ZEISS Presents All-New LRP S5 - FFP Riflescopes for Long-Range Precision Shooting and Hunting

[MarkyMark007]

Yeah honestly a 10 mil turret doesn’t need extra numbers, just a second rev indicator. If you’re in the second rev and can’t figure out what 4 mils equals you’ve got bigger issues. Not to mention how rarely people even go beyond 10 mils.

i think that there is NO indicator on the market which show YOUR revolution. it just show revolution of the mechanism of the riflescope, which is NOT your real revolution.
so in this case it's better to have more than 10 MIL in one revolution, because you will go less time in second turn.

 

[chevy_man]

i think that there is NO indicator on the market which show YOUR revolution. it just show revolution of the mechanism of the riflescope, which is NOT your real revolution.
so in this case it's better to have more than 10 MIL in one revolution, because you will go less time in second turn.

That is easily one of the more confusing things I've ever tried to read.

Have you ever actually handled a scope with a mechanical rev indicator? It's one of the things the mark 5 does really well, and the zco does well also. Also one thing missing on a s&b. Extra idiot check when the pin bumps out it's obvious you've went beyond the first turn.



I hope those turrets are less obnoxious in person. I do like the locking windage but would like a locking elevation also. I have a habit of chucking rifles in the truck and letting them ride around on the seats. The turrets move more often than not if they're not locked or capped.

 

[Huskydriver]

That is easily one of the more confusing things I've ever tried to read.

Have you ever actually handled a scope with a mechanical rev indicator? It's one of the things the mark 5 does really well, and the zco does well also. Also one thing missing on a s&b. Extra idiot check when the pin bumps out it's obvious you've went beyond the first turn.



I hope those turrets are less obnoxious in person. I do like the locking windage but would like a locking elevation also. I have a habit of chucking rifles in the truck and letting them ride around on the seats. The turrets move more often than not if they're not locked or capped.

Uh my SB's all have a pin that stick up when I'm in the second rev just like my zco

 

[Sgtsideways]

there is no flourite coating, just lences with fluorite, which are more fragile.

Thank you for pointing that out. Absolutely my mistake.

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

Why don't some of you expert scope designers give LOW a call and put all these other scope brands to bed, lolol?
You do not even have to invest in the manufacturing equipment or labor; they do it all for you.

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[chevy_man]

Uh my SB's all have a pin that stick up when I'm in the second rev just like my zco

Well damn. I had to look. Every one I've ever messed with has had the Yellow turrets. Didn't realize they had a pin system also.

 

[Dobermann]

I'm just here for the stream of negative comments from people who've never even seen these things.

I'm just here waiting for someone to give this a serious reliability test, over time, with multiple samples ... and report back.

(Said by someone who owns Zeiss Victory binos ... but for scopes ... the three main things I care about are reliability, reliability, reliability.)

 

[MarkyMark007]

That is easily one of the more confusing things I've ever tried to read.

Have you ever actually handled a scope with a mechanical rev indicator? It's one of the things the mark 5 does really well, and the zco does well also. Also one thing missing on a s&b. Extra idiot check when the pin bumps out it's obvious you've went beyond the first turn.

so when you sight in the rifle for 100m and there you set zero on you turret, your revolution indicator will pop up just exactly in zero of the second revolution?
than how you reset revolution indicator for the other ''zero'' setting on your riflescope? or it gets automaticly? or it doesnt get at all?

 

[308pirate]

so when you sight in the rifle for 100m and there you set zero on you turret, your revolution indicator will pop up just exactly in zero of the second revolution?
than how you reset revolution indicator for the other ''zero'' setting on your riflescope? or it gets automaticly? or it doesnt get at all?

The pin retracts as you dial back down into the first revolution.

Should be obvious.

 

[308pirate]

i think that there is NO indicator on the market which show YOUR revolution. it just show revolution of the mechanism of the riflescope, which is NOT your real revolution.
so in this case it's better to have more than 10 MIL in one revolution, because you will go less time in second turn.

Nonsense

 

[308pirate]

Hi,

Why don't some of you expert scope designers give LOW a call and put all these other scope brands to bed, lolol?
You do not even have to invest in the manufacturing equipment or labor; they do it all for you.

