Which would be a better choice for my 7RM, the Zeiss Diavari 2.5-10x50T or the Leopold VX-L 3.5-10x56 with B&C reticle? I believe the Zeiss is optically superior but haven't compared the two side by side. I do like the scooped out objective lens of the Leopold because I like my scopes to fit as low as possible. In addition, I do like the Leopold B&C reticle.

Bobby B.

A 50 or 56mm objective is totally out of place on a hunting rifle -- unless you are stand hunting in Europe by moonlight. Otherwise, there are no circumstances under which its bulk and high mounting are not more disadvantageous than the negligible theoretical optical benefit.

Unless you have a long neck and stock with high cheekpeice the large scopes don't work well for MY use on hunting rifles...as to quality....the two scopes are both a "no lose"..either should do very well....the Leupold is my first choice almost every time....BUT with the L series they haven't been out long enough to see if the sealant-retaining system required by the scooped objective is going to standup to longterm field use and I would pass on a L for me unless I got a great deal on a trade for one.....jmo....good luck and good shooting!!

I agree with Stonecreek. A 56mm scope is pretty big for most hunting purposes. What are you planning to use the rifle for?
IMO if the prize is about the same i would go for the Zeiss without any doubt. After a friend was told that they woulkd not repair his Leupold that had a 3 degrees inclination in the reticle i was done with them.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
A 50 or 56mm objective is totally out of place on a hunting rifle -- unless you are stand hunting in Europe by moonlight. Otherwise, there are no circumstances under which its bulk and high mounting are not more disadvantageous than the negligible theoretical optical benefit.

Stonecreek,

I agree with you on the gratuitous objective sizes you can find on today's scopes. Do you know why seemingly all European scopes come with such massive objective lenses? Is it just one of those things over in Europe, or do they do something we don't? Just curious.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
A 50 or 56mm objective is totally out of place on a hunting rifle -- unless you are stand hunting in Europe by moonlight. Otherwise, there are no circumstances under which its bulk and high mounting are not more disadvantageous than the negligible theoretical optical benefit.

WORD!!
Nicely stated.

Bobby, I have looked through both, mounted on the same rifle, the Leupy isn't even in the same league. It is an order of magnitude differential in favor of the Zeiss.

I respect Stonecreek and the other posters like cheaptrick a lot when it comes to optics, but I respectfully disagree, I don't think a 50 mm objective looks that out of place, I have several and like them on the rifles they reside on.

As to the optical difference, I won't go there, I'm not knowledgeable enough to debate on it, but some experts I've hunted with like Ron Spomer and John Barnsness have said go with as big an objective as you can tolerate aesthetically, it will help some in low light conditions......

It's all tradeoffs I suppose, but I think your option on the Zeiss would be fantastic.

Regards--Don

I'm not a big fan of 50+'s either, but that wasn't exactly what you were asking.

Given the Diavari vs. the Leup...no brainer...the Diavari hands down.

Fish is spot on. If given the choice to get TWO of the Leups or ONE Diavari for the same price, I would still get the Zeiss.

quote:

Do you know why seemingly all European scopes come with such massive objective lenses? Is it just one of those things over in Europe, or do they do something we don't? Just curious.

Hunting after dark by moonlight is legal and popular many places in Europe. It is typically done from a fixed shooting stand. The greater the magnification, the better the target resolution, so Euro hunters like scopes in about the 8X range. In order to produce the optimum exit pupil at 8X, the scope needs an objective lens of around 50mm (produces an exit pupil of 6.25mm -- about all the human eye can use at maximum dialation).

In America, virtually all legal hunting is done between the hours of civil twighlight (appx 30 minutes before/after sunrise/set). With light at civil twighlight levels or better, a 40mm scope provides a 4mm or better exit pupil, even at 10x. Four mm is about all your eye can use under these light conditions, so the larger objective is just bulk that is in the way and forces the mounting position of the scope to be too high for your cheek to rest properly on the comb of the stock.

For most American shooters, it is the psycological association of the larger objective with a larger penis that attracts them to the unwieldy and expensive optical instruments.

Stonecreek is absolutely right....Here in Europe we hunt a lot by night even with poor moonlight. Here in Iceland we shoot thousands of Artic fox during the winter mostly by night. For that kind of hunting you NEED a quality (preferably) European illuminated scope with 50-56mm lens. Same goes for stand hunting during the twilight in the woods. In these situation a “normal†3-9x40 won´t do !
Bobby! Don’t even think twice….buy the Zeiss 2.5-10x50 it’s one of the best all-around scope money can buy……ask any European hunter

quote:

Originally posted by Ingvar J. Kristjansson:
Stonecreek is absolutely right....Here in Europe we hunt a lot by night even with poor moonlight. Here in Iceland we shoot thousands of Artic fox during the winter mostly by night. For that kind of hunting you NEED a quality (preferably) European illuminated scope with 50-56mm lens. Same goes for stand hunting during the twilight in the woods. In these situation a “normal†3-9x40 won´t do !
Bobby! Don’t even think twice….by the Zeiss 2.5-10x50 it’s one of the best all-around scope money can buy……ask any European hunter

Stonecreek & Ingvar,

Thanks for the lesson. I suspected it had to have something to do with hunting in either twilight or NO light conditions that would necessitate such an objective lens.

go Zeiss
hands down
no doubt
about it
theres no need to justify that 50mm front lens
regards

I can't get good cheek weld with a large objective scope. I just bought an IOR 2.5 X 10 X 42 and I don't feel a need to go any larger than that.

If you're not hunting at night there is no need for such a large objective... Either way, for about the same dollars, check into the Leupold VX7s... You'll find they stand right up there with the Euros optically... You might also wish to check into the Nightforce line of scopes...

Ken....

I'm like chain, I want my head on the stock, line up faster for a running shot. A big objective, high mounted scope is a problem, plus it is wider than the rifle and bangs into everything on a rough country hunt.