Need a Spotting Scope for 1,000 Yards.

[Chuck R.]

Have you had a problem with the outside finish/paint of your scope getting sticky, and soft? Mine developed a soft finish on the factory paint, I called Howa and explained the problem, they said they could refinish it for $250.00! I said no thanks. Careful stripping and masking and a can of Krylon plastic paint it looks good as new. If you do get a Kowa get at least an 80mm objective.

Yup, mine went the same way...I careful stripped it and a friend who's into modeling went over it with a spray gun. I think leaving it in the hot truck during match season may have accelerated it.

 

[Varminterror]

You asked the same question 42 days ago, physics has not changed since then, so the answer has not changed.

Spotting at 1000 has the same challenges as spotting at 500 - but worse. There’s no spotting scope on the market which will reliably allow you to see splatter type paper targets at 1000yrds.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ing-scope-for-500-yards.900178/#post-12175726

 

[high country]

I agree with several others that have said it will be very difficult to reliably see .22" holes at 1000 yards. I am not well versed in spotting scopes, but since someone else put up a photo of a telescope (even if in jest) I thought I would add my setup pictured below. It is an Orion ST80. It is more delicate and less portable than a dedicated spotting scope, but very flexible for a wide range of viewing needs. I have never had the need to use it as a spotting scope, but probably will at some point. I use it mostly for grab-and-go astronomy, but it also works well for terrestrial stuff (wildlife and scenery mostly). Note, that 90 degree diagonal is for celestial use, I have a corrected 45 degree for terrestrial.



I would expect to need something in the neighborhood of 128x to see that small of a hole. At that magnification, the mount and the atmospheric conditions are as much a limitation as the scope quality. The scope has to be absolutely rock steady, any wind and there is no way. Likewise with mirage if the sun is out and heating the ground. If you are set on trying to use a scope for this, plan to spend at least as much on the mount/tripod as you do the scope, and plan to shoot early in the morning before the wind and sun get going.

All that said, if I were trying to check targets at that range a lot, and couldn't just take a ride out there to look, I would probably use it as an excuse to buy a drone.

 

[Laphroaig]

A while back Jupiter was visible and my grand daughter and I were looking at it through my Kowa. It was difficult to find it, and she kept bumping the scope, but I was amazed that we could see several of Jupiter's moons through the 27x eyepiece.

Bullet holes, not as easy.

 

[Rockrivr1]

Another Kowa user here as well. Mine has the 66mm lens and I can just make out holes at 500 yards. Doubt I'd see them at 1000 yards. As others have said I don't think they make a spotting scope that will reliably see that far short of some of these telescopes being shown.

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

I used to have the Orion 90mm telescope i pictured. It would sure work with the right eye piece. I still have an Orion 10 inch dobsonian and a Celestron C-8. They would be over kill to haul to the range though.

 

[high country]

A while back Jupiter was visible and my grand daughter and I were looking at it through my Kowa. It was difficult to find it, and she kept bumping the scope, but I was amazed that we could see several of Jupiter's moons through the 27x eyepiece.

Bullet holes, not as easy.

I know the first time I saw Jupiter and Saturn through a small telescope I was hooked. For me, a nice summer evening under the stars hopping between easier objects with a choice beverage and some music is about as relaxing as it gets.

But you make a great point. Looking a moon sized object, even if it is 550 million miles away, is one thing. For that I'd take a crisp image at 27x over a poorly resolved image at twice that magnification. Looking at a tiny bullet hole at a half mile or more is a much more precise task. I can get a generally good image using the Orion with a 6mm eyepiece and 2x Barlow tube (which is 133x) but it is very condition dependent because you are also magnifying every vibration, mirage, or vapor in the air by that same amount.

 

[Varminterror]

Telescopes pointing upwards towards celestial bodies don’t have to fight ground surface effects nearly as much as we fight when spotting targets. Unfounded speculation doesn’t change physics. You will not be satisfied by any purchase you could make of any optical device to spot splatter target holes at 500 or 1000yrds. Just wasted energy and money here.

 

[high country]

I used to have the Orion 90mm telescope i pictured. It would sure work with the right eye piece. I still have an Orion 10 inch dobsonian and a Celestron C-8. They would be over kill to haul to the range though.

That ST80 is a nice grab-and-go setup, but still takes a minute to setup so isn't ideal unless you are setting up for an afternoon or something. A 10 inch Dob would definitely not be practical for that purpose, but I'll bet you get some nice planetary views with it!

