Hydraulic conductivities associated with measurement scale of the order of m and collected during an extensive field campaign near Tübingen, Germany, are analyzed. Estimates are provided at coinciding locations in the system using: (1) the empirical Kozeny-Carman formulation, providing conductivity values, , based on particle-size distribution, and (2) borehole impeller-type flowmeter tests, which infer conductivity, , from measurements of vertical flows within a borehole. Correlation between the two sets of estimates is virtually absent. However, statistics of the natural logarithm of and at the site are similar in terms of mean values (averages of being slightly smaller) and differ in terms of variogram ranges and sample variances. This is consistent with the fact that the two types of estimates can be associated with different (albeit comparable) measurement (support) scales. It also matches published results on interpretations of variability of geostatistical descriptors of hydraulic parameters on multiple observation scales. The analysis strengthens the idea that hydraulic conductivity values and associated key geostatistical descriptors inferred from different methodologies and at similar observation scales (of the order of tens of cm) are not readily comparable and should not be embedded blindly into a flow (and eventually transport) prediction model.