Sincerely,
Theis

This constant bitching and opinionating by people who know less than zero about the subject matter is how real subject matter experts are chased out of forums.

 

[MarkyMark007]

The pin retracts as you dial back down into the first revolution.

Should be obvious.

i think you don't understand.

 

[308pirate]

i think you don't understand.

I understand perfectly well. Your questions and statements make it clear that you do not.

 

[Barelstroker]

My guess is that these new scopes from Zeiss are modified, updated, reconfigured Hensoldt designs.
After all, why wouldn't you use as much of the engineering as possible from one of the best scope designs in the world.
Maybe it's not as simple as I imagine but, I think they'd be smart to use as much as they could in the design of these new scopes.

 

[ma smith]

Why don't you guys just wait for a technical descriptions instead of guessing?

 

[Barelstroker]

Why don't you guys just wait for a technical descriptions instead of guessing?

Because I like to guess.
Anyhow, we'll more than likely never know for sure.

 

[308pirate]

After all, why wouldn't you use as much of the engineering as possible from one of the best scope designs in the world.

Because the state of the art keeps moving forward. That's why you wouldn't.

 

[Barelstroker]

Because the state of the art keeps moving forward. That's why you wouldn't.

Going by what I've read from owners of Hensoldt scopes, there's not a great deal if any improvement from an optical perspective when compared to most so called Alpha scopes.
Anyhow, I'm no expert but, it seems logical that they'd use as much of the design as they could to save on R & D.

 

[srt-4_uk]

Going by what I've read from owners of Hensoldt scopes, there's not a great deal if any improvement from an optical perspective when compared to most so called Alpha scopes.
Anyhow, I'm no expert but, it seems logical that they'd use as much of the design as they could to save on R & D.

And new owners of Ford Model Ts didn't think cars could get better.

 

[308pirate]

Going by what I've read from owners of Hensoldt scopes, there's not a great deal if any improvement from an optical perspective when compared to most so called Alpha scopes.

Owners of scopes have zero technical subject matter expertise to make any of those claims. Anyone who thinks optical performance at that level can be gaged by looking is a complete idiot.

This is Dunning-Kruger at its finest.

 

[Barelstroker]

Owners of scopes have zero technical subject matter expertise to make any of those claims. Anyone who thinks optical performance at that level can be gaged by looking is a complete idiot.

This is Dunning-Kruger at its finest.

Oh well, maybe.
I'm merely speculating as opposed to your authoritative edicts regarding who knows & who doesn't or can't know so, the Dunning-Kruger effect doesn't apply to me.

 

[308pirate]

Oh well, maybe.
I'm merely speculating as opposed to your authoritative edicts regarding who knows & who doesn't or can't know so, the Dunning-Kruger effect doesn't apply to me.

Think what you want, I don't care.

 

[RobbinsHGray]

This constant bitching and opinionating by people who know less than zero about the subject matter is how real subject matter experts are chased out of forums.

What? Are you saying Theis is not a subject matter expert?

 

[tylerw02]

If individuals can't gauge optical quality by "looking", as in comparing between them, what is the purpose of increasing quality if it will be unperceivable to to the end-user? Perhaps that portion of the budget should be used in different ways to improve riflescope design?

 

[308pirate]

If individuals can't gauge optical quality by "looking", as in comparing between them, what is the purpose of increasing quality if it will be unperceivable to to the end-user? Perhaps that portion of the budget should be used in different ways to improve riflescope design?

The eye can see differences between shit optics and high quality optics. It's still a subjective comparison without any quantifiable measure.

It's nearly impossible for the eye to see differences between top tier optics A and top tier optics B. If the person looking says there is a difference, it's an even more subjective opinion than when comparing shit optics to high quality optics.

If it were that fucking easy/simple, there would be no need for optical equipment manufacturers to buy sophisticated measurement and inspection equipment worth anywhere from the hundreds of thousands of dollars to the millions.

Why is that so damned hard to understand?

 

[tylerw02]

Slow your roll, here, buddy. You don't like questions?

We aren't talking about low quality optics. We are talking about top tier. And you've basically agreed...if the user can't tell the difference, is that the best place to be putting money?

