How much spotting scope do I need?

[minutemen1776]

I'm thinking of getting a spotting scope. It will be strictly for range use, so I'm not concerned about its suitability for hunting or anything like that. The shooting range I use has berms at 25 yards, 35 yards (why it's not 50 yards is beyond me), and 100 yards, and I shoot targets at all three distances. Almost all my rifles are either .22- or .30-caliber. So basically I need a scope that will allow me to readily see .22-caliber holes at 100 yards, since this is the most extreme duty this scope would likely ever see. I have the option of getting something in 18-36x50 or 20-50x60. The smaller scope costs about two-thirds what the larger scope does, and I also appreciate that it's a little more compact. Will the 36x magnification get the job done?

 

[ArmedBear]

I can see my .30 caliber holes quite clearly through my 3-9X40mm riflescope at 100 yards, in poor light (indoor rifle range).

18X will be more than plenty. Quality, not magnification, matters. If you can't see .22 holes clearly through a 12X, it's because the scope is junk, not because 12X isn't sufficient. Bad scopes lead to eye fatigue and general frustration.

Personally, I'd just use a good riflescope. Spotting scopes can be really frustrating with shooting/safety glasses on, since they don't have the big exit pupil and 3-4" eye relief of a riflescope.

It is considered unsafe and usually illegal to use a riflescope to glass for game, but pointing a rifle downrange while you're actively target shooting isn't a problem. If I were you, I'd pick a rifle and use the money to put a decent scope on it (Nikon, Burris, Leupold or better, 9X or higher), and skip buying a spotting scope.

There are times you want a spotting scope, but just checking your own targets while shooting isn't necessarily one of them.

 

[scotlfs]

Just remember that the last number in the 10x40 or whatever is the size of the objective lens. The bigger that number the heavier the scope or binoculars will be.

Most people don't need huge objectives, big objective are good for gathering light in less than ideal circumstances, but for day shooting and target practice like you are talking about, you don't need anything quite so large.

Just a little advice to keep your costs down and keep your scope from getting too heavy.

 

[krs]

You can spot .22 holes with 20 power, but it'd have to be a good quality scope.

There's a lot of cheap spotting scopes on the market and most have quite a variable range. Most of the cheap ones also have such lousy optics that you'd have trouble seeing a .22 hole in the black even when cranked to 45 or 60 power.

So spend your money on the glass and nevermind the geegaws.

Bushnell used to make one called the 'Sentry' - a fixed 20 power scope that had darned good optics for the price at the time. I'm pretty sure they still have a 'Sentry' but it's not the same scope at all.

Swift has been a good name in spotting scopes. Leupold if you can swing it are nice ones. That's pretty much all I know of today's market.

One thing to think of is that if you buy a good spotting scope it can do it's job for you for the rest of your life. I have my Bushnell Sentry still mounted in my old Pachmyer 4 gun match shooting box. I've also still got the fine Swift 15 -60x tripod mounted scope that I used to use for rifle shooting to 600 yards. I've had both of them for 35 years now, and never spent another dime on spotting scopes since I bought the two of them.

 

[jgatsios]

60 power

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I have to disagree with ArmedBear - I can NOT see .30 cal holes at 100 yards with a -9x40 scope - not even very well from a -14x50 Zeiss conquest. A sufficient scope might do it, but not your typical hunting scope. You want to err on the side of more rather than less, if in doubt. However, here there is no doubt that the -36x50 will do the job if it's of any quality at all. The quality of the lens and the objective lens size are much more important than the magnification (though the magnification is important too). But since quality is the most important, which one is it? There are some pretty decent low-end ones if you do your research, but some bad ones, too, even among the same brand (for example, not all Bushnells are alike in the same or similar price range). But at 100 yards, that'll be fine in good light and high contrast target (unless it's complete junk). In low light, and/or low contrast target, and/or if trying to see smaller holes (.17, .22), then it might be pushin it - also depends on your own eyesight.

 

[brooks]

I favor an 80mm scope for $235 (KONUS)

www.jarheadtop.com

It will be more than you need.

 

[jamesb]

I will second the Konus from jarheadtop, I have one and use it for high power and it works very well for the price.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

But that's the thing - while perhaps advisable to do so, he doesn't want more than he needs; he just wants exactly what he needs and no more, for budget and size reasons. How much can you realistically spend here?

