Do we have the Skill and patience to realize the quality?

Status
Not open for further replies.

JJHACK

Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2013
Messages
196
Location
Eastern Wa. State and ellisras South Africa
There are frequent posts here, and on many websites that discuss the minutia of quality and optical perfection. There are those that feel one of the big three are the only way to go, and some that feel that the big three are only a status symbol for the elite.

I guess in my life I have been in both camps. I have owned a number of binoculars in my life. In the early 80's was definitely in the camp of what could $1200 glasses possibly offer me that my 150.00 redfields did not? During those years I had way better then 20/20 vision. I was working as a guide in Alaska for bears and goats. I had clients with the high end glasses that I would frequently look through to compare.

I would find myself looking through the clients glasses to verify the tips of horns, or the quality of a hides. I was also embarrassed a few times with clients sharp comments that in my line of work I should not be using "junk" to judge their trophies. At my age, and their level of wealth and status, many of these wealthy guys could be kinda rude, and domineering. Of course I could have led them out and left them to die, but I would just just keep quite and do my best for a good tip. Some of the guides left their gear in camp between hunts or when there was a gap between clients. I would usually borrow their Zeiss 10X40B glasses which were the " professional choice" back in the day. They were far in excess of my pay grade.

Years past, with the purchase of another 1/2 dozen mid priced glasses for me. fogging up was a constant issue with those. While the Zeiss glasses the guides had 10 years earlier were still in use with no problems. I guess I realized at that point that had I managed to get those when I started I would be money ahead, and not have to be embarrassed with my clients. There is after all a lot of difference between using glasses casually during the year, and maybe a few hunting weeks. Compared to using them 90-100 days in a row every year in harsh environments with drastic elevations changes in non-presurized supercubs.

So is there a benefit to the high end glass? That's up to the individual, not for me to say. I have learned over a lot of years that they are a benefit to me. They are cheaper when you buy them early in your life. They may be the one thing that outlasts everything else you have. My Leica Trinovids are very old now. I can't think of another item I use that I still have from that far back. Rifles, sure, but beyond that nothing comes to mind.

The value that quality glasses retain allows most folks to trade up when the new glass, coatings, and designs come out. I see all the time that the same model glasses I have now, are selling in classifieds for darn close to what I paid for them. Still half of the cost of the best, but it's a big head start!

Having said this, there is a bigger problem that by far trumps quality. It's User education. I often wondered why myself and the other PH's spot game so easily while the visiting hunters seem to struggle. I reckoned it was just lack of experience on these African species. The colors and shapes are not the same as deer and elk. Probably the time change too! However after a while I realized it was the same in Alaska with White Goats and Black Bears. Sometimes in barron habitats. Not to mention I had those old Redfields and the clients were packing Zeiss and Swarovski most of the time. I was nearly always seeing game before my clients that were using the expensive glasses. However once found, I really could use those expensive glasses to better judge what I was seeing.

Just because you have 10X apex quality glass does not mean the game stands out there and waves a flag of surrender. By far the vast majority of guys glassing do not see the animals unless they are moving, or wide open. I think there is a bigger issue with the education or patience of glassing then the quality of glasses. It's like putting a normal guy in a Formula one car, and a formula one driver in a Mustang. My money is on the F1 driver in the mustang every time! The best tools won't help if you aren't using them properly.

So whats proper or skilled glassing? Good question!
Much depends on the habitat and the species. For starters, getting to a ridge top and scanning the basin, or meadow that lay before you for a minute is not likely to produce good results. I look for a comfortable place to sit with a clear view of what is before me. Then put my elbows on my knees to hold them steady. Usually I will glass the perimeter to see what is closest to getting out of sight first. Then grid the area and look at it all. Not for an animal, but a part of an animal. Not with a 100 yard sweep in a second, but a careful slow scan of the habitat, the shadows, the areas that will be out of the wind, the ledges that provide an overlook.

If you have ever stumbled upon a bedding area of Deer and Elk you will see they like the edges of long grass on a slope that keeps them out of the wind and allows a wide view of the area below them. Not always but this is typical. Learn to glass the areas they are most likely to be laying. Anyone will spot moving game, it takes a very patient hunter with good glass to pick out the tip of ears, antlers, and horns at a distance.

There is a lot more then this to learn. However the best glasses on earth don't do much good for the casual scanner who is in a race to "stumble upon" game while racing across the countryside. Binoculars do not work like a vacuum to suck in the animals from where ever they are pointed. I'm in no position to criticize or point a finger on this topic. I was 25 at one time and felt the greater area covered increased my odds. I wonder how many massive giants A glassed over and left sleeping where they were.

