Zeiss Diavari V 6-24x72* illuminated rifle scope

[ormondprop]

i'm thinking of buying one of these for my rifle, it'll be used for lamping and long range magpie/grey crow/rabbit shooting, just havent made my mind up on the 72mm or 56mm obj, i've shopped around and can get an ex demo 72mm model for d same price as a new 56mm but i don't know which to go for, the 72mm is surely better but will be mor expensive to mount due to d 34mm tube and i'll need a comb raiser due to the extra height of the scope, is there much difference between d optical quality of them, any advice will be greatly appreciated,

[Ballie]

i'm thinking of buying one of these for my rifle

Hi ormondprop,

I have recently bought the 56mm one and it is the DOG's testicles, it makes the NightForce I have look like a cheap scope (well not quite, but the Zeiss is much better) the 56 and 72 will be the same in day light the only thing the 72 will do better would be dawn/dusk.

However, my 56mm is very good at dawn dusk and much better than the N/F. At night with a lightforce SL170 lamp with Amber filter I can pick out a single leaf on a tree at over 300 yards.

My advice would be go for the 56mm the mounts are cheaper and you can mount it lower to the barrel, but the choice is yours.

All I can say is if you buy one you won't regret it.

[sir-slots-alot]

Agree with everything ballie said.

I currently have two 6-24x56 victory's - They are superb.

Having looked through The 72 mm scope, I can say it is noticably heavier and more clumbersome than the 56,

Whilst the 72 is no doubt a brilliant scope , the extra cost of mounting and the increase scope height above the bore put me off.

My advise - get the 56 mm model.


Alan

[ormondprop]

thanks guys, i reckon the 56mm should do everything i need and more, so i say thats what i'll go for, the 72mm was tempting me even though i knew it was going to be a lot of hassle to mount and look through on the rifle due to the extra height, so the 56mm will be mine soon enough, what reticles do ye guys have, i'm thinking of the 40 ir, or 60 ir i heard the nf scopes are a big let down alrite when there is little light,

[scottyoungsheep]

I would say if you're willing to spend that much money on a scope, an extra x quid for mounts shouldn't be of any concern to you.

[Ballie]

thanks guys, i reckon the 56mm should do everything i need and more, so i say thats what i'll go for, the 72mm was tempting me even though i knew it was going to be a lot of hassle to mount and look through on the rifle due to the extra height, so the 56mm will be mine soon enough, what reticles do ye guys have, i'm thinking of the 40 ir, or 60 ir i heard the nf scopes are a big let down alrite when there is little light,

I've got the 60 which I think is perfect. a couple of other guys on here have the same and also think its good

[Marky610]

I've got the 60 which I think is perfect. a couple of other guys on here have the same and also think its good

Me included

Ballie I'm glad your happy with the scope (how could you not have been ) I was worried about convincing someone to spend so much money on a scope without seeing one, even though I did

If someone doesn't want any extra aim points on a scope then I think the 60 ret is perfect, I've used mine at dawn, dusk, under the lamp and with a nv add-on, all perfect

Oh and during the day

[sir-slots-alot]

what reticles do ye guys have, i'm thinking of the 40 ir, or 60 ir

I have 43 ret on mine - ( the fine mildot ) well worth a look at - all of them are good , I especially like 60 ret - I would have a look through them and pick which one suit you and your shooting.

Alan

[Ballie]

ormondprop,

Ret choice is very personal if you like to use hold over points then the mil dot (43) will suit you well however, if you use the dial in method or use a very flat shooting rifle then a simple (60) dot is sufficient.

The choice is yours

[ormondprop]

i have a mildot scope already and never use the mildots so i think i'd prefer to go for a normal cross such as the 40 or 60, i'll have to look through them to decide, is the 40 very thick?

[pavman]

Agree with everything ballie said.

I currently have two 6-24x56 victory's - They are superb.

Having looked through The 72 mm scope, I can say it is noticably heavier and more clumbersome than the 56,

Whilst the 72 is no doubt a brilliant scope , the extra cost of mounting and the increase scope height above the bore put me off.

My advise - get the 56 mm model.


Alan

Al

do you shoot at night (sorry for not knowing) do they let enough light in from a scope mounted lamp (170) and can you get sun shades to cut out lamp glare?

[sir-slots-alot]

Hi Pavman,

Yes I have used this scope for lamping many times.

I set mine on 12 mag - this has been good enough for the ranges you typically encounter fox at night and still gives an excellent field of veiw.

When lamping alone , I use a scope mounted 140 and again not had a problem with glare from the lamp.

I am afraid I couldn't tell you whether there is a sunshade available for this scope ... someone on here is bound to know.


Good luck with your decision.

Alan

[pavman]

Hi Pavman,

Yes I have used this scope for lamping many times.

I set mine on 12 mag - this has been good enough for the ranges you typically encounter fox at night and still gives an excellent field of veiw.

When lamping alone , I use a scope mounted 140 and again not had a problem with glare from the lamp.

I am afraid I couldn't tell you whether there is a sunshade available for this scope ... someone on here is bound to know.


Good luck with your decision.

Alan

I spoke with a company called SRB Griturn on rec from Tim Northgate and it seems (most???) 56 scopes are screw cut the same in front of the objective M58X0.75 which is a standard camera thread, Griturn can make shades to order so looks like we are in business...

The .243 ticket arrived

[bullet boy]

I have a Schmidt and Bender 3-12x50 Klassik IR scope on my Tikka T3 Lite for Foxing.This scope will take some beating.