Should I even bother with spotter

[Eric M]

So I have never used a spotting scope but I'm starting to venture into country where one could be useful. So while reading about them, on here and elsewhere, a friend of mine says, "Why don't you just get one of those video cameras with the 52X optical zoom?" (Samsung SMX-F40 for instance). So I start looking at those and I'm thinking, Wow I could see things at 52X and have video of it-why bother with a spotting scope? I know some of you guys know a heck of a lot more about optics and camera equipment than I do-Am I missing something?

[Bean Counter]

Eric,

Your ingenuity is commendable.

I am a big time cheap skate but have managed to justify investing about $8K into cameras and lenses over the past three years. Mainly because I'm now getting paid to assist and occasionally shoot weddings myself. So I've learned a thing or two about when its time to open up the wallet and throw down good money. In photography, its often said that smart money follows the lens and not the camera and with a few important caveats I tend to subscribe to this theory and apply it to hunting as well. I have old, beat up, cheap crappy guns/bows and a quality spotter, binos, LRF, and riflescope and I am definitely glad I built my system this way.

I also own a camcorder of similar specs to the one you mention. Your idea is intriguing and I encourage you to borrow a friends camcorder and try it out on a non-committal scouting trip or better yet, on a hunt when one of your buddys already has a dedicated spotting scope and you can test your theory and report back to us. I would suggest avoiding rain.

My guess is that it wont turn out as well as you hope for several reasons.

• You'll run out of batteries and need extra--lots. These specialty Li batteries ain't cheap. for my DSLRs they are $60 each but at least they use the same   
• You're going to need and want a nice tripod anyway for smooth, precise, fluid panning when picking apart a hillside a mile away. Handholding this proposition would be a disaster. The magnification plus the distance would frustrate even the most steady of hands even if the camcorder boasts an image stabilization system.
• This camcorder is unlikely to be weather resistant like a quality made spotting scope would be and would fry in a little bit of rain. Even a non waterproof spotting scope that occasionally fogs up would be better.
• You aren't looking a though-the-lens image but rather a digitally processed image based on the resolution of the view screen, which probably isn't as good of resolution as you would want for distinguishing antlers from branches at 2,000 yards. Plenty of photography forums have these online urinating matches between the Sony fanboys and the DSLR old guard who maintain that an electronic viewfinder is just silly and has a long ways to come before sports and wedding/event photographers will consider adopting them.
• Lens coatings: consumer grade camcorders are likely to have few if any lens coatings. On higher end spotting scopes and DSLR lenses they will have multiple coats for things like smudge protection, flare resistance (for when you're glassing east at sunrise, etc), and phase correction. Simplifying the physics as correction for lateral color fringing (chromatic aberration) is usually done inside the lenses but without it this is what gets really Ugly McNasty at longer distances under high contrast. Just point it at the moon some night, zoom in, and look at that blue ring around the edge of the moon. Or purple fringing on antlers or tree branches on a digiscoped deer when someone used a low end spotter.
• Finally, size matters.  Most spotting scopes run 60-80mm objective lens diameters. These camcorders run what, 20mm? Even if it were world class, expensive-as-hell glass on that camcorder, which I bet a swift kick in the nuts for that price range it is NOT, you would have a hard time beating the low light gathering ability of even a midrange spotting scope. Quality glass goes a long way, but sometimes there's no trumping simple physics. bigger objective lenses gather more light for your pupillary exit.

HTH,
BC

[JDHasty]

Most big game animals are crepuscular and your optics choices should take that into account.  There will be tradeoffs made for weight and other considerations, but it is wishful thinking that a camera like you will describe would perform even half as well as a cheap spotting scope in the field.

It may work, to a degree, at high noon on a clear day, but not under hunting conditions.   

I have a couple spotters, Vortex Razor 85 that I wouldn't want to pack far at all and a 12-40X60 Leupold that is just OK in that regard.  I had a compact 50 mm scope that was stolen and I will replace it because I will not be in the field without good optics.

The little scope was OK, but it beat the heck  out of the big scopes I was not willing to pack and by OK I mean I was able to use it where you would not be able to resolve anything what so ever with the lenses on a video camera.  It had narrow FOV and light transmission was not what a big scope would deliver, but the big scopes were not an option for me at those times.     

