Spotting Scopes

[invictus82]

I'm debating between upgrading my riflescope (a lower end, but sufficient for the time being) and purchasing a spotting scope. I'm curious as to what characteristics to look for in a good spotting scope. It will be used primarily for hunting, but also for target shooting, sighting in, and animal watching (without a rifle in hand).

What brands do your recommend?

What characteristics should I get?

I'm hoping to keep it reasonable in terms of cost (under 200 would be nice).


Thanks.

 

[gggman]

I have this one.
http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=765856
I think it's hard to beat for the money. Read the reviews on it. I'm sure you could find a nicer one, but you'd have to spend a lot more money.

 

[earplug]

Save you money and buy a nice scope once, instead of several bargin scopes over the years that don't do the job.
I think a 50 MM Kowa would work for you. We have two Kowa's they are light weight, study. A bigger scope would work better for checking out .22bullet holes at 100 yards in the black etc.
A fixed twenty power works very well.

 

[Murdock]

Here's the advice I got when I was looking.

Go on some of the bird watcher web sites. A spotting scope to a birder is the equivalent of a good rifle to a big game hunter. Birders are really serious about color rendition, attachments for photography, clarity, etc. They like to use essentially the same 'scopes we do, with even more detailed considerations than most shooters care about. Many of the birder sites have detailed reviews of several models.

Don't be seduced by raw magnifying power. There are several other qualities to be considered.

The Kowa has always had a good reputation, which is reflected its price. Whether or not the 'scope and eyepiece are waterproof may also make a difference to you.

When I took everything I felt I needed into consideration, I bought a used Leupold 12-40X with a collapsible tripod for way less than the cost of a new"scope alone. The Leupolds also come with a nifty soft case that does not have to be removed to use the scope on the tripod; you just kinda peel it open. I used it in Wyoming elk hunting and thought it worked well. The scope is even easier to use on the range.

I would also consider the newer "miniature" Leupold spotter. It's less than half the size and could work very well for the man on foot in the big hIlls.

 

[eliphalet]

For hunting, ruggedness and general use, and after asking a lot of questions in a lot of places, I bought a Bausch & lomb 15X45X60 Elite close to 20 years ago. I have never been sorry with that choice, Now I see Nikon is making a very similar scope, and Leupold is always a good choice. Perhaps Bushnell is making them again but had discontinued this model.
It is short 12", light weight, rubber armored, water, shock, and fog proof all good things in a hunting to general use scope. It has seen plenty of use in the field, hundreds of hours spent carried in a day pack and works like a new one.
They can be found on Ebay at times in your price range but it is hard to get much for 200 new.
Kinda what I am getting at is buy quality for your intended use and you won't ever be sorry.

 

[S4Lee]

OpticsPlanet actually has some nice guides about spotting scopes.
http://www.opticsplanet.com/info/how_to_buy_spotting_scope.shtml

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

With that low of a budget ($200 - tough), probably the best one for your purpose is the Celestron C90 Maksutov:

http://www.opticsplanet.net/celestron-c90-mak-spotting-scope.html

You've got a 90mm objective, and with different eyepieces, you can run 37x (stock eyepiece that comes with the unit) or higher (60x or more, depending on the eyepiece). Can view straight OR angled with this spotter. It's compact and waterproof, with a tethered front lens cover. Pretty neat. But being a reflector rather than a refractor, it CAN get knocked out of collimation with rough handling, and the collimation would have to be re-set.

But the above advice is good. If possible, save for a Brunton, Kowa (not Konus), Swarovski, Zeiss or Leica. Those are the big 5 among spotters, though Nikon and Leupold also make some quality pieces.

Since you said field use mostly (presumably for spotting game), don't discount out of hand a good binocular for dual-purpose use - probably the best option for you is to save up, get a high quality BI-nocular with a tripod adapter, and a tripod. It needs to be around 15x (at least 12x, and no more than 25x), and needs to have an objective lens no smaller than 56mm, but preferably in the 60mm-80mm range - something like one of these:

http://www.opticsplanet.net/steiner-20x80-senator.html

http://www.opticsplanet.net/steiner-binoculars-15x80-senator.html

http://www.opticsplanet.net/swarovski-15x56-forest-green-binoculars.html

and the ultimate (though a bit bulky): http://www.opticsplanet.net/kowa-32x82mm-high-lander-binoculars-waterproof.html

