...
I'm trying to understand the argument for a higher mag. Not at all doubting you,
@375Fox or anyone else. Just trying to justify it when I never put my 3-15x44mm any higher than 5x when I was in Africa.
Is it just personal preference? It it a matter of 5x on a 24mm objective being a different or less stable sight picture than 5x on a 44mm (or slightly smaller)? I speak more from a perspective of inexperience vs. arguing the logic. Just trying to understand it better.
The ideal .375 H&H one-rifle safari scope (?)
There was a time in the 1980's when the golden rule of scope magnification was "1X per 100 yards". What that meant is that a 3x was good to shoot out to 300 yards, 4x was good to shoot out to 400 yards, etc. And it worked! In those days NATO snipers used 4x scopes, like during WWII, and these were perfectly adequate for a typical European theater mechanized warfare 400-yard sniper shot, and even out to 600 yards. I trained on these, you could not count the buttons on the bad guy's tunic, but you could perfectly deliver a centered torso hit. But you could not have hit a Taliban head in a rock crack at 800 yards.
At that time (1980's) the apogee of scope technology was the Zeiss Diavari 1.5-6x42. In those days, Swarovski glass was far from being as bright as Zeiss glass, Leica did not produce scopes, Schmidt & Bender production was very limited, etc. so Zeiss it was. The Diavari 1.5-6x42 featured a total cumulated light transmission (light going through all the lenses making up the scope) of ~80%.
This scope was considered a near ideal design for the following reasons:
- A low magnification of 1.5x allowed for shooting animals on the run (e.g. driven wild boar);
- A high magnification of 6x allowed, per the wisdom of the day (see above), to shoot big game out the 600 yards, which typically far exceeded the performance of commercial ammo and many rifles;
- An objective of 42 mm allowed a light bean of 7 mm to reach the shooter's pupil at full magnification and at full pupil dilatation at dusk and dawn;
- 80% total light transmission was sufficient for real-world application, as in low light conditions (dusk and dawn) the limiting factor is NOT the ability to shoot, but the ability to judge the quality of the game (through binoculars);
- The scope was comparatively still light and small (although heavier and bulkier than the numerous fixed 3x or 4x of the era).
I will personally argue that the basic design perfection of the Zeiss Diavari 1.5-6x42 stands in the mid 2020's as well as it did in the 1980's. Heck, I still own one of them on my Steyr Mannlicher Luxus .270 Win Stutzen, and a similar Schmidt & Bender 1.5-6x42 on my New Haven-made Winchester 70 Stainless Classic .300 Wby, two of my favorite rifles, and they continue to perform flawlessly.
Zeiss Diavari 1.5-6x42 on Steyr Mannlicher Luxus .270 Win Stutzen. The pinnacle of European mountain rifles in the 1980's.
Schmidt & Bender 1.5-6x42 on New Haven Winchester 70 Stainless Classic .300 Wby. The epitome of American all weather elk rifle in the 2000's.
But technology advances from the 1980's to the 2020s has made perfect even better
I believe that the Swarovski Z6 1.7-10x42 with Plex or 4A illuminated reticle is probably the best (near ideal?) .375 H&H
one-rifle safari scope available today:
The reasons why, are the following:
- While not as ideal as 1x, its low magnification 1.7x is still compatible with shooting animals on the run. Sure, pure 1x magnification is better to shoot a charging buffalo or elephant with both eyes open, but the .375 H&H is NOT a good stopper. Should it wear a scope designed for a .458 Lott? And in a one-rifle safari scenario, 1.7x will do on a charging DG.
- Its high magnification of 10x allows to shoot small game (e.g. Klipspringer) out to any ethical range. No, 10x is not needed to shoot a Kudu at 300 yards, but a Klipspringer at 400 yards is a lot smaller in the scope, and now that modern laser range finder, accurate ammo, good glass and precision barrels allow it ethically, a little more than 6x magnification comes in handy, and unless you shoot gophers at 600 yards, you really do not need 16x or 24x...
