Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Reticle spotter comparison

Two years ago I made the move to a spotting scope with a reticle. I've read some folks wondering why you would want a reticle in your spotting scope, here are my reasons:

To call corrections on long range targets for others more accurately, i.e. ".2 mil high, .5 mil left".

To measure targets of unknown size. I'm usually only interested in the angular measurement but this can be converted to inches or feet easily enough if you have the range. I HAVE used this to tell people that they really don't want to shoot that bear on the far hillside!

To mil range at "milling" stages in competition.

To measure groups from the firing point.



My first one was a Zen Ray ED2 82mm with a Vortex 30x MRAD eyepiece. I've used it a lot while shooting at the range, a little in matches, and for some hunting. If a match has dedicated range officers, I usually wouldn't bring it due to the size and weight. If it was set up where your squad would R.O. itself, it got toted along. I also picked up a Nikon 50mm Fieldscope to take backpack hunting, as size and weight matters even more to me there.

I did see some folks at bigger matches with dedicated R.O.'s bringing their own spotters, the Leupold Mark 4 showed up a lot. Using some of their's, it was easy to see the advantage of having it along to get a more clear view of obscure targets and to read mirage before you got on the line. I started thinking about switching to a Mark 4, as its size and weight would make it more reasonable to tote at matches, and would be light enough to use hunting as well.

In the middle of thinking this, I came into a new-in-box Vortex Razor 85mm. Great spotter, but big and heavy like the Zen Ray I had been using. Still was thinking of selling it all off to make way for a Mark 4.

While I was trying to decide if the TMR reticle was worth $500 to me over the Gen 2 Mildot Eurooptic had on clearance, I ran across the new Bushnell Legend T. Nearly the same spec's as the Mark 4, under $500, and some positive comparisons to the Leupold by folks I trust on Snipershide. I also liked the looks of the reticle at least as much as the pricier TMR. There is a Bushnell stigma still in some circles, but I've had very good luck with my top-of-the-Bushnell-food-chain products. My primary match scope is a Bushnell 3.5-21x50 DMR, my primary hunting scope is a Bushy LRHS, and for the price I really like my One Mile rangefinder binos. None of them have the BEST glass, but all are very serviceable for what I do with them. Taking this all into account, I ordered a Legend T. It showed up, I pulled it and the brand new Razor out of the box. Did some peering off the deck with them, then went shooting steel yesterday and spent a lot of time switching back and forth.






The Razor has the best glass of the three, period. Without having one there for comparison I can't tell you how much better the image in a $4000 Swaro or Leica is, but this glass is great. It was very sharp, bright, the colors pop, it sees through heavy mirage the best, and it is very easy to focus well. I'm not qualified to or interested in giving a long breakdown of all the optical qualities of a piece of glass; it's the best glass in this test, quite good overall, and I'll leave it at that.

I like the reticle that Vortex puts in their eyepiece. It's fine and sharp and you can make very precise measurements with it. I can measure groups on paper at 100 yards to +/- 0.1 inches pretty easily. I also think that placing it a little off center the way they did was clever, leaving the middle of the glass open for whatever you're looking at. This works because it is fixed, in a first focal plane zoom like the Bushy it'd be tricky to pull off well.





The Zen Ray is obviously similar to the Razor, but gives up a little edge. In ultimate sharpness, they were honestly pretty close, the Zen Ray is surprisingly good. This scope doesn't see through mirage QUITE as well as the Razor. It also lacks some pop in the colors. The focus is a little more fiddly as well, the Razor almost focuses itself but you might hunt a little with the Zen Ray to get it dialed in. Which one is the better choice for you would depend on how much you used it, what you used it for, and how significant the $800 price difference is to you.

The reticle is obviously the same as the Razor's, with the same pro's and con's. The biggest other thing to mention is with the angled eyepiece and no sights, the Zen Ray was noticeably harder to get on target than the straight eyepiece Razor. Vortex makes straight and angled spotters, but Zen Ray doesn't.






15X




30X


[img]http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee266/zingdingo/20160713_191337.jpg[/img]

45X


The Bushnell's is the hardest glass to put my finger on, for a few reasons I think. It is the most finicky to focus finely, mirage seems to affect it's image quality the most, and being a zoom, it has multiple powers to evaluate and they don't all behave the same. Yesterday when the sun would go behind clouds I could see a very similar level of detail as I could in the other two. When the sun was blazing and mirage was severe, it was noticeably harder to see the last bit of what the atmosphere would allow. Also, if you wanted the best view instead of a decent one, you'd have to chase the focus a little bit and sometimes tweak the reticle focus as well. This was exacerbated at higher power and was little issue at low power. Also, if the sun was in the perfect spot (high 12 o'clock) it would catch some imperfections on the reticle lens and wash the reticle out some. A sunshade or a hand over the objective would eliminate this entirely.

The reticle is good and straightforward, though not as fine as the Vortex. It's as good for most things, but gives up a little if you're trying to measure targets or groups very precisely. There are some .2 mil hash marks on the edges, but it's trickier to use them than the ones closer to the middle. The spotter was by FAR the easiest to get on target. Not only does it have the option of zooming out for a wide field of view, but the rails on the sides are great for sighting down.


They all come with view through cases. I like the Bushy's the best, but I have a hunch I won't use it.

The big spotters have an edge in the optics, no doubt, and the more expensive Razor is more impressive. For my uses, the smaller size and weight of the Bushnell, it's ability to be aimed quickly, and it's value make it the one I'm going to keep. It's glass will do what I need it to and I'll have it with me more than I'd have the others. It also feels the most durable to bang around the field and in packs, though time will tell.

For MY uses, I think it's the best choice. If I spent many hours of many days each year glassing while scouting and hunting, I'd chose differently. If I was behind a spotter at the range calling corrections a day or more per week, or running precision rifle classes, I'd chose one of the big guys I tested, or perhaps a Hensoldt or Swaro if the pocketbook allowed.

I wish I had access to a Mark 4 for this comparison, but I couldn't rustle one up. One last note is that these are all samples of one, and while all optics have some individual unit optical variance, I think lower priced ones have it worse than the better stuff on average. When I hear that someone's Bushnell Legend has at LEAST as good of glass as their Mark 4 and that someone else's isn't close, I tend to believe them both. I specifically bought mine from a vendor I knew would take a return if I didn't like the looks of the unit that showed up on my door.