Still need more info on spotting scopes. Please help with any personal experiences.

[Futo Inu]

I sent back the Sibir Russion scope I recently purchased, because it had shoddy/defective threading on the "car mount unit", and don't want a replacement because now I am skeptical of the entire product.

Also, here
http://www.thefiringline.com/NonCGI/Forum3/HTML/002650.html

is a recent thread that managed to stay in the Rifles forum on "Spotting scopes for $300", for reference.

I am still in the market for one, but really cannot justify a large shellout of dough, given that I'm not a long-range precision shooter.

SO, I'm seeking input on the best value scope for under $125.00. It need not be small, because it's just for general range use. I just want the best quality general purpose scope for the money.

A couple of specific questions:
1. Isn't the larger the objective, the better, generally speaking? 60 better than 50mm?
2. Is a low-end power of say 12, more useful than a low-end power of 20, for general use, like wildlife/bird watching?
3. Is it true or not true that a lower RANGE of powers (eg 12-40) means, generally speaking, a higher quality than a higher range of powers (eg 20-60)?
4. How 'bout the Bushnell/Bausch & Lomb "Sportview" 20-60x60mm for $75?

Or will I be better off sucking up and paying over $200.00 to get anything decent?

Thanks for your help.

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited May 26, 2000).]

 

[tuc22]

Try this:
www01.bhphotovideo.com
http://www.natchezss.com/natchez/specials.html click your way to spotting scopes.
I bought a Burris Landmark 15-45x60 from Midway USA for $170 w/tripod and I'm pleased with it. There are several ways to go when buying a scope. One way is to get scope, eyepiece, and tripod as one item. The other way is as individual components. Watch out for cheap tripods commonly referred to as tabletops and usually included for free. If you go the component route prices are approximately: tripod $30-$50, eyepiece $30-$120 with adjustable or zooms costing more. The optics are the most important so spend what you can afford here. Looking at the BH Photo Video site I'd suggest the Nikon 20x60 for $189.95. If you want inexpensive the Bushnell 18x36 for around $100. Scope quality first, (60mm objective is good+ fully multi-coated optics as best you can afford) then you want an eyepiece. 20x(power)is best compromise in fixed power and might save a little over adjustable.

[This message has been edited by tuc22 (edited May 27, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by tuc22 (edited May 27, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by tuc22 (edited May 27, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by tuc22 (edited May 27, 2000).]

 

[Futo Inu]

Thanks, tuc22. I got the Nikon straight 20x60mm for $190 from B&H. Very pleased with it. Got a cheap Burris tabletop tripod for it. Later for $119.95, I can add the 15-45x zoom eyepiece. BTW, the second and third and subsequent times you edit your message, you can at that time delete the prior software-added message that it has been edited, so that there is only one edit message showing after re-submitting.

 

[Schmit]

Futo,

When I was looking for a spotting scope I was of the mind to buy quality... once... for life.

It may cost you more up front, but it will last longer, and it will retain it's value better.

Just my opinion.

------------------
Schmit
GySgt, USMC(Ret)
NRA Life, Lodge 1201-UOSSS
"Si vis Pacem Para Bellum"

 

[700PSS Shooter]

1. Isn't the larger the objective, the better, generally speaking? 60 better than 50mm?

>>The 60mm will admit more light. This is not an issue for bright day shooting unless you are way up in power like 60X. A quality 50mm will be better than a mediocre 60mm.

2. Is a low-end power of say 12, more useful than a low-end power of 20, for general use, like wildlife/bird watching?

>> For birding, if you are going with a 12X, use binoculars. A birding scope is more hassle, so get the power. Just my take on it. For birding, where you are viewing for extended periods, poor quality results in blurred vision and headaches. For a quick glance at a target, you can get by with lower quality, unless you are shooting .22 or smaller at 100+ yards or any long ranges.

3. Is it true or not true that a lower RANGE of powers (eg 12-40) means, generally speaking, a higher quality than a higher range of powers (eg 20-60)?

>> See comments to #1. This is hard to answer exactly. Too many variables. However, dollar for dollar, a 12-40 is a 3.3X zoom ratio. 20-60 is a 3X zoom ratio. I would not go over 3X since keeping optical quality across a large ratio is expensive. If you have a cheap scope with a large ratio, the money is saved somewhere, probable in quality.

4. How 'bout the Bushnell/Bausch & Lomb "Sportview" 20-60x60mm for $75?

>> Fine for casual shooting.

Or will I be better off sucking up and paying over $200.00 to get anything decent?

>> YES!!!

I bought a used Kowa TSN2 (non-fluorite) with 77mm objective and 20-45 zoom eyepiece. I paid $300. I justified the price since I was using it for .22 and birding.

****Schmidt said it all in his last post.****

I can watch a wild critter for hours without eye fatigue.

On magnification, over 40, any breeze will create annoying visible wobble unless you are using a heavy tripod. I use a Slik U-212 photographic tripod from my camera days and hook a 10-15 pound weight on the bottom of the center post for stability in the wind. 25X is fine for .22 and up at 100 yards. I need the high end to see all my rounds since they are always so close together in the center of the black.