What size spotting scopes to you guys use? For packing in do you carry a 65mm or 80mm?

I had used my Leupold 12-40x60mm HD which fits nicely in my backpack but would like to move to a new Zeiss or Swarovski question is do I go with a 65mm or a 80mm?

Are the benefits of the larger glass out weigh the exit bulk and size?

I carry my Zeiss 85mm. I don't find it too heavy or whatever. So it is a pound heavier - big deal. It isn't like i am carrying it 20 miles or something. I would rather have it with me than a smaller one - brighter, more power, and better to take pictures through.

If you get one, get an angled IMO.

I carry my 80mm ED. Can't skimp on this stuff when you really need to see. I carry this in addition to my 15x56 SLCs

I use a Minox 62mm spotter, and Leica 10x50's.
Ive used the Swaro 65 and found it to be an excellent spotting scope, and I didnt find it lacking FWIW.

Choosing between a Ziess and a Swaro is a good problem to have.....

If I could afford either one, the difference between 65 or 80 mm wouldn't matter to me (and I suspect is only noticable at the extreme edges of dawn and dusk).

For now, I use a Nikon 50mm ED which is as good as I can afford.

And I would go with a straight scope as opposed to an angled one...

I used to carry a 80mm but it was too much for too little. I moved on to the 15x56's. I would carry a 80 again only if I needed to count anuli. I can see a shooter buck or bull from a days hike away where I hunt with the big eyes.

dennisinaz, you must be part mule.

I have the Leica 62, if I could do it again, it would be the Swaro 65. Like the focus better. I have no need or desire to backpack with an 80mm though. Maybe if I was a road hunter...

I carry my Leica 62MM when I have 2 people to split the weight on total gear. Quick looks and on a stalk I have been using the LW Minox. Leaving the bigger scope in camp, we spot moose from base camp, then go in closer to see if they are legal.

In the west I alway carry the 80mm Swarovski spotter. It's never been a problem yet.

I personally carry a Leica Televid 77, but if I was backpack hunting, or buying one brand new and $ didnt matter (I got my leica for a song from here, nobody wanted it because the body was rough, glass 100% perfect) I would buy one of the big three, 65mm with HD glass.

My buddies carry their Kowa highlanders quite a bit now. One buddy carries his in a Pelican case- gotta weigh 22+lbs alone. They use 4500CI packs as day packs. Crazy.

My typical pack (mostly a Badlands 2200) is about 28# when I am hunting in the winter time. 15x56, full-size tripod, 80mm spotter, jacket, food, water knives, game bags, gps it all adds up in a hurry. I have resisted the temptation to use a bigger pack as I will probably carry even more stuff.

Your pack sounds like mine. Of course, I have hunted with people that didn't even carry a roll of TP or extra clothes, yet they thought I was crazy for having such a heavy pack...until they were cold or needed tp.

for backpack hunting, I carry a zeiss 65mm, on a 10 day backpack trip an 80mm always seems too big, and heavy to fit.

You youngsters can carry the 80's, I'll go with a 60/65 thank you..

I'm like Dennisinaz on packing lots of equipment. My pack is in the 20 pound range too. Like him, iI carry my 15X56's, my 85mm scope, tripod and the rest of the gear (water, food, GPS, ect.). Maybe it is an Arizona thing to pack a lot of gear. It is big rugged country out here - you can often see miles and miles. Spotted a bull elk 6-7 miles away (looked at the Forest Service map to confirm distance) about a month ago (granted, the light was just right and he was moving). Because it is so dry out here, animal density is usually low. We are talking 4-8 deer per square mile in many areas. That means 1-3 bucks per square mile. And of course you want a big one. Point being to all this is good optics for spotting what you want to shoot is necessary. Locating the animals is the hardest part. It is a lot to pack in the backcounrty a couple miles for a 47 year old guy, but I would rather have the equipment with me than not.