Or on a much lower budget, one of these:

http://www.opticsplanet.net/65806.html

http://www.opticsplanet.net/nikon-12x56-monarch-atb-binoculars-7519.html

http://www.opticsplanet.net/ci-skymaster-20x80-gb.html

http://www.opticsplanet.net/ci-skymaster-15x70-gb.html

One of those Steiners or that Swarovski would be the bomb for your purposes, particularly the 20x80 Steiners - would both give you a good spot on targets out to 100-150 yards, or maybe 200+ with Shoot-N-C's, and would also be a great field game spotter. BUT, if you are trying to see holes out at 300 yards and beyond, like that guide says, you have to spend money to get the really good glass (high quality and 80mm+ objective). In that case, a bino will be too expensive, so a traditional monocular spotter is the way to go. All depends on the use.... But the more I think about it, the more I think that those Pentax 20x60s, with a tripod, for $230, would be a pretty decent rig for range spotting and field spotting on a budget. It's not gonna be high-end, but it's not complete crap either.

If all you want is a (1) low-end, (2) traditional monocular, (3) refractor only spotter (not Maks/reflectors), under $200, then I'd just grab a Burris Landmark 20-60x80, or maybe a Konus, Alpen, Celestron, Meade, Bushnell, or Barska - they'll work pretty well to 150; maybe 200 yards, for not much cash.

Be sure to check out the "Best Sellers, Top Staff Picks, and Best in Tests" section of optics planet:
http://www.opticsplanet.net/besandtopsta.html

Here is that section specific to spotters:
http://www.opticsplanet.net/spotscopebesandtop.html
As you can see, under $200, they've singled out (1) Bushnell Trophy 20-60x65, (2) Meade Kestrel 15-45x60mm, (3) Barska Blackhawk 20-60x60, (4) Bushnell Sentry 16-32x50, and (5) the Celestron C65 Mini-Mak. Oddly enough, no C90 Mak, but I'd bet that's an oversight, because a lot of folks consider the C90 Mak to be a very good value.

And here's an honest-to-goodness "ED"-glass, 100mm spotter for under 5 bills:
http://www.opticsplanet.net/celestron-ultima-100ed-spotting-scope.html
That's some serious value there!

 

[Cesiumsponge]

If possible, I would stay with astronomical brands at the lower price ranges, instead of getting spotters marketed directly to sportsman. $200 won't get any thing "good", but it'll get something reasonable and usable, especially if you can find something on sale or second hand.

Astronomy and bird watching folks know a magnitude more. 99% of shooters only want to see the picture and have no real idea about how to judge or compare sharpness, color rendering, chromatic aberration, etc. Most lower end spotting scope performance (clarity, brightness, sharpness) drop off severely at maximum magnification so don't think that a 20-60x at the same price as a 15-40x is going to be a better deal.

The suggested Celestron C90 Maksutov is a reflector instead of a refractor, which means its a bit bulkier, but it has a massive objective diameter (90mm) which should give you good brightness and resolution where most scopes in that price range might be 40-50mm. It is also 4x the area of something in the 40-50mm range. The interchangeable eyepiece also means you can upgrade or try out different eyepiece types. Eyepieces are just as important as the body itself. Telescope guys can often spend as much on eyepiece collections as the telescope body itself.

If you can save up for that $500 ED glass scope, don't hesistate. ED reduces your chromatic aberration which will greatly improve your picture quality.

Also, you will need a -good- tripod. Cheapo $20 tripods are shaky and lack reasonable adjustments. A good professional tripod of tabletop size will probably run just south of $100 including everything but you WILL notice a difference.

If you can afford to save a few more months, I'd suggest buying once. It's hard to understand until you've used a high end scope. It's like jumping from a 10/22 to a high end rifle; you never knew it could get so good. It's something you need to experience. For spotters, there really isn't such a thing as "more scope than you can use". Your eyes are the limiting factor and these optical improvements at higher price points only give you a picture that's closer to natural sight. This means less user fatigue, less squinting, and less fidgeting/fighting. It's like a good pair of loudspeakers or headphones. Music played through bad speakers makes your ears fatigued. Great speakers won't give you superhuman abilities, but it gives your ears the best rendition possible.

I personally run a Pentax PF-80ED 504mm body w/ Pentax SMC XL 8-24mm and a Giottos professional tripod. It wasn't cheap, but the image quality is great. Your eyes and legs will thank you when you can resolve small caliber holes in targets many hundreds of yards out.