Any tips on buying a spotting scope?

[Daniel Murphy]

My father and I are both in the market for a decent spotting scope, something that we can easily see where the rounds are hitting center mass at 100-200 yards. I've been considering something like a Burris Signature model 18-45X60. I'm 49 and over the past couple of years my vision has become a lot less than it once was.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[Arkady]

I purchased a Barska spotting scope (20x-60x, 60mm) a couple of years back for around $100 (on sale at Midway).

It certainly isn't as nice as the higher end models--eye relief is so short that I have to remove my shooting glasses--but on 60x I can easily spot .22 holes at 200 yards. Being that my smallest caliber is .22, and my range only goes to 200 yards, I bought based on that requirement.

If you're shooting .30 cal then the 45x may be enough for you, but if your vision is poor, like mine, go for the 60x.

 

[Maverick223]

Glass quality is paramount, I would suggest something like a Vortex/Bushnell on the low end or a Nikon/Meopta in the moderate price range.

 

[Big_E]

Yes, don't skimp on these. As much as I would like a Fluorite glass Zeiss, I don't think I could put down that kind of cash for many years. I plan on getting a Vortex in the meanwhile. Just don't go cheap, I thought it was dandy at first, but caused eye strain, couldn't see very well at lowlight/long distance and oh, it broke after tipping over. Spend a little more at first, and in the long run you will save money.

 

[Maverick223]

Yes, don't skimp on these. As much as I would like a Fluorite glass Zeiss, I don't think I could put down that kind of cash for many years. I plan on getting a Vortex in the meanwhile.

Good choice; I feel the same way, unless you have bucketloads of cash the Zeiss is a little too pricey IMO (but it sure is nice).

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

First, what's the max budget?

Second, are you willing to buy used, or new only?

Third, what's the smallest size hole you're trying to see at said 200 yards?

 

[semperfi63]

Midway USA sells Konus 20-60 X80 scope normally around $200. Great entry level spotting scope --- carry bag and tripod are junk but I'm not complaining for the price

 

[Rembrandt]

Spend the bucks and get a quality piece of equipment......cheap glass will perform like cheap glass. Secondly get a quality tripod.

My preference is Swarovski, nobody ever complains about the quality, only the price.

 

[Juice Boxes]

I got a Leupold. IMHO I think it is garbage. I love everything else that i have seen that is leupold.

 

[Big_E]

I also tried the Leupold Green Line, Nikon Prostaff and Konus. All were really dissapointing to me, w/ the Nikon being the best. The Vortex Nomad has pretty decent glass, and a lot of nice features (rotating collar, slide out shade, etc.) its like $350 IIRC.

 

[BHP FAN]

The simpler the better.If you get one with an adjustable super wazoo tripod, you'll never set it up.I'm going to give mine to my brother and buy an $89.00 Simmons from Big Five.

 

[Uncle Mike]

Zeiss is a little too pricey IMO

And so the Meopta top tier stuff, but man o man they are nice.

 

[semperfi63]

Spend the bucks and get a quality piece of equipment......cheap glass will perform like cheap glass. Secondly get a quality tripod.

My preference is Swarovski, nobody ever complains about the quality, only the price.

I would argue my Konus scope isn't cheap glass just economical. And Here is a guy who's opinion I trust that seems to agree with me.

http://www.jarheadtop.com/

 

[52grain]

Don't cheep out. This is one of those things that you should only buy once.

 

[Maverick223]

And so the Meopta top tier stuff, but man o man they are nice.

LOL, I sure hope so, because I am 99% certain that Meopta builds the Ziess Victory Diascopes.

 

[MCMXI]

My spotting scope is a Leupold Mark 4 and I like it partly because it's small/short/light and because it's a FFP model with a Tactical Milling reticle so I use it very effectively to calculate corrections on my scope. I can easily see .223 and .308 holes in targets at 300 yards. I can't see any holes at 600 yards of course but that's what the guys pulling targets are there for.