I have a 12 year old son. When we are hunting he will blow across a canyon in 2 minutes with his glasses and be ready to move. I'll sit for 10 minutes while he is fidgeting and staring blankly. Then I will ask him how many deer he saw. ...... Nothing. I will tell him there are 4 does and fork horn within 500 yards.

WHERE?

I tell him to grid the area and go slow, often in 2-3 minutes he will see them and say, Wow papa they blend in so good! Yeah, you are an impatient little guy, you need to slow down and look! This happens with adults I hunt with the same way.

Over the last several trips out in the bush, He is becoming quite a bit better. He will anxiously try to find something before I do. He is now visually mining into the bush looking for anything he can see. It's a big difference when you have just a little patience and think about what you're looking for. It's not a whole animal standing broadside in a parking lot!
_________________________
www.huntingadventures.net

Time spent in reconnaissance is seldom wasted
 
Last edited:
I am 27 years old and i need binos every day that i work my season. When i was younger, i used a pair of bright yellow binos (my favorite color) that auto focused and felt they were the bees knees.


Now, As a captain on a whale watching tour boat up here in Alaska I have the good fortune of being able to use a pair of coveted Steiners. I cant even use my old yellow ones any more because it feels like i am blind.

I agree with everything you say JJHACK. Deckhands that I work with (especially newer ones) seem to either stare blankly ahead at the 12 o'clock or scan very quickly and are just as fast to let me know theres nothing out there.

Practice usually makes perfect though, and thats why I have a little game that we play up in the wheelhouse. We both bet a dollar on who can spot the next whale.


...I usually end up making some money for lunch :p
 
Do we have the Skill and patience to realize the quality?


I think for the most part, in the case of the average hunter/shooter, that the quality of their optics, both scopes and binos, far exceeds their ability to realize it. No different than the Smart Phones, Digital Cameras and Televisions they sell today. Most folks use them till they break or die and never realize their full potential and never figure out all the do-dads, even tho they paid up front for all the whistles and bells.

Over the years I have heard many different suggestions of how much quality one should have in their optics. Phrases like "you should spend as much on the scope as you did on the rifle", or "you should buy the best quality optics you can afford". While good advice for most, they do not guarantee their potential will ever be realized. For the majority of hunters(overall, not just from this forum) that hunt a few days a year, shoot less than two boxes of factory ammo a year, hunt only when weather is pleasant and generally shoot no farther that 200 yards, they will be served just as well from a Wal-Mart special as a Swarovski. While there are many here that do not fit into that category, IMHO, the majority of hunters in the lower 48 do. Doesn't make them poor hunters/shooters, just means they do not hunt/shoot enough to tell the difference between a $300 scope and a $900 scope or a $200 pair of binos from a $600 pair.

Spotting game with or without optics is for the most part, a learned skill. Spotting a deer's subtle horizontal lines deep in the brush or spotting an antler above the swamp grass does not come natural to most. Picking out that turkey head above the alfalfa @ 200 yards as you walk across the adjoining field to another set-up is not like it shows on T.V. Folks that spend time in the woods tend to spot those things that don't fit, much better than those who's first trip is opening day. For years I was frustrated because it seemed my buddy could always spot game before me. 20 years ago @ age 40 I was told I had Astigmatism and needed glasses. Now I'm the one that spots things first.

Folks that guide/hunt for a living, or those that spend countless hours behind the ocular lens of their optics can and do realize the difference. While whether it makes them a better hunter or shooter is still to be determined, but they definitely can realize the difference in quality and will feel hampered if they do not have it.
 
I totally agree with your very well written examples. I also however find that for each person there are specifics which might come into play as well.

Maybe 8 or so years back I received a VERY nice refund on my taxes and decided that it was plenty past time to put the old Bell and Howell field glasses I grew up on into the box for limited use. They were still good and never fogged up that I remember but every once in a while you had to give them a smack to recenter the prism or find yourself looking at split images.

So I took my time and read through reviews of several dozen models and brands. I had made up my mind that upwards of $1300 would be around my limit. So I set out with a short list which included Zeiss, Steiner, Swarovski,and a few others thrown in for good measure. I REALLY liked the one model of Steiner, and had used a friends Zeiss on several occasions.