If the difference is not detected by the human eye, and only sophisticated machines can detect it, is it a good use of money? Are they building glass for machines or for end users? Most end-users are looking for "pop" and using their glass more for aiming than they are observing. Does it matter if the machine says the glass is the "best" in a given category, when the human eye chooses something else?


ETA: the place the nuances between top shelf optics tends to present itself are resolution within given environmental conditions. For instance spotting an elk in the shadows at a mile vs being able to provide a rough field score for the same elk. And yes, those kinds of differences are detectable to the human eye, but only when such situations present themselves. Of course it matters, and tools for optical engineering do matter because they are being used to improve on the very fringe vs actual field testing. At the end of the day, its the eye optics are made for and not the machine. Why is that so damned hard to understand?

 

[Barelstroker]

Anyhow, there's no need for anyone to go Vanessa about this shit. I was merely speculating as to the possibility that Zeiss MAY have used some of the design & manufacturing engineering that was used for the Diavari/Hensoldt scopes. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. Only Zeiss will ever know.
As for 308Pirate, he's usually a grumpy old shitter but, that's his right &, it's how we know he's still fine.

 

[chevy_man]

so when you sight in the rifle for 100m and there you set zero on you turret, your revolution indicator will pop up just exactly in zero of the second revolution?
than how you reset revolution indicator for the other ''zero'' setting on your riflescope? or it gets automaticly? or it doesnt get at all?

There is no "other zero".

The rev indicator is so you know you've dialed 20 mills instead of 10 mills with a glance or feel.

Notice there's several rows of numbers?

I feel like the single turn cds dial may be your level.

 

[ma smith]

Because I like to guess.

I'm merely speculating.

Anyhow, I'm no expert but, it seems logical

Cliff notes:

Step 1 bullshitting
Step 2 bullshitting
Step 3 ->"logic"


(I think this is what drives some people nuts, but YMMV)

 

[beetroot]

so when you sight in the rifle for 100m and there you set zero on you turret, your revolution indicator will pop up just exactly in zero of the second revolution?
than how you reset revolution indicator for the other ''zero'' setting on your riflescope? or it gets automaticly? or it doesnt get at all?

The revolution indicator resets automatically.

 

[Barelstroker]

Cliff notes:

Step 1 bullshitting
Step 2 bullshitting
Step 3 ->"logic"


(I think this is what drives some people nuts, but YMMV)

I thought it was obvious that I wasn't claiming facts. Was it the words "guess" & "speculating" which gave it away?
If I'm guessing & or speculating then by definition I can't be bullshitting.

 

[Soulezoo]

Half of you in this thread can buy the Zeiss. Half of you can buy the ZCO.
The other half can buy a Quigley Ford. (You know who you are.... well, anyway, we know who you are)

 

[Barelstroker]

Half of you in this thread can buy the Zeiss. Half of you can buy the ZCO.
The other half can buy a Quigley Ford. (You know who you are.... well, anyway, we know who you are)

What's wrong with a Quigley Ford?
Never owned one but I spose they work ok. Can they be worse than some of the cheap brands I've owned many years ago which would change POA after every shot &, by the way, one of those scopes was an extremely well known American brand. Admittedly, that was 30 years back but, it was a thing for me at the time. I finished up fitting that scope on a .22 & it's been fine ever since but.
I've been thinking of buying me a Quigley & seeing how it goes. Question is, if it goes alright, what should I do?
After all the shit comments around here about Quigley Ford scopes, I may have to tell some truths &, that never goes down well on this forum.
Hmmmm, have to think about this.

 

[Huskydriver]

What's wrong with a Quigley Ford?
Never owned one but I spose they work ok. Can they be worse than some of the cheap brands I've owned many years ago which would change POA after every shot &, by the way, one of those scopes was an extremely well known American brand. Admittedly, that was 30 years back but, it was a thing for me at the time. I finished up fitting that scope on a .22 & it's been fine ever since but.
I've been thinking of buying me a Quigley & seeing how it goes. Question is, if it goes alright, what should I do?
After all the shit comments around here about Quigley Ford scopes, I may have to tell some truths &, that never goes down well on this forum.
Hmmmm, have to think about this.

