Best value spotting scope….?

[sevenmil]

Hi guys - need to buy a new spotting scope, but have no idea what brands are favoured by forum members. I want it for long range work (F-Standard shooting) but may use it occasionally in the filed for long range hunting, so I need something durable, but hopefully not too costly.

I see that Australian Geographic shops stock a 115x power unit for around $230-250, but I am not sure how rugged they'd be. Any thoughts as to brands and how much I should expect to pay for a mid price range unit ?

[DaveMc]

Hi seven mil,
We have spent a fair bit of time (with the aid of optical guru Peter Smith) looking at combinations and optics for Target shooters over last few years and if you don't mind will offer some advice from that experience (By all means jump in here Peter!)

First of all be wary of 115x - way too much power, many things will suffer including but not limited to field of view. Optics of 115x at that price range are likely to not have a great result.

Whilst it is a matter of opinion I believe most spotting scopes for our game are best at 15-32x. The lower the power, generally the more "field" you will see and optical clarity is easier to achieve - some like to work at 15x to see all the targets and mirage over the "range" but I personally like to work around the 30x mark with a quality wide angle eyepiece (with enough eye relief!) so I can see more targets and depth of field down the range (with better clarity at edges) but still enough power. A fixed power eyepiece generally giving you best optical clarity, eye relief and field of view over a zoom.

We have put together several specialist coaching and F class packages lately that are truly "eye opening" in quality - we will have some of these at Belmont this coming week for people to see.

The 65mm Pentax EDII (PF65) is a great medium price scope (very compact), waterproof with high end optics and takes the standard 1.25" astronomy eyepieces(allowing great choice in eyepices) - from these you can get amazing optical quality at a reasonable price. Comparable (or at least in the same ballpark) to high end NF, Leupold, Swarovski and Leica etc. You can also put together eyepieces that give you extreme eye relief or alternatively a zoom if that is the requirement. (around 800-950 with eyepiece and half to 1/4 the price of comparative scopes). We are happy to talk about pairing the best eyepieces up for your needs and there are great, cheap eyepieces you can add later to make these scopes very versatile to do all of the above.

The larger versions (PF80EDII, or 100) with a high end astronomical eyepiece such as the televue delos simply have to be seen to be believed - I have not seen anything that compares - especially for the price.

If these are too high a price then some alternatives are below (not limited to these but these will be compact, usable scopes but not in the same class as above - In general I see a marked drop in quality as you go down the price ranges below and a big jump down to the $2-300 scopes but all below are supported by great warranties and are lines we have decided to support for various reasons/ including value for money)

Vortex Viper 15-45*65 (around $600)
Leupold SX-1 Ventana 15-45*60 (similar)
Redfield rampage 20-60*60 (slightly cheaper again - 450).
Alpen 18-36*60 with tripod for around 299 rrp

Dave McNamara

[sevenmil]

Thank you Dave, that is very much appreciated. I am currently looking at the Vortex Viper range, as this looks like good value. Have you had a lot of experience with this particular spotting scope?

[DaveMc]

Thank you Dave, that is very much appreciated. I am currently looking at the Vortex Viper range, as this looks like good value. Have you had a lot of experience with this particular spotting scope?

I have owned a 65 HD version (thanks very much to the excellent sponsorship of Extravision over the years). It was a very nice little scope, good optical quality. The only issues were technical ones - not quite enough eye relief and a comparatively smaller field of view with the zoom compared to the pentax options we had put together. The 25x wide angle eyepiece would have been a good addition but just shy of the targeted 20mm+ (18mm) eye relief needed for glasses again. I wouldn't have any issue recommending them but just understand the eye relief/field of view issues and the fact you cannot easily adapt after market eyepieces to overcome this. If you wear glasses (and should really wear safety glasses anyway) - then you will struggle to get close enough. If you want to use it whilst lying in prone and shooting then longer eye relief again is warranted.

But as far as off the shelf items it is a good one.

[AlanF]

Dave,

From what you have seen, what is the widest field of view for any spotting scope at or above 10X which has acceptable quality optics and eye relief?

Alan

[Tim N]

Dave,
With the rise in popularity of electronic targets is the scope preference likely to change?
That is, if the viewing of other targets is of no benefit?

[macguru]

I bought an Orion 80mm astronomical telescope, and use that sometimes, but generally use binoculars, as most ranges i shoot at have electronics, and when they dont the binos are fine for scoring. And the f classers have good scopes anyways.

The orion is a good upright image for under $300 (they are used as guide scopes by the serious amateur astronomers for their expensive main camera scope) but its not as weatherproof and i just have a camera tripod which is a bit crappy .....

