Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Big Eyes or a Spotter?

It seems odd that folks will pack around extra weight when there are fantastic scopes available. I use binocs to finbd game. If I can't make out horns I can switch to the rifle which has either a 4 1/2-30X50 Bushnell or a 5-25X52 Swarovski. Both do an excelent job at their top magnification.

I bought the Swaro because it is a few ounces lighter than the Elite. It has seen way more use time than the Swaro.

Maybe someone has compared a spotter with either of these. If so, would you post your opinion?

Ringman, with all due respect, those scopes won't come close to a high quality 65mm spotter, or even remotely close to a 85mm class spotter especially in low/poor light conditions. I hunt wide open stuff and don't feel the need for anything over 10x on my riflescope, ever. Then again I don't launch bullets past 400 yards either, and seldom at that distance. I've never seen a hunter in camp yet show up with a scope like you describe to use as a spotter.

Give 'em time. Some will catch on.

I really believe they already have, no what I mean?

Know. Knot yet.

Ever tried to count brow tines on a moose at 3+ miles with a rifle scope?? Hard to compete with a spotter that can zoom to 60X firmly mounted on a steady tripod vs. 25X rifle scope resting over a backpack or the like. You can get away with a rifle scope for some types of hunts, but when talking LONG distances over crappy terrain like bogs/swamps in the brush where its hard to lay down to get a good rest to even get remotely steady enough to hold the rifle to get a decent view at animals at that distance.

Where antler configuartions aren't required for the animal to be legal in that it just has to have antlers or the like then sure why not just get a big rifle scope...but personally I'll keep the hubble on my tripod and off my rifle. Plus I don't like to make a habit of "spotting" with my rifle.

I don't know anyone who doesn't look through a rifle scope at animals. I do read about folks on the net who claim they don't.

Never said I haven't ever looked at an animal through my rifle scope before, just said I try not to make a habit out of it. By only relying on your rifle scope to check things out closer pretty much ensures that it would become a habit.

I won't give up the quality images of a spotter for the hunting I do for a lesser quality image and limited zooming for long distances by mounting a hubble on my rifle to "save weight" when I would end up having to do 3 times the hiking to confirm if an animal is legal or not.

Like I said it might work for the style of hunting and the animals you are pursuing. Which is great and I am glad it works for you. But for myself where I hunt and the animals I am chasing a true spotting scope on a tripod can't even come close to effectively being replaced by just a rifle scope.

I think that it would be an interesting "shoot out" between a Nikon 50ED spotting scope compared to the 50mm riflescopes Ringman talks about. [img:right]http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=312521&d=1299967006[/img]

I know my Leupold 2x7 was not the equal to my Swarovski non phase-coated 7x30SLC binocular. My feeling is that the riflescopes would not "measure" up.

Looks like Ringman was looking for an argument, not opinions.

Yea I know JG I saw his reply right after yours. After seeing or not seeing something in my riflescope compared to my binocular this has been something I wanted to try some day. I am not about to buy one of these riflescopes though. As far as opinions go I would rather see facts. A riflescope is not going to replace a spotter any time soon.

SteveWM,

Don't limit it to the 50mm Bushnell Elite. Also include the 52mm Swarovski. Maybe folks would like to see other 50mm rifle scopes brought into the comparison.

Before I mounted the Bushnell I took it to the range several times and compared it with lots of brands of rifle scopes. This incluses Swaro, Leupie, Nikon, and others. Once I compared my 50mm set on 30X with a 62mm spotting scope set on 30X. I think it was a Minox. So far it is the only scope, spotting scope or rifle scope, to give me a sharper image then the Bushnell 6500.

After I bought the z5 I discovered it was also no better than the 6500 when both are set on the same magnification. Never the less, the Swrovski is WAY better in low light and is lighter.

Ringman, Here is a link to one you can copy post #32 by Surveyor.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=147615&page=2

Thanks, SteveWM.

I got a pair of Leica Geo's 15x56 last Lear and have had a very good Zeiss spotter for ten years. The Geo bigs get reached for ten to one over the spotter. Binocular vision, no eyestrain, wide FOV, etc. I go to the spotter when I want a closer look at what I've already spotted with the "eyes".