While at one store which actually had each one I wanted to look at I was approached by a fellow from Nikon who was thee for who knows why. He had already seen me make several trips up to the front of the store with different pairs to see how they were in both low light inside the store and bright sunlight outside where I could also check out the clarity at longer distances. He asked had I considered Nikon and that they were offering a pretty decent sale on a couple of their models. I figured why not give them a look, and had the fellow behind the counter bring out two pair. To my total disbelief, and to my eyes, both of these were not only clearer to me, but they also allowed me to focus in from about 12' or so and still be very sharp out to well past 400yds where to my eyes they were still very sharp and clear.

Now granted my eyes, compared to your eyes, and my hunting compared to yours are night and day different. I hunt whitetails and hogs, mostly at ranges of less than 100yds but on occasion I stretch things out across a wide open pasture. I have not had any issues putting detail on things, but I have also had the use of the adjustments to look into a patch of switch cane at less than 10' to determine which way the hair was running on a big hog which was bedded down in the middle of it. I had slipped right up on it, but in amongst the cane with the wind blowing it around I simply couldn't be sure which end was which until I dialed it in through the bino's.

One of the other features I found interesting when comparing and also calling in to the manufacturers was that the Nikon's were waterproof to 30' where the others of much higher cost were only water resistant. To me this was pretty unusual but it is what it is, and that was a big selling point. While I don't hunt underwater, there are plenty of times when I get drenched while out there hunting. I simply didn't or couldn't see myself having a higher priced set out in some of those conditions.

Here again, I DO agree in that you get what you pay for, but in the times since I have purchased the Nikon's I haven't had any regrets nor have I missed finding what I was looking for. I picked up two pair for less than what it was going to cost for one of any of the other brands I was looking at. One set is a 8X which I gave my daughter, and the other is a 10X that I use. I think they are both 32X objective, which while not as receptive to very late or very early, they will get you in trouble on both ends of the shooting times really easily.

Would I like a nice high dollar set, probably but not simply for he name. I guess it is like me driving a Dodge verses anything else. It's not that I am a Dodge fanboy, it's just that they had everything I wanted for a price I was willing to pay.
 
Good explanation. My current hunting environment doesn't require glass at all, being relatively short range stuff, except for the odd varmint trip a few times a year. But, having cause to use binoculars in the past, it's very true. You can't just aim them and your eyeballs in the general direction, you must take the effort to actually SEE what is out there.
 
good right up. Only thing id add to it is like you hinted toward glass has come along ways in the last 20 years. A good midrange priced 5-800 dollars would probably put to shame what you considered a great set 20 years ago and from what ive seen the gap between the newer midpriced stuff and the real top end stuff has closed up alot. I still think that a pair of ziess conquests, zrays, leupold mckinleys, steiner night hunters all are probably better glass then what was even available 20 years ago and plenty good enough for ANY hunter. You can pay 2 or 3 times more for a top ends set but about all your going to gain is maybe 5 percent better performance and thats like you said JJ is if your even capable of taking advantage of it. Im sure that if it were possible to majicaly give me set of binoculars that are twice as good as anything on the market today youd still be better at it then me with those old redfields. I think it comes down to a vette/porche thing. Give me 60k to buy a vette and i can drive away with one that will run right with any porche costing a 90k. It will handle just as well, run just as long and probably even hold its value better then the porche. I wont argue though that the fit and finish of that porche might be a bit better. Now young wall street stock investor might prefer the porche but truth be told the guy working at the local factory that bought the vette could probably hand him his ba@@s driving that vette
 
… glass has come along ways in the last 20 years. A good midrange priced 5-800 dollars would probably put to shame what you considered a great set 20 years ago and from what ive seen the gap between the newer midpriced stuff and the real top end stuff has closed up alot. …
Good point, Lloyd, and one that I ruminate on whenever I'm trying to decide on a scope. What with the meteoric advances in technology over the past decade or two, it seems that the dollar/quality ratio should have changed for optics as it has for color televisions, calculators, and computers. Is the "spend as much on a scope as you would on a rifle" school of thought still valid? Wouldn't one expect that the price of quality optics in this fiercely competitive industry be more in line with what is affordable to the average Joe? I remember paying over 100 bucks for a Texas Instruments calculator back in the 70's, because I wanted one that would do square roots. (One with trig functions was $499.00---well out of my price range as a college student!) Today, a much more sophisticated calculator can be had for five bucks or less. So my question is: have optics followed suit?
 
You will spend 98% of time looking through field glasses and 2% looking through a rifle scope.

