Spotting Scope?

[BetoBow]

I am currently trying to purchase a new spotting scope. Cabelas has its brand Euro HD scope for $1750 ($500 discount) and I am debating between it and the Vortex Razor HD $1600.

Can any one give me their opinion on which one they would go with and the reason behind it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MtnMuley]

I would buy one of the last year model Razor HD's for $999 and save $700+ dollars.  In your shoes, it's a no brainer.

[BetoBow]

I would buy one of the last year model Razor HD's for $999 and save $700+ dollars.  In your shoes, it's a no brainer.

Thanks MtnMuley. How do they perform compared to the new Razor? Do you believe the old Razor is better quality than the Cabelas brand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MtnMuley]

The Razors are basically the exact same, but have a new look. I can't tell you how they compare as I've never used the Cabelas. I use a Zeiss HD and chose that because I felt it to the best after comparing them all. I've looked through a couple friends Razor HDs and think they are best value in a good quality spotter. Especially for $999.

[huntnphool]

For that price I'd look at a pre owned Swaro as well.

[teanawayslayer]

For that price I'd look at a pre owned Swaro as well.

[dog]

I have one of the Cabelas Euro HDs, Got it this summer on sale there at a little over $1600. It is made by Meopta scope, and it is quite impressive.

[MtnMuley]

Where you gonna find a 20-60x80 Swaro HD spotter for near 1K though? Unless the Swaro is an HD,  my eyes chose the Razor HD over the non HD Swaro every day.

[JDHasty]

Where you gonna find a 20-60x80 Swaro HD spotter for near 1K though? Unless the Swaro is an HD,  my eyes chose the Razor HD over the non HD Swaro every day.

Cuck hunting I use my old model Razor 85 right next to my buddy's Swaro and they are very close close.  Fact is he was using a 30 WA Vortex Razor eyepiece w MOA reticle in his Swaro a lot of the time and that is why I bought one too.  It swaps right on, but does not lock on the Swaro. 

With his Swaro eyepiece it is still not a big difference in resolution. 

[huntnphool]

 I've got buddy's that sold their 20-60x65 Swaro to buy the 80mm. They are very nice but now those same buddy's are looking to get back into the 65mm because the 80mm is just too big to pack.

 Might take that into consideration. If you are driving to all your vantage points that's one thing. If you are planning on hiking with it, I'd think hard about it.

[JDHasty]

I've got buddy's that sold their 20-60x65 Swaro to buy the 80mm. They are very nice but now those same buddy's are looking to get back into the 65mm because the 80mm is just too big to pack.

 Might take that into consideration. If you are driving to all your vantage points that's one thing. If you are planning on hiking with it, I'd think hard about it.

We have a Razor 85, an  old 12-40X60 Leupold GR non-HD and a 20X50 Leupold Rubber Armored GR and that Razor is only packable if you really need it.  The 12-40 is a lot lighter, but bulky and the little scope I can drop into a coat pocket with a Gorilla Pod or a Leupold Packer Tripod if I am wanting to hike my fat hind end any distance and think I can get by with out more. 

[BetoBow]

I've got buddy's that sold their 20-60x65 Swaro to buy the 80mm. They are very nice but now those same buddy's are looking to get back into the 65mm because the 80mm is just too big to pack.

 Might take that into consideration. If you are driving to all your vantage points that's one thing. If you are planning on hiking with it, I'd think hard about it.

We have a Razor 85, an  old 12-40X60 Leupold GR non-HD and a 20X50 Leupold Rubber Armored GR and that Razor is only packable if you really need it.  The 12-40 is a lot lighter, but bulky and the little scope I can drop into a coat pocket with a Gorilla Pod or a Leupold Packer Tripod if I am wanting to hike my fat hind end any distance and think I can get by with out more.

I am planning a couple of backcountry hunts next year. I would need to pack it in. Is the 85 too much of a hassle? Sorry for the million questions it will be my first spotting scope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MtnMuley]

If you plan on back country hunting quite a bit, I'd go 65mm as people mentioned. I assumed you were looking at 80mms since that's what the prices you mention reflected.

[BetoBow]

If you plan on back country hunting quite a bit, I'd go 65mm as people mentioned. I assumed you were looking at 80mms since that's what the prices you mention reflected.

I assumed bigger is better....maybe not the case lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JDHasty]

If you plan on back country hunting quite a bit, I'd go 65mm as people mentioned. I assumed you were looking at 80mms since that's what the prices you mention reflected.