Budly loves his

 

[Barelstroker]

Budly loves his

Whom is Budly?

 

[Soulezoo]

What's wrong with a Quigley Ford?
Never owned one but I spose they work ok. Can they be worse than some of the cheap brands I've owned many years ago which would change POA after every shot &, by the way, one of those scopes was an extremely well known American brand. Admittedly, that was 30 years back but, it was a thing for me at the time. I finished up fitting that scope on a .22 & it's been fine ever since but.
I've been thinking of buying me a Quigley & seeing how it goes. Question is, if it goes alright, what should I do?
After all the shit comments around here about Quigley Ford scopes, I may have to tell some truths &, that never goes down well on this forum.
Hmmmm, have to think about this.

Do you work concrete? Do you bench 275? Those are serious prerequisites for making the Quigley awesome sauce.
Seriously looking forward to that thread if you make it.

 

[Barelstroker]

Do you work concrete? Do you bench 275? Those are serious prerequisites for making the Quigley awesome sauce.
Seriously looking forward to that thread if you make it.

Well I've wondered if the scopes are worth the shit canning they get around here.
I dunno, maybe they are. I might have to see for myself.
They certainly look interesting.

 

[toolman]

Wonder if they will be bringing it to the Long Range Expo coming up at Arena training center?

 

[bulldozer3]

I found Budly with his quigly ford down at the concrete plant

 

[Barelstroker]

I found Budly with his quigly ford down at the concrete plant
View attachment 7727206

Yeah, I wanna be just like him.
That settles it. Quigley Ford it is.

 

[7WSMShooter]

Buddley’s Quigley thread was one of the epic threads of SH.
Dont know if it was made a sticky or not, but should be required reading
to be a posting member on this forum.

 

[MarkyMark007]

The revolution indicator resets automatically.

thank you.
because on my Kahles K1050 it's fixed for it's internal mechanism; so it is useless, because it shows riflescopes internal revolution, not mine where i set zero. same thing at delta optical stryker FFP.

in one leupold manual i saw that you need to reset revolution indicator manualy. at ZCO i didnt see this topic in manual.

 

[MarkyMark007]

Slow your roll, here, buddy. You don't like questions?

We aren't talking about low quality optics. We are talking about top tier. And you've basically agreed...if the user can't tell the difference, is that the best place to be putting money?

If the difference is not detected by the human eye, and only sophisticated machines can detect it, is it a good use of money? Are they building glass for machines or for end users? Most end-users are looking for "pop" and using their glass more for aiming than they are observing. Does it matter if the machine says the glass is the "best" in a given category, when the human eye chooses something else?


ETA: the place the nuances between top shelf optics tends to present itself are resolution within given environmental conditions. For instance spotting an elk in the shadows at a mile vs being able to provide a rough field score for the same elk. And yes, those kinds of differences are detectable to the human eye, but only when such situations present themselves. Of course it matters, and tools for optical engineering do matter because they are being used to improve on the very fringe vs actual field testing. At the end of the day, its the eye optics are made for and not the machine. Why is that so damned hard to understand?

every eye is different, so even if the machine or paid shills on snipershide tell you that some glass is the best, you cant say if it is realy the best for your eye.
not to mention that every scope is not the same as the previous, so yours can be better or worst than the tested one.

Most end-users are looking for "pop" and using their glass more for aiming than they are observing.

if you use glass for aiming than you are looking for mechanical percfection, not optical.

 

[tylerw02]

every eye is different, so even if the machine or paid shills on snipershide tell you that some glass is the best, you cant say if it is realy the best for your eye.
not to mention that every scope is not the same as the previous, so yours can be better or worst than the tested one.

Most end-users are looking for "pop" and using their glass more for aiming than they are observing.

if you use glass for aiming than you are looking for mechanical percfection, not optical.

My point exactly!

 

[Denys]

there is no flourite coating, just lences with fluorite, which are more fragile.

Yeah, well, words mean things.