You only need to look through a rifle scope long enough to squeeze the trigger. You will be looking through Binoculars for hours on end.

Brightness in scopes is not the critical factor internet loonies rant about. You will loose the crosshairs before you lose the target. It's why they started selling illuminated crosshairs. Don't get caught up in the whole scope brightness concept. I've used a 3.5~10 leupold VXIII for 15 years on my rifle. This is a professional hunters rifle critical for use with clients on all sorts of game. It's not a recreational infrequently used tool. But full time for culling, damage control and dangerous game. It's equipped with German 4A reticles. I shot a hyena at 50 meters using only moon light at midnight.

This is not a high end 2000 dollar scope. Put the money into binoculars, it's where your time is spent.
 
Folks that guide/hunt for a living, or those that spend countless hours behind the ocular lens of their optics can and do realize the difference. While whether it makes them a better hunter or shooter is still to be determined, but they definitely can realize the difference in quality and will feel hampered if they do not have it.
Agreed. If you spend several hours a day looking though optics, your eyes and head will thank you for spending the extra money.

Put the money into binoculars, it's where your time is spent.
Yup. I do have some really expensive scopes, but they are on varmint and/or traget rifles where I spend hours a day looking through the scope. I have scopes by Nightforce, Swaro, Zeiss (Victory) and even Schmidt and Bender. All of them are on special purppose rifles. The rifles I hunt with the most wear a Leupy. Heck, I took a S&B Summit off of one of my coyote rifles and replaced it with Bushnell. Killed just as many coyotes and had just as much fun.
 
JJHACK, points well taken. Quality of optics and how to use them are often muddled together.

While tracking a hunters wounded whitetail buck, was able to pick it out of a running herd nearly 3/4 of a mile away with Swarovski 10X42 SLC's. The tail was distinctively red from the bleeding wound. Other hunters in the party couldn't believe that such detail could be picked out at those distances. Budget glass doesn't have the color clarity to match the high end units. Fox hunting in the snow is another example, the red fur stands out like a beacon whereas with cheap glass the fur appears dull earth tones.

Another factor that isn't often discussed, eye strain from looking through bargain glass for long periods. If you're glassing for 6-to-8 hours a day the better glass will pretty much eliminate headaches and eye strain.
 
Having said this, there is a bigger problem that by far trumps quality. It's User education. I often wondered why myself and the other PH's spot game so easily while the visiting hunters seem to struggle. I reckoned it was just lack of experience on these African species. The colors and shapes are not the same as deer and elk. Probably the time change too! However after a while I realized it was the same in Alaska with White Goats and Black Bears. Sometimes in barron habitats. Not to mention I had those old Redfields and the clients were packing Zeiss and Swarovski most of the time. I was nearly always seeing game before my clients that were using the expensive glasses.

Well, there is a reason that they are paying you as their PH, isn't there? You are a specialist. You probably pay specialists to do things for you that you have the ability to do as well, such a taxes, fix your vehicles, appliances, paint your house, etc. Sure, customer support could explain to you how to do a lot of things over the phone, but that doesn't mean that you will or can do them well despite having been "educated."

If I am paying my PH to get us on the game and I am the one getting us on the game, then my PH isn't providing for me the results for which he is being paid. You should be expected to see game before your clients, at least most of the time. You know what to look for, where to look for it, how to notice subtle things in the environment that for you should stand out, though will not be readily apparent to the majority of your clients.

So whats proper or skilled glassing? Good question!

Actually, it is two different questions and the examples that you provide introduced a third component as well. You can explain how to properly glass an area to a given person, but that person, even if following you instruction, will not be skilled. Instruction is simply the knowledge tools and while very helpful, is no substitute for actual practice and experience.

The third component you introduced was the recognition of sign. You have to know sign to recognize sign. You can be great on the glass but if you don't know what you are looking for, then you will likely be severely hampered.

Brightness in scopes is not the critical factor internet loonies rant about.

You realize that since you are posting your opinion on the internet in a rant of your own, you have made a reflexive statement and as such, discounted your opinion.
 
JJ,

Thank you for a thoughtful and well written explanation of glassing. I especially like

"Usually I will glass the perimeter to see what is closest to getting out of sight first. Then grid the area and look at it all. Not for an animal, but a part of an animal. Not with a 100 yard sweep in a second, but a careful slow scan of the habitat, the shadows, the areas that will be out of the wind, the ledges that provide an overlook.