Don't discount the Leupold 12-40X60 HD.  It is better than ours optically, and ours is pretty darn good.  I got it from Maschmet (when they were repping Leupold) about 1992 for doing a show for them and it really has served us well. 

It's kinda' like the Leupold vs Nightforce riflescope dynamic in that there is "mo betta" optically out there, but when it comes to outfitting hunters Leupold has shown themselves to be really listening and making the trade-offs that make Leupold a world leader in outfitting serious hunters. 

The Leupold is not seriously marketed to bird watchers because getting into back country is not generally what their first concern is.  Bird watchers demand resolution and color fidelity and are willing to pay for it in weight... and dollars.

That is my  and you probably are more into finding game and assessing game than sitting there examining every hair on that animal and drinking in the experience that that brings bird watchers.   

Just give that scope a thought.  Leupold most certainly did when they first offered it three decades ago and it proved to be so "right" for hunters that they have kept it alive and improved upon it constantly. 

[MtnMuley]

I've used a 12-40×60 Leupy since they came out. I still own my original and still use it on many hunts.

Also, how did you get an HD model in 1992?

[Sliverslinger]

I have the brand new razor hd 27-60x85 spotter and it is absolutely incredible. However, I didn't pay anywhere near1600 for it. If you happen to be a veteran call up vortex directly-  they give an incredible discount. I paid less than what used ones of the old version go for- on the condition that the discount price is not revealed.  Seriously though- they got a customer for life out it and it's an incredible spotter.

[MtnMuley]

27x is as low as it goes on the new model?

[JDHasty]

27x is as low as it goes on the new model?

Maybe on the larger Leupold, but not so far as I know on the 12-40X60 GR.  It can be used in place of also packing a binocular because of the FOV it offers by going that low.  Maybe the larger scope only has a low power of 27 and if you also pack a binocular to find game it is probably OK.  Bot not if you don't.  I always have a binocular when I have my 20X50, but not necessarily when I have the 12-40. 

[lord grizzly]

If you plan on back country hunting quite a bit, I'd go 65mm as people mentioned. I assumed you were looking at 80mms since that's what the prices you mention reflected.

I assumed bigger is better....maybe not the case lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All I do is backpack hunt. Optics is the only thing I'm willing to pay a weignt penalty on. If your going to get serious about it buy a 80 and spend as much as you can. On the scope and the tripod

[Antlershed]

27x is as low as it goes on the new model?

The new 85mm Vortex is 27-60, the 65mm is 22-48x.

[MtnMuley]

27x is as low as it goes on the new model?

The new 85mm Vortex is 27-60, the 65mm is 22-48x.

That's very interesting why they chose to go 27 on the low end. Not good for a guy who wants it to pan country. Be surprised if their sales don't force them to go back to a 20x.

[Bob33]

27x is as low as it goes on the new model?

The new 85mm Vortex is 27-60, the 65mm is 22-48x.

That's very interesting why they chose to go 27 on the low end. Not good for a guy who wants it to pan country. Be surprised if their sales don't force them to go back to a 20x.

The angle of view is allegedly wider, and equal at 27x to the older model at 20x.

I do agree that having a lower power is nice. I use a Leupold 12-40 HD frequently and love the 12x for scanning.

[JDHasty]

27x is as low as it goes on the new model?

The new 85mm Vortex is 27-60, the 65mm is 22-48x.

That's very interesting why they chose to go 27 on the low end. Not good for a guy who wants it to pan country. Be surprised if their sales don't force them to go back to a 20x.

The angle of view is allegedly wider, and equal at 27x to the older model at 20x.

I do agree that having a lower power is nice. I use a Leupold 12-40 HD frequently and love the 12x for scanning.

It actually works exceptionally well, dontcha' think?  27 just isn't going to work well at all for scanning.  I mean it gets you to focus on looking, but it is just too tight.  20 isn't much better. 

Leupold did a great job of market research before releasing that scope!  I know, how well do I know, that every once in a while you want a bit more power.   But that bottom end is where I spend most of my time. 

To comfortably, and efficiently, look for game at 12 power and then have up to 40 available, if mirage is not making that unusable, well that is a God's send.  And then, how many times can you go above ~40 and not have everything go all to heck... no mater how fine you focus because of mirage?

Where I am going is:  Don't leave that scope out of the decision matrix.  Ours is first generation and it will be passed down to someone who will treasure it even though the Razor 85 HD outshines it optically every time it is tried.  New ones are far better optically, perticularly the HD version, but we want for nothing with our old one.  Bottom line is:  It works and a new one will give you a tad bit of resolution and color fidelity ours doesn't allow us to enjoy.

