New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - ZEISS 2.5-10x42 Diavari?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

ZEISS 2.5-10x42 Diavari?

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/10/2007 at 20:01
SAKO75 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/29/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 246
I am looking at hard at this scope. It sure is light for a 30mm scope. Anyone look through one of these? How does it look at the lowest and highest power? I am wanting the #4 reticle.

any info or feedback on this is appreciated!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/10/2007 at 20:08
Pred6D 1CD View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: February/09/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Cant speak for the 2.5 X 10, But I have a Zeiss 3 - 9X32 Diavari and you can't beat them.  Its well worth the money.  Once you go Zeiss, its hard to look through anything else. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/10/2007 at 21:26
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

I have not spent time with that pacticilar model but the 3-12x56 is top of the line in every way,

I would expect nothing less from this model.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 00:44
tbone1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: May/31/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 195
I haven't looked through the 2.5-10x42 either because no store around has had one in stock.  I have owned the 1.5-6x42 VM/V and the 3-12x56 VM/V and both have had outstanding optics.  It seems like an unbelievable scope.  I bought the Swaro 2.5-10x42 PH, I think right before Zeiss introduced this scope.  It seems like a perfect hunting scope.  As with most scopes in the VM/V series, very short and light for a 2.5-10, low profile, exceptional field of view, and superb optics.  I have never seen a VM/V that wasn't very impressive optically.  If I were in the market for a 2.5-10x42, I would definately give this serious consideration.  As I said, since I haven't personally seen one, I can't say it's a slam dunk.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 04:27
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479

I have looked through  a couple.

Light weight, optically superb, and your choice of the #4 reticle is good to go also.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 07:34
SAKO75 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/29/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Thanks

The only thing I wonder about is the 1st plane reticle. Zeiss states the crosshairs subtend .54" @ 100 yards but I have always found that 1st plane reticles appear larger than they actually state in print.

I like the eye relief @ 3.54" median.
I like the huge FOV.
I like the fact that it weighs the same as a 3-9x40 conquest while in a bigger, better package.

I dont see this on SWFA's website??
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 07:47
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20479

I'd give The Optics Goddess a shout tomorrow at SWFA, Sako.

Looks like the website is getting updated.

 

BTW, you can try SWFA.com instead of riflescopes.com.

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 07:59
jonbravado View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: October/05/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1131

the only diavari i have had in my possession is the 56mm and it was nothing short of breathtaking.

 

i wouldn't think twice about this scope. get it, and love it.

 

the #4 is a fine choice of lowlight, quick acquisition reticle.

 

good luck.

 

J

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 08:17
maine(r) View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: December/26/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 33

 

 

The VM/V line has been removed from the SWFA web site...Only the 1.5-6x42 with lotu-tec remains.  My guess is that they are phasing in the lotu-tec coated model. 

 

So the next question is... when are the non lotu-tec VM/V's scopes going to the Sample List?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 11:51
tbone1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: May/31/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 195
Sako 75,  I'm sure you would want to look through it for yourself, to remove your reservations, but I personally wouldn't be overly concerned about the 1st plane reticle.  In both VM/Vs that I have had, the reticles have been the perfect size, and are not too large.  I have always used the #8 which is similar to the #4.  As far as the differences go.  My Zeiss and Swaro seem to subtend about the same amount with the Zeiss being slightly thicker at the same magnification.  My S&B seems to subtend slightly farther than both the Swaro and Zeiss and is slightly thicker than both.  In my opinion the Swaro is a little to thin and can sometimes be lost in low-light situations.  This is one reason I prefer a 1st plane is that I can thicken it up enough to see in most any situation.  The Zeiss is a little better and the S&B is the best in this regard.  I have a 3-12x42 S&B and a 3-12x56 Zeiss.  Both at 12x the S&B is thicker and subtends noticably further.  It may be partly due to the size of the objective but also the size of the reticle.  I am not sure what you are looking for.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 12:16
SAKO75 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/29/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 246
THANKS TBONE1

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE ZEISS #8?
WHAT RETICLE DO YOU HAVE IN THE S&B?

I like the #4 better because the posts come closer and I can range estimate with it easier on deer....

I was looking at a swaro Z6 in 2-12x50 but the fact that swaro has the audacity to launch a scope that price and only put a 10 year warranty with it is pathetic! The kicker is the AV and PH series still have limited lifetime???

Plus the Zeiss is lighter and alot cheaper...
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 15:01
Obi Wan Kenobi View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/21/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 186

Sako75, I own a 2.5-10x50 VM/V & I love it. I've always used the #8 recticle in my Zeiss scopes because I hunt in low light. You're correct its a VERY VERY light scope, good for stalking & sitting in the stand all day.

