coues7 Report post Posted September 17, 2009 AZOnecam, Thanks for the input.....VERY well put. I glass with Swarovski 10x50 SLC's. These are the bino's I carry around my neck day in and day out. I've had the 15x56's and they were just too much to carry around the neck. I glass off of a Bogen/Manfrotto 3031 tripod with the RC2 head. I'm half way convinced not to get a spotter although I've definitely found situations where having a spotter (especially a big one) gave me the extra maginification I needed to assess a buck. The rifle I carry is a 12.5 lb tack driver and FEELS VERY heavy in the heat and hiking of AZ even during the fall hunts. I really need to just think it through and access whether I really want to pack a 55 ounce spotter throught the hills. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azhuntnut Report post Posted September 17, 2009 I have had the ATS 80 for about five years. The first three years I would pack that thing everywhere. I glass mostly through my spotting scope since I cant see out of one eye. After a while I got real tired of packing that big heavy thing and tried using a the compact Nikon 13-30x50 ED angled. Since then I have only carried the Nikon. It weighs a little over a pound and I would say it is just as clear my Swaro. Plus, it works great for digiscoping. You can also get a 13-40 eyepiece if you need more power. I will probably pick one up soon for mine. David Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coues Sniper Report post Posted September 17, 2009 I'm going to disagree a bit with AZOnecam. I carry a pair of 10's around my neck and 15's, a Bogen, and the 80mm Swaro in my pack. I too usually use my spotter for judging an animal I have already found using my binocs. Using one to glass extended periods of time is not practical. However I find my scope to be very valuable for judging animals, especially Coues deer, at long distances. I can't imagine trying to score a buck at say 700 yards or more with my 15's. Maybe you guys have better eyes than me, I just don't think I could do it. The buck I killed last year I could barely tell was a buck with my 15's, I put the scope on him and could tell he had potential but it was still far enough that I couldn't be sure what he was. I decided to put a move on him and he ended up being the second biggest deer I have ever seen. Not sure I would have put a move on him if I didn't have my scope as it took almost 3 hours to get over there. I also like the spotting scope to find other deer that are with a bedded deer. If I find a doe during rut, MANY times when I get the scope out I'll find a buck bedded near her that I never would have seen with my binocs. I also use it while hunting elk during the rut - if I can hear a bull in a thicket that won't come out and I can't pick him up with my 15's, I'll use the spotter to pick that thicket apart and most times I'll eventually see a tine or an ear and be able to get a good idea what kind of bull he is. So to me, the extra weight of the scope is completely worth it. I don't use it constantly, but when I do use it I find it invaluable. And the weight of the tripod is a moot point because I already want a sturdy one for the 15's. Not trying to say AZOne is wrong by any means, just that I have a different take on it. Food for thought anyways Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Diamondbackaz Report post Posted September 19, 2009 If birders are the judge......which I'd say they smoke us hunters on day to day use, it looks that they prefer the Swarovski to Zeiss 50:1. I've been told by a few of the optics dealers when telling them that I'm willing to spend the money for a Swarovski, that always seems to be the one they recommend OVER all others..... When it comes to 65mm vs 80mm.....the 65 can't touch the 80 when it comes to magnification (as I understand it). It would seem that with the 20-60 eye piece simple math tells me that the 80mm trumps the 65mm. I guess I'm not so much concerned with weight as I am magnification. In talking to a few of the optics dealers the one down side to the Kowa is that it is NOT rubber armed.....but the birders seem to love it. Leica is way out of my price range. The larger diameter lens gives you better light transmission, not magnification. The 80 is going to have the edge in those low light conditions at dusk and dawn when wildlife is often most active. I got the 80 just for that reason. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catclaw Report post Posted September 26, 2009 I looked through most of them and liked the Leica the best but couldn't get over the spaceship look it had. I ended up with the Pentax 80mm ED. It is a great scope but BIG. If I bought another new one today, it would be the new Leica ($4000) or the Vortex Razor HD. The Kowa 88mm is superb as well. All of these I like better than the Zeiss and Swaro. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