[Born2late]

Funny you ask this question. My son and I just went through this exact situation, and it cost us two bigger bucks than we ended up shooting.
We went to kodiak on a remote deer hunt where my friend flew us in for 4 days for blacktail hunting. My son  and I shoot long range guns and the we were wanting to utilize that on this hunt as the terrain is really hilly. I bought a sony video cam with a 60x
zoom with image stabilizer to record the hunt. Didn't get it specifically for a spotter but ended up trying to use it to see horns.
The first day of the hunt we climb up near the top of the mountain and had two nice bucks bedded at 330 yds. Easy shot for us except
that where we were at it blows none stop, and i mean a lot 30 to 50mph for 4 days straight. We had bushnell and zeiss binos and a vortex scope which went to 24 power but even that wasn't enough to see the tines coming up off the main beams. The wind made your eyes water none stop and the grassy background all blended in.
I made the decision to hike to the backside of the mountain and hike all the way around which would have us come out right on top
of them ,but they were gone by the time we got around to them.
We tryied to view them through the video camera and it was so grainy that it was worse then looking through the 24 power with watery eyes. Needless to say next year i will have a good spotter to ride in the pack with me.

[Eric M]

After posting this I thought about the weather if not ruining a camera, then at least ruining the image I was after. I didn't think about batteries (duh!). I appreciate everyone's thoughtful responses. I figured I would get at least one good answer (even if it wasn't what I wanted to hear), but when everyone says the same thing, especially with the experience (and experiences-sorry Born2late I work up there and know what you mean) of the posters, I will take heed. BeanCounter and JDHasty-Thank you guys for your insight. You have given me some invaluable information and a lot of what you said was a bit over my head and will get me to learn more. Born2Late- Thank you also. hearing not only will my idea probably fail, but already has is good to know. And here I thought I might be some kind of genius. haha

[Bean Counter]

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

If you have a creative way at looking at your budget you can find all kinds of ways to cut expenses and needless junk out of your gear list. There's no end to industries in hunting that want to sell you 'must have' gear.

[Eric M]

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

If you have a creative way at looking at your budget you can find all kinds of ways to cut expenses and needless junk out of your gear list. There's no end to industries in hunting that want to sell you 'must have' gear.

I hear you. I am changing a lot about the way I hunt, and it's adding up. Also thought the idea that, even if I came home from a long hike empty handed, I might have some cool video. If I find something promising, I'll let you know.

[stryker]

 Last year or so I saw a cheap adapter made for a scope so that you could attach your cell phone to it and capture the long distance images.

It was a cell phone case with a plastic tube glued on the back over the lens hole, then you just slide it onto the eye piece of the scope.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTQyMlgxNjAw/z/9OQAAOSwPhdU~6oU/$_35.JPG

[Eric M]

Last year or so I saw a cheap adapter made for a scope so that you could attach your cell phone to it and capture the long distance images.

It was a cell phone case with a plastic tube glued on the back over the lens hole, then you just slide it onto the eye piece of the scope.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTQyMlgxNjAw/z/9OQAAOSwPhdU~6oU/$_35.JPG

Nice-Thanks

[Eric M]

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

If you have a creative way at looking at your budget you can find all kinds of ways to cut expenses and needless junk out of your gear list. There's no end to industries in hunting that want to sell you 'must have' gear.

It's been awhile and I got away from the shopping because Christmas came up and well you get it. So now I see a newer thread discussing similiar issues and it gets me searching again. So my question for you Beancounter- I see a lot of guys (Boneaddict for example) who put up some nice pictures. Some people make their living doing it. Instead of the video route I was initially addressing, I've been looking at youtube video of regular cameras with incredible optical zooms mounted on tripods. There is a Nikon Coolpix with an 83X optical zoom that brings the moon craters right into your backyard. My questions (finally) Are any of these types of systems waterproof? Would a camera like this that does stills and video give me superior images to an android phone mounted on a spotting scope? Assuming it's possible to get antler clarity with a camera, do these kind of cameras come with the lens out of the box ready to see mule deer a mile away, or are you having to gradually build a system? I appreciate any time you give me on this. When I spend $1000 plus on something I really want to be satified. I'm worried about going one way or the other and being PO'd or unsatisfied, which I dread when spending that kind of money. Anyway sorry for the long wind.