If you have ever stumbled upon a bedding area of Deer and Elk you will see they like the edges of long grass on a slope that keeps them out of the wind and allows a wide view of the area below them. Not always but this is typical. Learn to glass the areas they are most likely to be laying. Anyone will spot moving game, it takes a very patient hunter with good glass to pick out the tip of ears, antlers, and horns at a distance.

There is a lot more then this to learn. However the best glasses on earth don't do much good for the casual scanner who is in a race to "stumble upon" game while racing across the countryside. Binoculars do not work like a vacuum to suck in the animals from where ever they are pointed."

I'm in my late 50's, but basically a new hunter trying to teach two of my boys. I learned the lesson you state this last season. At 140 yards, I looked right past the three bedded deer into the woods beyond. (As you stated, they were in the long grass right at the edge of the woods where they could see anything approaching in the field.) I didn't see them but I was confident there was nothing there as I started to move forward. You can laugh at my surprise when the three deer I was looking for jumped up and bounded off into those woods. Had I known they were there my tactics would have been much different.

With that lesson learned, I started scanning the edge first, looking for anything out of place. Perhaps you, or someone else here can suggest some better equipment for us. Here's what happened. On the last day of deer season, we had a chance. My eyes couldn't see the deer(?) at 192 yards. With my old bino's I was able to see the out of place horizontal line and the color difference of the animal (most likely a bedded deer.) The sight through the scope was better but I wasn't absolutely sure it was a deer. I wasn't going to allow a shot where we couldn't definitely identify the target. (One of the neighboring farms has a golden retriever that occasionally roams our property. We were most likely looking at a deer as the golden is in constant motion and this critter was bedded.) Plus 192 yards is pushing the limits of my 15 year old's range. As the field is terraced, we dropped into a terrace and duck walked to close the range to 140 yards. Unfortunately the animal was gone when we crawled to the top of the berm for a peek. (We looked for 10 minutes but the animal never came back.)

The bino's we're using are on old pair of Bushnell 7 x 35 Sportviews. They work well for an animal in the open, even one moving through the forest but the detail of a bedded animal at 200 yards is poor. The view through our Leupold VX-1 is better but still not great on a bedded animal. (It works great on an animal in the open.) Most of our shots are going to be 150 yards or less so I'm not in a hurry to replace the scope. Before next season I would like to get new bino's. I'm thinking a $400 to $500 budget should get me what we need, something in a 8 x 40, but I don't really know.

Can you recommend some bino's that will let us see the detail of a bedded animal at 200 yards? (There is a slight chance we might try an elk hunt in a couple of years but for now we're hunting white tail deer out to 200 yards.) Thanks for any suggestions you can make and thanks again for your original post.
 
200 yards is fairly close by binocular standards.

My suggestion for affordable is eBay sells lots of Steiner and Zeiss German military glasses. They are in various quality and condition.

Should be able to get a good set for under 300, most important is that they are solid and repairable quality. So even if there becomes a problem later they can be fixed to like new again

Steiner are especially solid and built like the proverbial tank. The Zeiss poro prism glasses are also built with extreme construction for military durability. The ones with green rubber armor I've seen could be used for a wheel chock!
 
The best value for the buck today in the optics world is from the Czech company Meopta.

They have been on contract to build lots of stuff for zeiss and Swarovski. They have huge military contracts as well.

They all come with lifetime warranty regardless of owner. So buying used is fine, still fully covered. Just like leupold.

Look at the big camera stores. Eagle optics, camera land, optics planet etc. they often have open box demos for very good prices. These are alpha glass quality and bullet proof construction for About 1/3 the price.
 
Thanks JJ. Optics are real confusing to newbies like me. I just know I can see a huge difference between my old Bushnell scope and my new Leupold VX-1. I'm anxious to see the Meopta MeoPro's. I'm sure they will be a huge improvement over my old Bushnell binos. The boys and I are learning patience in hunting (and having a great time doing it.) Thanks again.
 
Good explanation. My current hunting environment doesn't require glass at all, being relatively short range stuff, except for the odd varmint trip a few times a year. But, having cause to use binoculars in the past, it's very true. You can't just aim them and your eyeballs in the general direction, you must take the effort to actually SEE what is out there.

Yeah, well, I can't see more'n 100 yards where I hunt, but it's nice to be able to see that the deer is legal if meat hunting or judge the rack if looking for the big boy in the woods. And, it's dark back in those trees. I find I can't see iron sights very well with my old eyes back there. I've even mounted a scope on my 10/22 now, a gun I wanted to keep iron sighted. Missed too many squirrels lookin' for that danged front sight in the shadows.

