I recently acquired two pre-owned Zeiss HD5 3-15x50 riflescopes from different owners, with the intention of setting up two similar rifles identically. The scopes appear to be in a great condition. The scopes made sense for me with regard to weight (25mm tubes), optical quality (good enough for the intended purpose), the reticles (bold enough and the Z600 makes sense for the purpose) etc. So far so good...

What I notice is that after focusing the reticles as per "usual" against a clear background, the parallax setting for 50m appears pretty much spot on, but with both scopes focusing for 100m requires the parallax almost at the "infinity" setting. I would have thought that the dial had slipped were it not for the 50m setting which appears correct.

Can owners of similar scopes please share whether they have experienced a similar situation? Thanks.

For some reason Sam Jaffe in Ben Casey comes to mind. It would seem infinity is closer than ever - I'm pretty sure eternity is

My only experience with easily adjustable parallax has been in my Nikon Monarch 4-16x42. As it happened, I took it as a spotting scope when hunting a few days ago. My mate complained that the resolution wasn't that great, at which I suggested he adjust the parallax. With doing that the picture came clear, causing us to look at the dial, where it appeared infinity was closer to 1000m.

I used to adjust it when it was on a rifle years ago but recall only that the picture focus did not coincide with parallax and that neither aligned closely with distances on the dial.

Thinking more about your scopes, AL: are there lots of other numbers on the parallax dial? If not, maybe Zeiss has taken the view that hunters don't want to be constantly obsessed with parallax and that minimal changes will do. With lower-powered scopes, tradition has been to set parallax at some intermediate distance and let the shooter wing it at others.

I note that you say the setting for 100m is almost at infinity. Could it be that the adjustment interval just gets concentrated at that end of the scale and that there is still change required before infinity is actually reached?

Another way to look at this could be via the parallax aspect itself. At what dial mark is it eliminated at 100m?

Also, at what magnification did you notice the situation? Does it vary with power? I would expect more difference at higher powers as scopes below 6x or 7x usually have no ready means of changing parallax.

As the OP suggests, some input from other members who actually have that model would be appreciated.

If it were me, I would check the parallax itself. In other words, with a target at 100 and the rifle in a good rest, move your head and see what happens.

If the point of correct focus is parallax-free, I would not worry about it any further.
But if they are parallax free at the 100m setting and you consequently have an out-of-focus image when the scope is parallax free, that is less than ideal and I feel they need to be repaired or replaced.

I like your outlook, Peter, but fear getting focus and parallax correction to agree may be a vain hope. If it could, and those values also corresponded with the marks on the dial, the need for separate rangefinders would be much diminished.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
I like your outlook, Peter, but fear getting focus and parallax correction to agree may be a vain hope. If it could, and those values also corresponded with the marks on the dial, the need for separate rangefinders would be much diminished.

I only own two scopes with parallax adjustment. On both mine, focus and parallax do agree. So in my very limited experience, the parallax and focus should co-inside.

One (a Leupold VXIII) is not marked with distances, the other (a very early Nightforce) is marked for distance, and the distance marking doesn't give correct focus or fully correct for parallax. But not to the extend mentioned here. Mine probably has about a 15% error.

The problem is, if focus and parallax don't match, it becomes very difficult to adjust correctly under field conditions.

Re the need for rangefinders: no, at the ranges one needs to know the distance accurately, the depth of field is too great to make focus adjustment an accurate range measuring tool.

But I must also say, it makes far less difference than many people seem to think. I have shot a few PRS matches (matches where the targets are steel gongs at varying but relatively extended ranges, and where one has to very quickly change ranges). I typically adjust my parallax somewhere in the middle of the target array's distance for that stage, and I doubt any of my many misses were caused by a parallax error. I think a shooter with good fundamentals and reasonable stock fit doesn't really need to worry too much about parallax unless the targets are really small.

I have an adjustable parallax HD5 and think you likely have an issue with your scope - I can get a clear adjustment at 100 yds at the first “rectangle” or so on the indicating/adjustment knob if I recall

Thanks Peter, I'm glad to hear your focus and parallax adjustments do coincide. I guess a bullet could slip quite a few inches within such depth of focus at long range.

Thinking of the OP, I wonder if AL's personal reticle focus might be some way off the mid-point, and whether this affected the parallax settings.

If not, whisk(e)y hunter may be right. Does Zeiss warranty scopes for subsequent owners?