 

[rangerruck]

the biggest prob I found with the cheap scopes, is that usually they have a very small sweet spot, when it comes to the focus knob. get it on the distance you want, and try to dial it in real good; becomes a super chore- you move it a bit, nope no good, go back the other way, damn!!! too much, try back the other way, Is that in focus as well as the first time!>!!!???
So spend at least 300 bucks I say, so you can get a nice easy to turn and adjust the diff knobs and such, well worth it, and less headaches, both real and imagined.

 

[SwampWolf]

Seeing .22 holes clearly at much over 100 yards will require better than average optics. My 80 power Leupold barely makes the grade. And more power (magnification) doesn't always equate to better resolution. Ask me how I know...

 

[ms6852]

When purchasing spotting scopes or any type of optics the rule is to purchase the best you can afford. Save and buy once instead of buying cheap than having to buy again because you were disappointed. Regardless of what you purchase, you must remember that even with the top of the line spotting scopes such as Kowa, Swaroski, Zeiss, Leica, and Nikon field scope, all of these scopes will be limited to no more than 300 to 400yds in discerning bullet holes. Atmospheric conditions will always be a factor that plays havoc with your optics. Beyond those ranges the scopes are usally used to see the vapor trails and make corrections as necessary. More power does not necessarily get you the distance you want, because it also magnifies atmospheric distortion on a hot day. What a better quality scope does is minimize the problems and allows for better correction. Of the top five scopes listed the cheapest that I would use is the Nikon, which side by side with a Swaro is just as good and the difference in resolution is not really seen by me with my eyes. Pay a little less but than go with at least an 80mm objective lens because the more power you use the darker the image becomes, and 80mm will help with this. At prices lower than Nikon between $800 to 1000 go with the Bushnell with ED glass, or the Brunton. My brother has the Brunton with ED or HD glass and gives my nikon a run for its money.

 

[Offfhand]

From post above;

"I got a Leupold. IMHO I think it is garbage. I love everything else that i have seen that is leupold."

Juice, which model did you get? I have the Golden Ring 12-40X HD and it is superb. I like it even better than my Swarovski because it is just as clear and a lot more compact. I bought the kit, which comes in a nice case and includes a good tripod, window mount and filters. Couldn't be happier.

 

[stubbicatt]

Kowa is the choice of many highpower competitors. I think you will be happy with one of them.

 

[Maj Dad]

Angled Eyepiece

I have a very nice Leupold with tripod, etc., but what I really wish I had was an angled eye piece so that it wouldn't be necessary to twist my neck another 30 degrees from the vertical to horizontal. This is something I didn't consider, and discovered too late. Otherwise, you can't go wrong with Leupold, though I am sure you can find one that does the job for less money. I have no experience with other spotters, but my experience with optics is that you usually get what you pay for.

 

[dubbleA]

Cant go wrong with the higher end glass as already stated.. I use a couple Swarovski ATS 80HD's and couldnt be happier. A sturdy tripod is a must with the high magnfications, Manfrotto gets the nod there. .22 holes at 400yards no problem, 30 cal holes at 5 and 600 yards can be seen when the mirage isnt boiling.

 

[SwampWolf]

I agree with Maj Dad in that an angled eyepiece will reduce unnecessary head and neck contortions. I also agree with dubbleA's recommendation to seek out a "sturdy tripod". However, if your shooting will mostly involve the classic competitive shooting stances (standing, kneeling, sitting, prone) as opposed to chiefly using a bench, then a non-tripod type shooting stand is adviseable. There are many excellent shooting stand makers on the market that cater to competitive shooters, including First Strike, Ray Vin, Giraud Tool Company, Ewing and the Creedmore "Big Blue". I'm a big fan of the First Strike stand but all of the companies listed offer a good product and each have advantages and disadvantages when comparing them to each other.
Just remember that no matter how good your scope is, a less than fully stable stand will compromise the optics you may have paid dearly for.

 

[Welding Rod]

My tip: Save until you can buy the spotting scope that you think you will be happy with the rest of your life. Same goes for all optics, and guns too for that matter.