Can anyone take a picture of thier #4 reticle? I would like to compare it.

That's a beatiful set-up ya got there!!

Thanks, Hate to say, sold the Fx3, plan to get an Fx2 6x36 and do a custom shop #4 if it's the same config.

Did keep the 6.5x55 though The scope did just clear rear sight, though it does not look it. Seems like I used shim made out of a business card to give it a few thou to clear.

Anyone got the ziess or swarovski to compare with?

Zeiss German #4

I think I like that better than my Fx3 I had, the outer 3 are bolder, though you'd never lose the Leupold in any legal light.

If only Conquest 4x32s came like that....what scope is that one?

Victory 2.5-10x42 T* VM/V

Nice sir. I saw some great optics in Zeiss's booth at the Shot show, that's one I could work with, the largest ones did not appeal to me.

That's great, anyone have a swaro? That'll make up my mind!

I had a S&B 4x36 that had the German #4 but they number there reticles 7,8, and 9. Forget which one they called it but it looked exactly like the Zeiss. I like the Leupold reticle better myself.

zeiss first focal plane 2.5-10x42

LOW POWER

MIDDLE POWER


High Power

ah... The schmidt looked like the High power Zeiss then at a constant 4x. Bought it when you could get em for about $400-50. Now they want over a grand... good scope but...

schmidt's with A7 and A8 reticle have twice the width between the posts, they are a 4a type not a true #4. I think they are 50" @ 100 yards wide and the zeiss above is 25" @ 100 yards posts to post. almost all of them say the crosshair subtends 1/2" @ 100 yards which is constant because they are front plane.

S&B doesnt import their A4 but you can order. I have owned a couple s&b's and the spacing is so wide that it didnt really seem close enough to bracket game at low light. The reticle above (true #4) appears close enough to use the posts is the crosshair fades provided the animal isnt too far away

I think the Leupold did fine for bracketing, the spacing was give take 26" IIRC or thereabouts. I think the day I was trying to take a pic, my dig point/shoot camera had alot of white out and I could not get a pic with a view. Resolution like Zeiss sharp/clear, and the lines square off, thick to thin.

Crosshair was .7 at 100yds.

Burris 3p#4 is identical for all practical purposes, had one.

in a fixed leupy this is good to know but in a variable i'm surious what the subtensions are? probably different depending on model. I like the premier #4 in leupy's

Yes indeed SAko, there is a #4 S&B offers. Never knew that, thanks.

Unfortunately Premier no longer works on Leupold IIRC, perhaps Leupy made a 'deal' with them.

Check Leupold website for info or call per variable substensions.

Here's the Leupold post & duplex reticle. It's posts aren't as thick as the #4 and the center is closer between the posts. The center is almost as thick as the heavy duplex.


http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o23/chk1953/IMG_0001-2.jpg

So are the center wires on the #4 thinner than those on the post & duplex?

The post and duplex is one of my favorites but I've always wished the center crosshairs on it were just a touch thinner.

Bill

Im not sure but I believe they are but I also believe there will be a wider spacing between the left and right heavy posts leaving it more open in the middle of the reticle.

The center wires on the post & duplex are slightly thinner than the heavy duplex/#4 and the post & duplex spacing is tighter than the heavy duplex and definately tighter than the #4. The post & duplex posts are thinner than the heavy duplex or #4 but thicker than the standard duplex.

Does leupold offer the Post and duplex reticle as a standard reticle option in any of the new VX3 models or is it a speacial reticle that has to be installed for a fee? I like the looks of this reticle. It has just the right amount of heavy crosshairs with a small aiming area. I dont like super thin center lines in the middle or a wide spacing in the middle and this reticle is interesting to me.

The post & duplex isn't offered as a standard option BUT if you want one in a new scope order it from the custom shop and save a few $$$. It's less expensive to order direct. The custom shop will only sell scopes with finishes, turrets, or reticles that are not available over the counter direct. I ordered my VX-II 3x9 with the post & duplex from the custom shop.

Thanks Dave,

I knew the posts on the post & duplex were thinner and closer together, but after seeing 65BR's pic of the #4 on that Leupold the center wires looked thinner than the post & duplex. I've never been able to see the #4 in a Leupold except pics.

Bill

Bill

Re: Leupold, when I was a the 2007 Shot Show, I looked at a #4, and I THINK it was in a 6x42, but not positive, and THAT demo/sample had a very wide spacing compared to the one I owned above. I DO think there were possibly 2 variations of #4, but not positive - by Leupold. Certainly if one was in a variable scope it would likely differ somewhat depending on power.

SO, my point is I'd check with Leupold on specs prior to committing to a purchase to be sure what I was getting. I liked the one I owned alot, but not the '07 show sample. I was far too wide for my taste.

The pic above does not show the outstanding resolution of the scope, nor the sharpness of the reticle. It is like the Zeiss, very contrasting thin to thick was SQUARED off in the transitioned, not tapered like a duplex reticle. That looks better to my eye but the post duplex is a very nice option, and a #1 Leupold is also good. Some like the heavy duplex. The standard works fine, but the wide duplex is a disappointment and would be better served if Leupold did a #4 instead or a P/D IMHO.

FYI.. The new Leica riflescopes have the German 4 reticle available also... They show them on the website... Haven't seen on in person yet. Ovis_Chaser

At $ 1,500 and up, not my cup of tea....I can get a Burris for a small fraction with 3P#4. I guess there are those who can run Lambo's and Maserati's, others have to settle for less....

Did see them at the Shot Show and they are nice, but I cannot see how they are justified. If you can't kill it with a Leupold, Bushnell, Burris, Nikon, etc. I doubt a Leica will change the outcome.

Call Leupold and ask them about the different subtentions of the different reticles. I did and then got the post & duplex for my needs.

Yeah I looked on their website for the substentions for the different reticles, but found they do not list them. Kind of silly, it would make it alot easier to choose a reticle, especially with all they offer.

Bill

Phone or email, you will get answers quickly.

The of the things I like about #4 is that unlike most Duplex, it doesn't taper from thick to thin, and the boldness of the heavy part of the reticule.

Also, although not a function of the type of reticule, because mine have been in FFP scopes such as S&B, Swaro and Zeiss, the reticule tends to remain dark and solid in all light conditions.

I have noticed on other scopes, all 2ndFP, that the reticule can go almost silver/translucent...I'm not sure if thats down to how the reticule is made by the individual scope makers, or whether its common to 2ndFP scopes?

Regards,

Peter

I have noticed the crosshairs of the Bushnell Elites, Nikon Monarchs and even Weaver Grand Slam turn a silverish/translucent color when out in daylight with the light at different angles to the scope. I noticed that the one Sightron 4x32 and even the Pentax Pioneer 3-9x40 didnt do it at all. I think it may have more to do with how far the reticle assembly is from the ocular or maybe they coat their reticle wires with a non reflective coating. I know the Bushnell Firefly stays very black in all lighting conditions due to the Luminecent coating on the reticle wire which does not reflect light it absorbs it.

I do have a swaro AV3-9 with #4. I may have time this evening to take a pic of it against my sheetrock wall.

I sold a Conquest with #4 reticle. The Conquest reticle was very thick (like the Leupold Heavy Duplex). At least equal to the pic above of Zeiss on high power.

Please do I would really like to see it!

These aren't great pics, but I think they show the reticle okay. The reticle is pretty thick and it is a clear scope.