I am starting a search for a spotting scope and would appreciate some input.
Paul

WOW mate...that's like asking for advice on buying a car.

There are any number of spotting scopes on the market, and I am a firm believer in you get what you pay for. As a general rule, if you spend a little and you get a little quality...if you spend big bucks, you generally get good quality.

I think if you stick to the known quality brands of riflescope then you will find that they usually produce a spotting scope of similar quality to their other optics. Personally I like the Leopold product...I just wish I could afford to purchase them.

I found this website online, but I note they don't list Leopold so maybe they only list certain brands...

The Best Spotting Scope Reviews Website

Swaroski.
It will hurt the wallet but the ability it has is worth it.
IMO Better than Ziess.
Nothing else comes close.

It all comes down to budget. Swarovski is considered the premium glass in my neck of the woods, but its damned expensive. If you have money to burn go for it, I could not justify the price personally.

When I was researching glass, I found a highly rated scope that in virtually every single review all said the same thing: "only fractionally less clear than Swarovski". The killer thing is it was half the cost of Swarovski. Is it worth double the price to get a 3 or 4% improvement in clarity? It wasn't for me

The scope is a Vortex Razor.



I chose the 85mm objective 20-60x variable zoom model. Vortex has one of the best warranty's out there, in fact I got a tiny scratch on mine, sent them a email asking if I could get some touch up paint. They responded they don't sell touch up paint but if I sent it back they would repaint it for free. I told them thanks but it wasn't worth the hassle.

So with such a good warrenty, I talked to others who let me in on a semi-well kept secret. There is a website called CameraLandNY that goes to alot of outdoor shows and they set up scopes for people to demo. After a couple of shows the store sells off the demo scopes. I bought one of these demo's and you honestly could not tell it had ever been taken out of the box, it was immaculate! Not a fingerprint. I've told all my friends, they've all bought demos from Cameraland and had the exact same experience.

cameralandny.com/spott...=0&y=0

Soooo some pictures (these were taking right after we got this scope, I did not have a phone scope adapter or anything so I was hand holding the phone behind the spotter:


See the mountain in the shadow there in the background? Thats 2.4 miles away. Notice the bump on the right edge where it decends off the peak and rises up a little?



Yea this, well what do we have here... low power:



Waited for cloud to move and sun to come out... I'm holding my crappy cell phone up to the eyepiece here, its even sharper with the naked eye. High power.



2.4 miles and able to seperate billys from nannys. THAT'S why its worth saving a little more and going for a razor, its just an amazing difference.


-DallanC

Being from camera background, I have made in the past spotting scope from older secondhand lenses.
Camera lenses are usually made to higher standard than most spotting scope.
Large telescopic film camera lenses are now can be obtained for cheap due to their different film plane sizes from most "cheaper" digital cameras.
If you attach a good telescope eye piece to the real lens cap of a camera lens. you will get a very good spotting scope.

Unfortunately I do not have one to show right now.

Geland, thanks for that advice. I've to try that one because I think it can give a nice (small) good quality scope.

And I'm for many years the owner of a Swarovsky AT80 with a 20-60x occular, but to be honnest: I don't think I can do what Mr. Dallan did (and it's not because we don't have mountains with goats). I'm not sure my scope will be that clear...
And the AT80 has an angled occular, which is OK at the shooting range, but for searching nature to spot game, you better have something that goes straight.

And the big problem with such a big scope: they are clumsy to carry. And also such an expensive scope stays more in house than being used out in the field, because you are a little bit afraid to damage it.
I also have a much smaller and lighter Russian straight spotting scope that sees much more usage because it's stocked in my hunting bag. The quality is much poorer but it's always available when needed...

gelandangan wrote:

Being from camera background, I have made in the past spotting scope from older secondhand lenses. Camera lenses are usually made to higher standard than most spotting scope. Large telescopic film camera lenses are now can be obtained for cheap due to their different film plane sizes from most "cheaper" digital cameras. If you attach a good telescope eye piece to the real lens cap of a camera lens. you will get a very good spotting scope. Unfortunately I do not have one to show right now.

I'm looking forward to seeing how this all fits together and works mate...it sounds like a good home project.

Sooo...next time you put something together, post some pics please mate.

Paul what are you wanting to do with it? See bullet holes at the target or spot goats like Dallen is?

I'm only interested in seeing bullet holes on paper. I have binoculars for spotting game.

The biggest point that I could say is buy the scope that has the largest exit pupil size at the greatest magnification that you will be using. A 2 mm exit pupil is TOO small for a person to see through easily at 60 x and especially if that person wears glasses. I have Bushnell 20-60 x and it is not as great a scope to use at the higher powers. I bought it on sale for 300$ a few years ago and I had wished to research and use it before buying it.

I shoot highpower and I see a lot of different spotting scopes on the firing line. You can spend a lot of money and still not be able to reliably see bullet holes in paper particularly in the black...

But my observations...

I have a Celestron Ultima 80 20-60x that I got for less than $200 from Optics Planet a few years ago. I have used it and handled it pretty roughly. I have always been able to see .22 bullet holes at 100 yards and I can usually see them at 200 yards if the light and back ground is right. If I am shooting at 300 yards.. it can be about 50/50 chance if the light is right. At Camp Perry where we shoot into lake Eire the targets are up and have the sky as a back ground and I can usually see bullet holes at 300 in those conditions.

I have actually watched trace and could see a .22 hole at 500 yards once on a perfect day and can usually see 22 holes in a shoot n c at 300 and 500 as well.

I have looked through the ED glass models by Celestron, Swarovski, Kowa Konus Bushnell Nikon Zumhell... some of which cost 5 times what my Celestron costs... and I can still see mirage and holes as well as the high dollar scopes.

If I dropped mine and broke it today... I would order another Celestron Ultima 20-60X.

Celestron is in the telescope business! they make some great star scopes.
That is probably the most demanding of all fields. I'll have to look into that one.

I have an inexpensive Simmons 20-60x spotting scope that I picked up at Cabela's on Black Friday for $39 which you normally can find for $99. It does ok up to 35x but going any higher than that makes the image worse. You guys are inspiring me to get a replacement.

Yes, I've seen some of the cheap ones and they all suffer from color aberration badly. I never thought to look at Celestron.

Can't seem to find a Celestron to look at locally. Best Buy seems to have the best deal on these right now. Also found this one at Cabela's that is made by Vortex. I will stop by and look at it later this week.

www.cabelas.com/produc...QAWidgetID