 

[taliv]

all you really need is contrast and then you can use a cheap, crappy, low-power scope to see 22 holes at 200 yards. (i'm not advocating cheap, crappy or low power scopes here)

an good example of this are shoot n see targets

but if the targets are oriented so sunlight shines through the hole it will be easily viewable, or if you use white paper with a dark backer or berm behind it, it will make the scope's job easier

 

[Sitting Duck]

Minutemen 1776 doesn't say whether he's using a scoped rifle at 100 yards and under. If he is and this is recreational target shooting, I would agree with taliv. I purchase shoot 'n see type targets and spot with my 6x20-40 at 200 yards using a .224 caliber.

You can buy a lot of factory ammo or put that money towards a good rifle scope for the price of a good spotting scope using the shoot 'n see type targets.

I don't reload yet so I put my money towards ammo as opposed to a second scope that at 200 yards would be redundant.

JMO.

 

[minutemen1776]

Thanks for all the advice and input. When I shoot rifles, I almost always use iron sights. I currently have just one rifle that has a scope, and it's a fixed 4x on a rimfire. So, just using a high-power rifle scope to spot with is not an option for me.

Dr. Winslow, thanks for appreciating that I really want what I need and no more than that. I've been around THR long enough to know that most "what should I get?" questions will usually be answered (at least by someone) with the "something bigger and more expensive" response. That's OK, and in fact the Konus scope mentioned by two posters looks really interesting. Realistically though, I am hoping to get something more compact and under $150. For now, I'm looking strongly toward the Barska Blackhawk line. Their low prices, multi-coated glass, and generally good reviews have me very interested. Does anyone here have experience with these, especially in the 18-36x50 or 20-50x60 configurations?

Thanks again!

 

[SwampWolf]

Whichever spotting scope you decide on, I'd recommend getting one with an angled eyepiece, especially if you're using it primarily at the range instead of the field. The Leupold "Sequoia" line offer good optics for a relatively modest price-though more than you're looking to pay for. Oops! I think I just recommended "something bigger and more expensive"-sorry.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

But if you shoot a lot, a more expensive / better scope is cheaper in the long run than buying Shoot-N-Cs.

 

[Furncliff]

I have used Optics Planet with great success. Good prices good service. One of the things you may or may not have thought about is if you want a straight eye piece or an angled one. It all depends on how you would use it ie. prone or on a table...

 

[Seattlefungus]

A big plus 1 on the Konus 80mm. With any type of scope, optic.. If you have to look through it for any length of time, a large objective really helps avoid getting sore eyes! With poor quality glass, you will end the day feeling like sand is in your eyes. Most folks start with short range shooting, buy a cheap scope, then find they are deficient for there needs. Especially if they decide to start shooting mid and long range. (Mid 300 to 500, long 600+) Yes. With irons. Service rifle is all irons from 200 to 600.

 

[JWarren]

I've had no trouble seeing .308 holes at 100 yards with my 3.5-10X optic.

However, my father got me a 60X spotting scope for Christmas.

I can see my soul with that thing!

As others have said, however, it has a TINY exit pupil.


-- John

 

[Swampy]

minuteman,

If you are shooting from positions then I'd DEFINITELY get a scope with an angled eyepiece. You will regret it severely if you don't.

Sorry, don't know about the Barska....

Will add that the Konus scopes are rapidly becoming the Silver Standard for Highpower shooters (Kowa being the Gold standard.). The Konus brand has all the features required by Highpower shooters of seeing .22 and .30 bullet holes out to 300 yards and mirage at 600 and beyond, plus the angled eyepiece.

Re image quality: Get the LARGEST objective lens you can afford. Magnification without objective size is a marketing gimmick with little practicality to back it up. Magnification levels beyond 20x DEMAND an objective lens diameter of at least 60mm to have any decent image resolution at all. With a 60mm objective lens you will most likely not be able to use effective magnification beyond the 25x level without losing image resolution.... i.e. ability to resolve fine details... read bullet holes.

As a fer instance, most Highpower shooters us Kowa 80mm scopes (High dollar, High quality.) with a 22x or 27x fixed magnification eyepiece. This is all that's needed to see bullet holes out to 300 yards when using a top quality objective lens. Conversely, a cheap 50 or 60mm scope won't let you see any bullet holes at 300 yards regardless of how much magnification you have.

It's all in the diameter and quality of the objective lens... NOT, rpt. NOT the magnification number. At a certain point extra magnification only causes loss of image quality, ESPECIALLY when you have a sub-par objective. If the quality and diameter of the objective lens is not up to the task, then it don't matter how much magnification you have.... all you are doing is magnifying a poor quality image.

Just my 2 bits,
Swampy

Garands forever