[williada]

There is still a place for a spotting scope, particularly in coaching new shooters. The use of a scope is very important in reading mirage where you often focus not so much at the target but up range at the longer distances. Its true that a lot of people used to look at other shooters hits for an advantage particularly on those targets to the prevailing wind side. That was more important than chasing other people's spotters beside you.

I was an observer of a shoot off once, and saw an interesting strategy at play. The bloke that won it, got a 4 on his second sighter dead square and noticeably out. He was one of the country's best shots. His opposition who was relatively inexperienced but who had shot well on the day reacted to that shot and promptly shot a 4 first business. The winner shot a centre next shot and it was all over. The games people play... David.

[ShaneG]

1. FOV is not only about watching other targets - it is about watching the widest field of mirage giving best indicators of consistency or changes in mirage occurring across the range.

2. Binoculars are NOT acceptable for scoring - for ANY shooter if you are to score properly.
Binoculars are just sufficient to see the value marker but no hand held binocular can allow one to see the position of the marker as a good spotting scope can.
and don't even try to say they are OK for the short distances - have you really had a look at the size of the spotter for 300?
Not that F class should ever shoot that distance anyway but that is another TR throwback we need to end.
In fact on some days if you are honest you wont even see the marker.
So how does one challenge a value marked? And to do the job properly one should be able to question an obvious wrong.

3. when i began shooting F class i had good quality binos and used them especially when travelling.
However I quickly learned what i have written above

shane

[williada]

Spot on Shane.

[Barry Davies]

It would surprise you what some get away with because the scorer/check scorer is using binoculars, whereby they cannot precisely define the position of the spotter relative to the scoring line.
A spotting scope should be mandatory.( minimum 15x )

[macguru]

A spotting scope should be mandatory.( minimum 15x )
•••••••••••••••••••••••

then the club hosting the OPM can organise them . I will continue to bring binoculars.....

[AlanF]

Whether its a spotting scope or binoculars, it has to be good enough to make sure the shooter is not benefitting from an obvious marking mistake. And shooters will have their own spotting scope and/or riflescope to check the marking, and its up to them to challenge if they think they've been wronged. I've had a least one incident where the scorer challenged the marking with a spotter close to the line, and was wrong. That is a no-no, and in my opinion it should be worth an optional shot.

[DaveMc]

Whilst I half agree with you here on one side Alan - what about the reverse - not all shooters with their scopes will put their hand up for one that is obviously out - the scorer should be aware and watching - and never challenge borderline calls. If so and marker was correct then an optional sighter could possibly be warranted.

Tim, I use a spotting scope at the longs even with electronics to give me a better view of the mirage over the whole course (especially in a tail wind or range where mirage is differeing at front and back) but each to his own.

Alan - on "best fiedl" this is a tough question. I think we first need to define "enough eye relief". This of course is up to each individual and whether they wear glasses and what sort of glasses. On the range I hope most use shooting glasses anyway so will go with Peter Smiths recommendation of a minimum of 20mm. This seems about right for me too. Some people with different glasses are looking for even more. So whilst there are eyepieces that have phenomenal Apparent Field of View (100-110 degrees). None of these have adequate eye relief. The best compromise are the Televue Delos and Pentax XW series which have 20mm eye relief and 72 and 70 degree AFOV respectively. The 20mm XW in the Pentax 65 (390mm focal length) will view about 61m at 1000m @ 19.5 power. You can get wider actual fields by dropping the power further but this is the best "comparative field at a given power with 20mm eye relief. If you wanted to drop to 10 power a 50 degree AFOV plossl eyepiece would give you around 100m at 1000.

Practically though I would prefer a 12.5-14.5mm (giving 27-32x) eyepiece in these 65mm (390mm focal length) scopes with a little less field (still enough though) but more power and good optical quality. The Pentax XW14 is great but at 1/3 the price the , Long Perng (LER), Orion (Planetary), or Williams (planetary) 12.5-14 (all out of same factory) are the best value for money with superb quality and a great match for the little scopes.

I believe a long focal length and good optical quality right to the edge, with a stable tripod allows us to see mirage over the bulk of the length of the range.

On the larger PF80ED with 510mm focal length the Televue 17.5 Delos is just out of this world, Pentax 20XW is also great and the LP 14.5 are very good.

None of the off the shelf zoom scopes will approach these but as Macguru said - some of the astronomical ones will do so at a great price but you need to go to the 65 and 80mm ED ranges to compare fairly (twice the price) - they just tend to be less rugged and water resistant.

Dave

[sevenmil]

All good comments. Aside from being able to read manual targets at away prize meetings (our club uses electronic targets), the main reason I want a good spotting scope is to read mirage.

I ended up talking to OZ Scopes and they recommended that a good mid priced spotting scope was the Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 20-60X80, so after some deliberation I ordered one.

Hopefully it works well….(anyone else using Bushnell Spotting Scopes?????