are both quality products with good coatings on all the lenses. The Zeiss coating give a cleaner look and continue to show a crisp view after the Burris has died out. The Zeiss has clarity edge to edge where the FFII has some fringing. I also prefer the controls of the Conquest. When you change the mag setting of the Burris the whole rear end moves. This is an irritate for me because I use scope lense covers. I also find the clicks on the Conquest to be more precise. I think the Burris is the Best $200 scope that money can buy. I think to see any real improvement over the Conquest you have to spend $1,000.00+. If you have the money, I swear by the Conquest and I think it is the best balance of price vs performance.

ranburr