My advice is:  Don't leave this option out of your decision matrix.     

[lord grizzly]

I could barely give my old leopold spoter away. I have a vx6 on my rifle and love it but there spotters are sub par. Buy a razor if that's house price point and a swaro if at all possible.

I do agree the 20x over the 27 for the low  end is my preference

[hucklebeary]

I would be stupid on telling you what to buy cause I don't own either of the spotters in question and our eyes are not the same. I do own a older Meopta spotter and I love it. What I don't like about it is how heavy it is and the tripod I need to pack to hold it steady. So to remedy that I bought a Leupold spotter that is way smaller and lighter. And of course being a lighter scope you don't need a heavy tripod. So in short, you should be like me and own 2 spotters. Lol. Just kidding. If your planning on sitting on your butt for hours on end trying to spot a critter like the cous deer guys, buy the heavy glass but if you are just going to use it to determine how big the bull or buck is then use the lighter smaller glass. That's my opinion. Pack weight and size is a big deal in the backcountry..... Not only do you have to pack your camp in, you also have to be prepared to pack meat out.

[Magnum_Willys]

If your eyesight isnt great you will notice lil difference between leupy and swaro hd.  I got the swaro but lighter leupy would suit me fine. My son not so much. 

[BetoBow]

I would be stupid on telling you what to buy cause I don't own either of the spotters in question and our eyes are not the same. I do own a older Meopta spotter and I love it. What I don't like about it is how heavy it is and the tripod I need to pack to hold it steady. So to remedy that I bought a Leupold spotter that is way smaller and lighter. And of course being a lighter scope you don't need a heavy tripod. So in short, you should be like me and own 2 spotters. Lol. Just kidding. If your planning on sitting on your butt for hours on end trying to spot a critter like the cous deer guys, buy the heavy glass but if you are just going to use it to determine how big the bull or buck is then use the lighter smaller glass. That's my opinion. Pack weight and size is a big deal in the backcountry..... Not only do you have to pack your camp in, you also have to be prepared to pack meat out.

I feel like I am selling myself short if I can afford a bigger scope and purchase a smaller one.....but at the same time I need to be conscious of weight. Wish I can have both but don't think I can convince my wife a second time lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jjhunter]

I've got buddy's that sold their 20-60x65 Swaro to buy the 80mm. They are very nice but now those same buddy's are looking to get back into the 65mm because the 80mm is just too big to pack.

 Might take that into consideration. If you are driving to all your vantage points that's one thing. If you are planning on hiking with it, I'd think hard about it.

I packed my 95mm all over the West this year with no issue.   I'd rather go without lunch than day hike without my big spotter.   It's all about priorities 

[huntnphool]

I would be stupid on telling you what to buy cause I don't own either of the spotters in question and our eyes are not the same. I do own a older Meopta spotter and I love it. What I don't like about it is how heavy it is and the tripod I need to pack to hold it steady. So to remedy that I bought a Leupold spotter that is way smaller and lighter. And of course being a lighter scope you don't need a heavy tripod. So in short, you should be like me and own 2 spotters. Lol. Just kidding. If your planning on sitting on your butt for hours on end trying to spot a critter like the cous deer guys, buy the heavy glass but if you are just going to use it to determine how big the bull or buck is then use the lighter smaller glass. That's my opinion. Pack weight and size is a big deal in the backcountry..... Not only do you have to pack your camp in, you also have to be prepared to pack meat out.

I feel like I am selling myself short if I can afford a bigger scope and purchase a smaller one.....but at the same time I need to be conscious of weight. Wish I can have both but don't think I can convince my wife a second time lol.

 This is the type of deal I'd be looking for http://www.ebay.com/itm/Swarovski-ATS-65-Spotting-Scope-20-60x-S-Zoom-Eyepiece-/272460614349?hash=item3f6feb0acd:g:WMUAAOSwcUBYNedX 

 

[huntnphool]

I've got buddy's that sold their 20-60x65 Swaro to buy the 80mm. They are very nice but now those same buddy's are looking to get back into the 65mm because the 80mm is just too big to pack.

 Might take that into consideration. If you are driving to all your vantage points that's one thing. If you are planning on hiking with it, I'd think hard about it.

I packed my 95mm all over the West this year with no issue.   I'd rather go without lunch than day hike without my big spotter.   It's all about priorities 

 Oh brother!

[full choke]

I had the Meopta version of the Cabelas scope you mentioned in your original post. I recently sold it in favor of going smaller and lighter with a Swaro 65. The Swaro is smaller and lighter for sure- but that Meopta was optically superior in every way. I miss it already...