The Gun Counter

Does anyone know how is the clarity, colour correctness, resolution, edge distortion and magnification is of t he military/police division, Hensholdt by Carl Zeiss 6-24x72mm -- Reticle is mounted in the 2nd focal plane…I just can’t imagine a bell, lens that big…I thought 56mm was huge this is “ginormus” (as my daughters would say)!

The 3-12x56mm has two models available one with a reticle in the 1st focal plane and the other, the FF version, with it in the 2nd focal plane…Why? What’s the difference? Which is better and why?

SeekHer wrote:Which is better and why?

I have no clue. Do you want me to call the Zeiss people and ask?

If I remember correctly, if the reticule is in the first focal plane, the apparent size will change when the magnification is changed, while in the second focal plane, the apparent size will remain the same. Maybe that's reversed. I think it's only important if you're wanting a mildot or BDC reticule, since the apparent size would need to change with magnification change in order to remain a valid measurement tool.

Someone who has more than a passing recollection will hopefully comment.

That seems correct. Seems you would need a heck of a cheek rest to shoot that thing!

Denis wrote:

SeekHer wrote:Which is better and why?

I have no clue. Do you want me to call the Zeiss people and ask?

Yes!

Why would you want the crosshairs to get bigger, blot out more of the already small view and purposely do it and even offer a non magnifying version as well...seems self defeating?

All my variables stay the same size, the image just gets closer and larger...

Where are you Chris, when we need you...

I inquired about Pride Fowler's Rapid Reticle scopes a while back, they do that so the BDC stays the same relative to the magnification, IIRC.

ETA: Okay, here's the thread, and yes, Chris weighs in. According to comments in the thread, reticles in the first focal plane zoom with magnification, so I guess reticles in the second focal plane do not:

http://theguncounter.com/forum/viewtopi ... ide+Fowler

I'd wondered about how to get a really large aperture scope on a gun, without needing super high rings or having the eye end high above the rifle. Maybe a fixed Porro or roof prism in the optical train might allow it (imagine splitting a pair of binoculars in two and mounting one side atop the rifle), recoil affecting optical alignment might be a problem, though... I saw a pic somewhere the other day of a rifle that appeared to have a Mak-Cass scope atop the rifle!

ETA2: Wow, thanks for getting me started, SeekHer; I'd forgotten about the Pride Fowler site until prompted by this thread. They have a Rapid Reticle scope for .22 magnum, maybe I just found the scope for that ZKM 611! Looks like they make several scopes for different calibers, not just the usual .223 and .308.

http://www.rapidreticle.com/22mag6x40.htm

72mm objective? That's not a rifle scope, that's an astronomy telescope. That's the freakin' Hubble.

Do they make rings that tall in a standard offering, or does it require a custom mount?

I guess they need it for all the stuff displayed in the scope...it has a ballistic drop calculator built in as well as a angle indicator, anti cant device and thermometer...

Chris, what's the difference between 1st and 2nd plane or why would or wouldn't I want the reticle to magnify?

a 72mm objective lens? Yeesh. And it's oddly low powered for such a huge lens. hmm.

Now if they say, doubled, or even tripled that magnification, they'd have the BR guys beating down their doors to buy 'em.


HTRN

CByrneIV wrote:

HTRN wrote:a 72mm objective lens? Yeesh. And it's oddly low powered for such a huge lens. hmm.

Not oddly low powered at all when you think about it. I know you know this, but I'll go over it again for those who don't.

Oh, I understand that, I was thinking from a marketing point of view.