- Its 42 mm objective allows a light bean of 7 mm to reach the shooter's pupil at 6x magnification and at full pupil dilatation at dusk and dawn. This is where it shines compared to a 1-6x24 "DG scope" format which only provides a 4 mm light beam at 6x. Will you need 6x in a leopard blind? Most of the times not, as shots as generally below 100 yards, but 6x with maximum light reaching your eye (e.g. 7 mm beam) may prove invaluable for a trophy Kudu at dusk at 300 yards.
- 90% total light transmission is a brightly visible (pun fully intended) improvement over 80%, and if your binoculars are on par with your scope (they actually should be at least as good, and desirably better) 10% more light transmission, and a better ability to judge the quality of the game (through binoculars), then shoot it (through the scope), extend the magical dusk and dawn times when most of the big trophies are taken.
- Its dimensions are compatible with magnum-length actions (it fits on the Mauser 98 and CZ 550 Magnum actions), which most of the 1980's 1.5-6x42 DID NOT, and which was originally the primary reason why "DG scopes" were (and have remained out of acquired habit) straight tube scopes with a main tube long enough to fit over magnum actions.
- It is only 1 ounce heavier at 16.6 oz than the 15.5 oz straight tube Z6i 1-6x24, which means that in practical terms, weight is not a selection criteria.
- It is still somewhat affordable, compared to the Z8 8x magnification range series.
In summary,
aside from the acquired taste for what a .375 H&H "should" look like with a straight tube "DG" scope, it seems hard to impartially object to any of the Swarovski Z6 1.7-10x42 characteristics for a one-rifle safari client's .375 H&H, whose primary objective is not to be a "stopper" (the caliber is not powerful enough anyway) for which a true 1x magnification is arguably better.
Other scopes nudge the answer, like the like the Zeiss V6 2-12x50, but its magnification range is not as ideal in my view; or the Leica Fortis 1.8-12x42i, but it is really pricey; etc. but to my knowledge, but for a short time still before it disappears from the market as "ever-bigger" marketing specialists (certainly not hunting specialist!) recently killed it, the Swarovski Z6 1.7-10x42 with illuminated Plex or A4 reticle is rather unique out there.
I do not have a Swarovski Z6 1.7-10x4 on my .375 H&H, as it did not exist when I modernized my .375 H&H scope, and my Leica ERi 2.5-10x42 is close enough, that I have no reason to change it. Yes, it would have been better to have a lower end magnification, but I can live with it for one-rifle safari duties. For dedicated DG hunts, I have a .458 Lott...
So,
- Yes, there are less expensive brands.
- Yes if you look long and hard enough you can ferret out one example or two of Swarovski field failures (they are very, very, very rare though), but this is true of ALL brands.
- Yes, you will not need every hour of every day the amazing glass and coatings quality.
- Yes, lower tiers scopes have come a tremendous way and 2020's $500 scopes are light-years (pun fully intended) ahead of 1980's $1,000 scopes in terms of glass, coatings, image quality, light transmission, waterproofness, etc.
- Yes, they will outlive you, your kids, and your grandkids if they are reasonably handled and cared for (not pampered, mind you, but not thrown around on rocks or in the back of the truck or "cleaned" with your dirty shirt sleeve).
But I will stand by what I have already written elsewhere, when it comes to binoculars and scope: "you do not know what you do not know until you try", and I will continue to argue that a best-in-class pair of binoculars, and a best in class scope, while not necessary per se, are likely the only pieces of equipment that fully justify paying a few months of credit card interests.
In conclusion...
If - but only if - you can shoot a .45+ DG rifle as well, it is a much better choice than a .375 for DG, and there is a strong rationale for a straight tube scope with 1x magnification at the low end.
Conversely if .375 recoil is your threshold, it is an immensely better choice than even a .40, never mind a .45+!, but you are likely not into "dedicated stopper" territory. Your PH will handle that.
And if, like so many of us, you have a .375 H&H for a one-rifle safari, you are likely not into "dedicated DG hunt" territory, and your scope should be able to do it all, from a very, very, very (did I say very?) unlikely Buffalo charge at 25 yards, to a much, much, much (did I say much?) more likely Kudu at 250 yards or Duiker at 150 yards.