[JDHasty]

"Assuming it's possible to get antler clarity with a camera..." 

If, and that is a BIG IF (that is probably the limiting factor), there is sufficient light to be able to capture an image - when you are dealing with digital cameras you are dealing with pixel count (the # of the receptors that are available). 

https://photographylife.com/camera-resolution-explained

[popeshawnpaul]

I never brought a spotter on my sheep hunt...  Pretty crazy when you think of it.  I did bring my 7D2 with a 100-400 L II.  At 400mm with the 7D2 crop factor makes it appear as if it's 640mm.  1x is 50mm so about 13x as I look through the viewfinder.  I then can zoom in on that on my screen either 5x or 10x so it's the equivalent of 65x or 130x on the screen to evaluate rams. 

Here is a shot of a rams I was scoping at about 1000 yards away.  I can zoom all the way into the head on these to evaluate in the field.  Plus I have the image to bring home. Weight of the setup is relatively similar although I bet my camera is a tad heaver.

[Eric M]

 I appreciate the responses. Considering light gathering is something I continue to forget about. (Usually until 5 minutes before legal light ends). I think I am leaning towards some 15X56 Vortex binos this year and early next year (or for Christmas) picking up a spotting scope. When I look at how much there is behind cameras and taking quality pictures, I'm thinking it might be something to work towards when I get closer to retirement. The hunting season with a camera never ends. Thanks again guys.

[JDHasty]

I appreciate the responses. Considering light gathering is something I continue to forget about. (Usually until 5 minutes before legal light ends). I think I am leaning towards some 15X56 Vortex binos this year and early next year (or for Christmas) picking up a spotting scope. When I look at how much there is behind cameras and taking quality pictures, I'm thinking it might be something to work towards when I get closer to retirement. The hunting season with a camera never ends. Thanks again guys.

I was shopping for quite a while for a 15 power binocular.  The Ziess 15x60 BGA is discontinued, the Docter 15x60 Nobilem is bulky and heavy & a lot less money, but nearly as fantastic optically as the aforementioned Ziess.  The Swaro was a close third optically, IMHO all three were really, really close, and the Vortex Kaibab was just ever so slightly behind the Swaro SLC.   After using our SLC a chuck shooting buddy wanted a pair and I told him that the Kaibab was pretty close and it is worth a look see.  I left him with our SLC and he took it with him when he went shopping to compare and contrast and decided the Kaibab provided everything he was looking for and at a substantial savings over the SLC. 

When we are set up we are looking through whatever is in front of us and frequently I am looking through his binocular and he is looking through ours and I can say that I think you will be very well served with them if you end up going that way. 

[Eric M]

I appreciate the responses. Considering light gathering is something I continue to forget about. (Usually until 5 minutes before legal light ends). I think I am leaning towards some 15X56 Vortex binos this year and early next year (or for Christmas) picking up a spotting scope. When I look at how much there is behind cameras and taking quality pictures, I'm thinking it might be something to work towards when I get closer to retirement. The hunting season with a camera never ends. Thanks again guys.

I was shopping for quite a while for a 15 power binocular.  The Ziess 15x60 BGA is discontinued, the Docter 15x60 Nobilem is bulky and heavy & a lot less money, but nearly as fantastic optically as the aforementioned Ziess.  The Swaro was a close third optically, IMHO all three were really, really close, and the Vortex Kaibab was just ever so slightly behind the Swaro SLC.   After using our SLC a chuck shooting buddy wanted a pair and I told him that the Kaibab was pretty close and it is worth a look see.  I left him with our SLC and he took it with him when he went shopping to compare and contrast and decided the Kaibab provided everything he was looking for and at a substantial savings over the SLC. 

When we are set up we are looking through whatever is in front of us and frequently I am looking through his binocular and he is looking through ours and I can say that I think you will be very well served with them if you end up going that way.

Thanks. For a pretty big difference in price, I think the Vortex Kaiibab's are all the glass I need in a 15X binocular. I have a cheaper pair of their 10X42's and no complaints. This year is find the shapes on the mountain side that look like deer year. Between your comment, and what I've seen elsewhere, plus a side by side comparison, I feel pretty good about it. That's key for me when I make a big purchase like that.