The Zeiss literature talks about "fluoride lens elements" as in:
"The premium optical design utilizes ZEISS Fluoride lens elements, SCHOTT glass and ZEISS’s proprietary T-Star lens coatings for optimum color fidelity,"

They repeat this meaningless canard many times. I am not aware of any glass made with fluoride. I have heard of fluoride coatings. I am also aware of "fluorite crystal lens elements" but these are expensive as heck, fragile and the very few people who have them in spotting scope talk about them A LOT in their sales propaganda. Look at the Kowa Prominar spotting scopes. You will also find fluorite crystal lens element in top end camera lenses from Nikon, Canon and perhaps others. These lenses go for $8000 and up. If the Zeiss really had fluorite crystal lens element, they would talk about it a lot more.

I have heard of a single riflescope made with fluorite crystal glass, and that's an Airbus at over $7000.

I also know that ED and especially Super ED glass has some fluorite crystals in it, more so in the Super ED lenses, and currently only March scopes use Super ED lens elements in their High Master optical systems.

If Zeiss has finally started using ED glass, they are keeping it a secret. I did read somewhere than Zeiss using Schott glass out of Germany for all the internal lenses and that they use ED glass from Japan for the big external lenses. I place a low credibility rating on that claim; doesn't mean it's not true.

The 40mm tube seems to be rather thin in the cutaway drawings, more in line with the regular 2mm thick walls, thus providing for a wide range of adjustment. Nothing wrong with that, just something of which to be aware. I kinda like the solid 4mm thick walls in the 34mm tubed March scopes.

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

O look the March Optics Shill has arrived.

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[Denys]

Hi,

O look the March Optics Shill has arrived.

Sincerely,
Theis

Yep, and Kowa shill, and Burris rings shill, and Redding reloading shill, and Shot Marker shill, and Autotrickler shill, and JLK bullets shill... shall I go on?

Did I mention Nikon shill?

 

[Globalstar66]

The 40mm tube seems to be rather thin in the cutaway drawings, more in line with the regular 2mm thick walls, thus providing for a wide range of adjustment. Nothing wrong with that, just something of which to be aware. I kinda like the solid 4mm thick walls in the 34mm tubed March scopes.

Where did you get 40mm tube? It's a 34mm main tube.

Also, this is from Zeiss:

With the ZEISS FL Concept​

A further reduction of this “secondary spectrum“ can be achieved through the use of special glass containing fluoride (fluoride ion) with so-called „abnormal partial dispersion, where the undesired color dispersion is considerably lower from the very beginning in comparsion with all other types of optical glass.

The SCHOTT FL glass minimizes the spread of the color spectrum. Contours are almost without color fringes and the color fidelity is higher. Fine details are clearly visible.

However, the glass material alone is not enough. Only the meaningful integration of these SCHOTT FL lens elements into matched optical systems, including the right coating technologies, results in the “FL concept“ that stands as a guarantee for outstanding image quality and brightness.

This concept demonstrates its full capabilities with very elaborate optical systems, particularly very large lens diameters, very high magnifications and very wide fields of view.

Therefore, only selected spotting scopes, binoculars and riflescopes – being the reference class for observation and hunting optics – bear the FL Seal of Quality only.

 

[Khlit]

I wonder how this compares to the older Zeiss Diavari fl's and Hensoldts. Those scopes to this day are optically the best scopes I've ever looked through hands down even compared to S&B, Kahles, and the likes. The rest of the features sucked compared to more modern scopes but in terms of eye strain after sitting behind them for hours on end they were in a step above IMO though haven't used any of the TT's yet.

 

[Barelstroker]

I wonder how this compares to the older Zeiss Diavari fl's and Hensoldts. Those scopes to this day are optically the best scopes I've ever looked through hands down even compared to S&B, Kahles, and the likes. The rest of the features sucked compared to more modern scopes but in terms of eye strain after sitting behind them for hours on end they were in a step above IMO though haven't used any of the TT's yet.

My guess is that they will compare very closely. Why reinvent the wheel when you've got all the drawings, manufacturing & technical data locked away in a draw somewhere.
When looking at the scope, I don't see that Zeiss have gone in balls & all on this one either. Looks to me like they're testing the waters to see how hard the bite is then maybe they'll bring out that Hensoldt, Schmidt & TT slayer they've had tucked away for ten years.