 

Their is a bit of confusion about the Zeiss Rapid Z recticle. I'm in the market for another Zeiss scope for a 300 wsm, but I'm waiting to see if which scopes they will provide with the Rapid Z. Like you I'm looking for a scope that I can range fairly quickly for long shots. 300-400 yards to be exact.  

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 16:02
tbone1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: May/31/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 195
I personally love the #8, it allows for very fast target acquisition but I would have no problem with the #4 either.  I didn't realize that the posts come closer together.  Have you looked at one in the Zeiss or does it just look that way in the picture.  The reason I ask is that the picture much of the time is inaccurate.  I thought the only difference is that the #4 lacks the thick part of the top post but I could be wrong.  I assume you know since its sounds like you have experience with the #4.  This is a Zeiss #8 at 6x.the
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 16:17
tbone1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: May/31/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 195

Obi Wan, there are several different rapid z reticles for different calibers and they will be offered in different scopes.  I was going to take a picture of the brochure I have but this should be easier.

 

http://www.zeiss.com/C1256BCF0020BE5F/ContentsWWWIntern/3DC0 003746AB21148525726200057786.

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 16:30
SAKO75 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/29/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 246
I have a PDF from zeiss on subtensions

measurement is how many CM @ 100 METERS

CROSSHAIR OPENING OR WIDTH - 140
CROSSHAIR THICKNESS - 1.5
POST THICKNESS - 15

#4 IS SAME BUT OPENING IN 70 INSTEAD OF 140
I AM THINKING THE #8 MIGHT NOT BE SO BAD..... HMMMMM
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 16:37
SAKO75 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/29/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 246
HECK NOW I AM THINKING OF GETTING 2.5-10X50, ONLY WEIGHS ONE MORE OUNCE AND MY MOUNTING SYSTEM WILL WORK WITH EITHER???
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 22:27
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

Originally posted by SAKO75 SAKO75 wrote:

HECK NOW I AM THINKING OF GETTING 2.5-10X50, ONLY WEIGHS ONE MORE OUNCE AND MY MOUNTING SYSTEM WILL WORK WITH EITHER???

 

Cool, I would go with the 50.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/11/2007 at 22:59
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8047
Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

 Cool, I would go with the 50.

These are good words from someone who has large scopes on some great looking guns. Completely changed my perspective on how they look. Of course they are always a pleasure to look through.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/12/2007 at 09:07
Obi Wan Kenobi View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/21/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 186
Originally posted by tbone1 tbone1 wrote:

Obi Wan, there are several different rapid z reticles for different calibers and they will be offered in different scopes.  I was going to take a picture of the brochure I have but this should be easier.

 

http://www.zeiss.com/C1256BCF0020BE5F/ContentsWWWIntern/3DC0 003746AB21148525726200057786.

 

 

Thanks T, it sucks they don't offer it in the standard 2.5 & 3-12. The Diarange 2.5-10x50 & 3x12 are a little too deep for my pockets.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/12/2007 at 10:23
tbone1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: May/31/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 195

Sako 75,  This is a tough decision.  I really don't want to pursuade you either way.  I'll give you my thoughts and then let you make up your on mind.

 

I typically prefer 42mm objectives.  To me they fit my rifles better, mount lower and are not as bulky.  I used to hunt primarily with 50mm objectives but my preference has changed, I now prefer portability when choosing a rifle and scope.  I love the short mags strictly because they are built on more portable rifles.  My hunting style has also changed and I do alot of stalking now where I used to do more stand or beenfield hunting.  To me a 42mm seems to be easier to shoot from various postitions.  I guess really it all depends on the rifle that you are going to put it on.

 

As far as performance goes,  this is always a tough decision for me.  In my experience larger objectives have not yielded the improved performance that I have expected.  When I have done side by side testing of similar optics, I have been very surprised at how little difference there is whether it's been with binos or scopes.  All I can say is look for yourself if you can.  To me exit pupil gets exagerated.  In my opinon for low light hunting anything over 4mm exit pupil is sufficient.  It's when you go below 4mm that I believe you will notice a decrease in performance.

 

Since we are comparing equal optics and equal magnification then the only difference here is exit pupil.  You could look at it another way.  A 2.5-10x50 would yield a 5mm exit pupil at 10x.  A 2.5-10x42 would yield a 4.2 mm exit pupil at 10x.  The 42mm at 8.5x will be just as bright 50mm at 10x.