 

[Roverguy]

As per above, no optical device available on the civilian market is going to let you see bullet holes in paper at 1000 yards. As suggested above, a remote camera set up will likely be the best and most cost effective approach.

 

[shoobe01]

Just some more +1s for things mentioned and some experience spotting from 800-1400.

I have used a $300 imported third tier scope to spot hits on steel at those ranges (I have had people WAY better than me at spotting borrow my scope and tripod for match scoring). Splash and swing is doable. Smaller the caliber, the harder it gets. 6.5 at that range is iffy for even splash, 308 you may not see the hit, but 300 Winmag on up with a freshly painted target you can see that.

Which gets us to the systems problem. It's easier to see hits in good light. With less mirage. With less haze and dust. With big targets, without backlight, freshly painted.

With a good tripod. You cannot see if there's wobble from wind, etc. Spend money on the tripod first I tend to say. Learn how to deploy and weight it down right.

And esp if your range: maybe give up on the whole concept. Remote cameras set behind their own little berms, maybe even with solar panels so they are always on. You can get home surveillance cameras that network easily, cheaply. That range MAY take a bit to get a WiFi directional antenna bought/made (eat some Pringles then look for "cantenna") but it's doable, and very useful. Set a cheap small tablet up on its own mini tripod where you can see, and you can spot your own shots even! Time of flight to 1000 is enough to shift your focus to the downrange video feed.

(FWIW: I still have my cheap Vanguard for loaner, etc but have an LMSS 2 with Department of Techne ARCA rail as my primary now).

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

We used to have very dark skies. They did away with the light pollution reduction street lights. They now have bright LED lights. But yes the dob is great for planetary viewing. As well as deep sky objects. The gun club is out away from any towns. They said im welcome to take the telescopes up there any time. The C-8 has a clock drive on it. So it tracks what im looking at. It's an older one from the 90's. The new ones are real high tec now. It's one like this.

 

[Walkalong]

A while back Jupiter was visible and my grand daughter and I were looking at it through my Kowa. It was difficult to find it, and she kept bumping the scope, but I was amazed that we could see several of Jupiter's moons through the 27x eyepiece.

Bullet holes, not as easy.

I set my Celestron up looking at the moon the other night for a couple of my wife's friends and they were wowed by what they could see.

Not doubt, .22 bullet holes are tough at 500, and are a monster ask at 1K for a spotting scope.

 

[doubleh]

Looking upward at night is a completely different ball of wax than that looking through atmosphere at ground level even on a cool day. Just a few day ago I was outside playing with an 800mm camera lens. It was chilly enough to wear a coat. I was shooting at a home about a mile and a half away and was amazed at how much mirage was running from south to north. Needless to say my photos were junk.

I will assume that many will think I am lying about what my wife did with her ipad last year. There were three stars close to Saturn and she took a photo of the stars. You could clearly see the stars, Saturn, and the rings around it. They were tiny but seeable. I am still wondering how the ipad was capable of this and I will swear on a bible that it did so. It won't be capable of seeing 22 bullet holes at 1000 or even 500 yards though.

 

[LiveLife]

Since we can't see bullet holes at 1000 yards, are we back to Caldwell target camera system with 1 mile range to see bullet holes for $375?

https://www.amazon.com/Caldwell-Ballistic-Precision-Waterproof-Construction/dp/B01B7OYN1Y

 

[JFrank]

I only target shoot. I use the splatter targets and steel.

At 1000 yards you can spot your own shots when shooting Steele hanging targets, splatter targets won’t help much at a grand. If you just want to see the Steele swing then most any spotter will work. Now for longe range load development we use a different method. PM me if that’s something you’re interested in.
Jim

 

[Legionnaire]

Use a camera.

https://www.dpgunworks.com/product-page/eagle-target-cam

 

[Varminterror]

Here’s an example of why I recommend against spending money on any spotting scope to see splatter target holes at 500 or 1000 yards.

This is a screenshot of HD video captured through $2500 Swarovski SLC 15x binos, demonstrably some of the highest resolution, best clarity glass in the market, viewing targets at only 699yrds - wanna guess what animal shape might be that target on the right? Mirage was disgusting, we struggled to even see target response at 500, and even the flashers at 600-900 were getting lost in the boil. I wish I could post the video without other hosting, it’s remarkable how much those targets are being distorted. That IPSC is full size, 18” wide by 30” tall, and that #8 on it is around 2 ft tall. The obscured target is over 2ft wide.