I don't have expensive glass. I've got a few Bushnells, a Weaver 2x10x40KV on my .308 that I like, and a Weatherby Supreme 3x9x44 on a 7mm Rem Mag that's just awesome. No Steiners, no Zeisses, no Schmidt and Benders, not even a Leupold in the bunch. Yet, I kill deer every year. Never have fogging problems, but then, it don't get that cold down here. If I was 8K feet up in New Mexico in winter, I might run into some fogging problems with my stuff, but I doubt it on that Weatherby Supreme. That thing is quality glass. If I ever hunted out there again, I might take the big 7 just for the glass.
 
Thanks for posting that. I hope to be hunting out west later this year and your story provided a nice education.
 
JJHack,

Thanks for the compelling essay. I am a senior casual hunter. My gear is tougher than I am these days! We do share better than average eyesight.

While I have had Hensoldt 8X56 binoculars since 1963 they have never been special in finding game. A lighter set would be more likely to get to hunt.

Recently I was hunting a large area for a buck. While does were legal I did not want to take one. I spotted some deer across a valley but with the 8X Leu. Wind Rivers I had or the 2.5-8 Leu. on my 06 I could not tell if there was a buck in the group.

Thus I bought Switch Power binoculars. I got the Leupold 7-12X 32mm.

They are outstanding for scanning at 7X and easy to switch to 12X to discover "what is it."

I got them for "half price" ($500)! and the model seems to be discontinued. At that price I don't wonder.

On another forum a 'writer' spoke highly of his dual or switch power binoculars.

10000132.jpg
 
Last edited:
I never could afford the leupold and better when younger and now I don't care.

I still use optics from ,in some cases 36 years ago. I have a old bushnell somethun .25-10x40 made in japan on a 308 rem 788 that is still a very good scope I use in creek bottoms and heavy woods and swamps and has always surved me well even well before legal light to watch a deer I can barely make out with my eye.


I have one other scope that was an all I could afford scope 20 something years ago . Its a first year simmons atec 3.8-12 old rifle I had a gunsmith custom for me . When done I still could not afford a better scope so off the the range we went. Good for 2" 400 yard groups with factory ammo. I did a year later buy a nice burris 30mm 4-16 black diamond for it. But 16 years later that scope still sits in my gun safe unused waiting for that 20 year old simmons to die. Its also been just fine for watching deer before legal light at distance or in some dark conditions. I 2 pair of binos. One is a 20 year old 10x40 simmons and one is a leupold wind river 10-x40 and the simmons is the one I grab for the most.

I always though seeing game was simply something you learn and has little to do with having average or great eye sight, glass's or not.

I do own a leica 1600 range finder as the others just aren't worth throwing money at.

I probably never spend big dollars on a scope or binos. I do know a spotting scope and range finder need to be better quality products. My spotting scope is a older mead but they too no longer make a good spotting scope today.
 
I wanted to add something here that is not pointed at anyone, not even sure if it's been written by anyone as this thread is longer then expected now!

Binoculars are for scouting, and information gathering. Rifle scopes are for shooting. Never confuse the use of these two tools.

Having been glassing a canyon on private land, and seeing hunters on this land without the permission to be on it. I Looked to see who they could be. At the moment I found them clearly in my binoculars, I was stunned to see that both of them were looking at me through their rifle scopes. That is quite a disturbing situation. My anger at them being on private land without permission changed quickly to the horror of two hunting rifles being pointed exactly at me!

It's basic firearm safety to never point a gun at anything you don't want to shoot. That feeling of being in the Crosshairs is quite disturbing.

Use field glasses until your going to shoot, Never EVER use a rifle scope for scouting or checking anything. Rifle scopes are simply used for one very specific need, shooting!

I found out who the guys were that were looking at me through the scopes. We had a discussion on basic responsible safety. Along with trespassing. Fortunately they were well beyond embarrassed and very sorry for the situation. I fully expected to get into an argument over this with them. I offered them a set of old cheap Nikons I had at my house if they could not afford binoculars.

Nevertheless, a rifle scope is not a scouting tool!
 
JJHACK,

I use my riflescope for identifying game that I cannot make out with my binoculars.

If I am looking at game I see nothing wrong or at all unsafe pointing a rifle at it.

Of course we do not scan for game with the riflescope.
 
Ever wonder how all those goats and sheep got shot before there were any scopes? :) or how the bow and arrow and muzzleloader guys ever score?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top