 

I like to talk in real terms of performance.  What will one scope allow you to do that another one won't.  Personally I don't think the slight difference in magnification would make any difference in shooting what so ever.  I also don't believe if the buck of a lifetime walked out right at dark, you would be able to shoot with a 50 but not with a 42.  The only difference is in the ability to see small details.  Let me explain.  I have a pair of Leica 10x42 and 8x32.  They both have about a 4mm exit pupil and technically equally as bright.  I glass constantly for hours and I can see noticably better with the 10x42 in low light.  It may not be because they are brighter (even though they appear to be), its because they are just as bright and have more magnification.  Or they may actually be brighter due to a higher twighlight factor.  For example, if I'm looking at a doe in fading light and trying to make sure that its not really a button buck that that hasn't broken the skin yet.  That extra 2x magnification helps me to see that in fading light.  A 10x32 would probably be fine most of the time however the exit pupil would drop a little too low (3.2mm) and wouldn't be sufficient in low light.  When I have tried a 10x50 the difference was very minimal and hardly noticable.  So to me the possible benefit of the 50mm scope would be that you could "possibly" be able to turn up the magn. 1.5x with equal brightness to determine if you can see small buttons or not.  The reason I say possibly is because the 42mm can also go to 10x as well so it would need to be nearly pitch black for there to be a potential difference and also because scopes are not suited for this purpose very well since you are looking through one eye.  I prefer using a good pair of binos since you can determine small details much better with them.

 

Most of the time a 50mm is substationally bulkier and slightly heavier than a 42mm.  However in this case the VM/V 50mm is such a compact scope that it would be hard to argue that it's too bulky.  The only real difference, other than being an 1oz heavier is the that it would need to be mounted higher.  I hate to say this, because I hate when people tell me this, but you really can't go wrong with either one.  To me, it would depend on what rifle I was putting it on and what type of hunting I would be doing most of the time.  The compact 50mm VM/V would be plenty portable, but the 42mm would also be plenty bright.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/12/2007 at 15:11
SAKO75 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/29/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 246
THANKS EVERYONE
I am going to go with the Diavari 2.5-10x50
Unlike, a lot of people I will shoot deer on the highest power. i read alot of forums where people always leave their scopes on 4x or 6x. I sure as heck dont. 2 instances over my career made me choose the 50mm.

Last year, evening hunt, about the end of legal hours and I am watching a kudzu bottom 230 yards away. This area was even darker than other areas because it was small opening surrounded by large trees which made it look darker than where I was sitting.
Multiple does in the area. Big bodied buck i had a glimpse of a couple hours early appears faintly in my binoculars. Put the leupold vx-III 3.5-10x40 up to my eye and i cant find him. put the gun down, binocs back up and there he is barely. put gun back up- cant see him, just a bunch of shades of brown.
Will the zeiss be better? Maybe, maybe not, but I want to try it and see.

I had a similar situation happen a couple years ago but was using a conquest 3.5-10x44. Same thing but it might have been after legal hours..

The point of this is when i dial the zeiss up to 10x, i will have 2 things- a visible reticle and a solid 5mm of exit pupil.
Only time will tell....

For a 1oz difference and mount setup that can support wither, i'll take adavantage of the mounts and the lightest brightest 50mm scope on the market.
I'll give a thorough analysis when i receive it and compare it to the 8x42 ultravids i just bought.


Edited by SAKO75
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/12/2007 at 17:11
ceylonc View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: September/13/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 514

SAKO75, looks like you've made a great decision!  Congrats on what is going to be an amazing scope for your applications.  To put it to you another way, if you can't see well enough to take a shot with that scope, there ISN'T any other scope (short of night vision) that could...

 

I just sold a Diavari VM/V 3x12 56mm about two weeks ago.  It's a long story as to why but what is came down to was that I wasn't doing the shooting that really takes advantages of this scope's strengths enough when I really want a high quality scope that will excel on the 200, 300 & 600yd lines.  With that being said, the VM/V is the cat's ass as a hunting scope and I think you'll be amazed with just how good the glass portrays the images. 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/12/2007 at 17:18
SAKO75 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/29/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 246
I also found out that my new zeiss WILL have the LOTUTEC coatings
Wonder how they will work???


THX!!!!!!

Edited by SAKO75
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "ZEISS 2.5-10x42 Diavari?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Zeiss diavari V 3-9x42 T* Robster80 Rifle Scopes 0
Zeiss Diavari vs Victory HT RedneckWitAPaycheck Rifle Scopes 7
Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42 bwilliams1848 Binoculars 1
Zeiss Diavari V *t 1.5x6x42 thoughts? mlv2k5 Rifle Scopes 1
Zeiss Diavari-Z 2.5-10x52mm T* artdir Rifle Scopes 3
Zeiss Diavari scope and Zeiss Victory scope little cleo Rifle Scopes 4
ZEISS DIAVARI Z 2,5-10X48 MC huntlife Rifle Scopes 0
Zeiss Diavari Z or Swarovski PH brodeur272 Rifle Scopes 5
Zeiss Diavari Z 3-12x56 T* rd7fox Rifle Scopes 5
Zeiss Diavari Victory Renico Rifle Scopes 16


This page was generated in 0.375 seconds.