When light is scattered before it reaches the lens, no spotting scope can fix the image.



Usually, we aren’t so inhibited by mirage as we were Saturday, but it does happen - and it’s rare to ever be without any mirage. When light can be bent so badly that a target over 2ft wide becomes indiscernible, we have to recognize a 3/8” bullet hole simply won’t be visible at all. Noting here, there are multiple bullet splatters on that target already - splatters of contrasting grey against the white paint, somewhere around 1” in diameter. Totally indistinguishable on that target in the image and original video. Mirage was bad enough, we even had guys miss the target on purpose to see how much berm splash we could view, such anything which didn’t splash became an “impact.”

 

[MR WICK]

Since we can't see bullet holes at 1000 yards, are we back to Caldwell target camera system with 1 mile range to see bullet holes for $375?

https://www.amazon.com/Caldwell-Ballistic-Precision-Waterproof-Construction/dp/B01B7OYN1Y

That's insane.

 

[MR WICK]

Here’s an example of why I recommend against spending money on any spotting scope to see splatter target holes at 500 or 1000 yards.

This is a screenshot of HD video captured through $2500 Swarovski SLC 15x binos, demonstrably some of the highest resolution, best clarity glass in the market, viewing targets at only 699yrds - wanna guess what animal shape might be that target on the right? Mirage was disgusting, we struggled to even see target response at 500, and even the flashers at 600-900 were getting lost in the boil. I wish I could post the video without other hosting, it’s remarkable how much those targets are being distorted. That IPSC is full size, 18” wide by 30” tall, and that #8 on it is around 2 ft tall. The obscured target is over 2ft wide.

When light is scattered before it reaches the lens, no spotting scope can fix the image.

View attachment 1062866

Usually, we aren’t so inhibited by mirage as we were Saturday, but it does happen - and it’s rare to ever be without any mirage. When light can be bent so badly that a target over 2ft wide becomes indiscernible, we have to recognize a 3/8” bullet hole simply won’t be visible at all. Noting here, there are multiple bullet splatters on that target already - splatters of contrasting grey against the white paint, somewhere around 1” in diameter. Totally indistinguishable on that target in the image and original video. Mirage was bad enough, we even had guys miss the target on purpose to see how much berm splash we could view, such anything which didn’t splash became an “impact.”

So how exactly do people check their groupings at longer distances?

 

[Varminterror]

So how exactly do people check their groupings at longer distances?

A lot of walking or riding on a 4 wheeler, hanging multiple targets and reclaiming all of them at the same time at the end of a session.

Or, like I said before:

have guys working the butts downrange and plugging spotters into your bullet holes.

OR you have electronic targets or target cameras

 

[LoonWulf]

I have a drone i keep thinking about taking along and leaving down range to use as a remote camera....battery won't run the motors for very long but it can sit on a chair and watch for quite a while.

 

[gamboolman]

Thanks Mr. Wick for this thread.

And thanks to the Posters who mentioned the Camera Systems

For at least 10 year before retiring on 1-Feb-21, I have been looking at Spotting Scopes for Target Shooting / Sighting In guns but have not purchased yet.

After reading about the Target Camera Systems, i.e., Longshot System, in this thread - I am pretty sure that I will purchase the 300 yard Longshot system.

ms gamboolgal and I will be calling Longshot tomorrow and if possible will drive down to look at the equipment and purchase same since it is not along ways for us to drive.

If we do go on ahead and get it, we'll post back a review on our thoughts and impressions.

gamboolman...

 

[Nature Boy]

So how exactly do people check their groupings at longer distances?

In High Power matches someone is in the pits marking your impacts between shots with a white disk. The orange disk reflects the score. This is a 1,000 yard match



If you’re on the line and shooting you’re using your spotting scope to see the shot marker and reading the wind direction based on the mirage. If you’re on the line and scoring you’re using your spotting scope to see the scoring disk and record the score for record.



No one is seeing bullet holes, unless they are working in the pits

 

[Hikingman]

It's one thing to have an expensive spotting scope that will do all. What I'm not seeing in this thread is what 'power' might deliver the desired 1k range, at a minimum.

Anyone?