Anyone regret getting a 48x instead of 60x spotting scope?

[aaronoto]

As the title says, any regrets?  I've not been behind a spotting scope enough to really know if I need all the way up to 60x.  Primary use will be spotting for long range rifle shooting and glassing fields for waterfowl. Weight is not a concern.  Looking at the Vortex Razor HD line.

Given what my rifle scope looks like at 24x I know the 48x would be more then enough to accomplish what I'm looking for, but there's a voice in my head telling me if I'm going to spend that kind of coin that I should just spend a few hundred more and get a 60x.

Thanks!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Bob33]

It would be of limited value on a 60mm scope. The exit pupil would be very small past 48x.

https://www.astronomics.com/spotting-scope-specifications_t.aspx


A scope’s magnification limit is about one power per mm of scope aperture under excellent seeing conditions (bright daylight; still, calm air; and little haze). A 60mm scope is therefore capable of 60x at the most, which explains why 60mm scope manufacturers don’t make eyepieces capable of higher powers. Attempts to push the power beyond this point would only result in very dim and increasingly unsatisfactory views. Low to medium powers usually provide more satisfactory observing than high powers under average seeing conditions.

As a general rule, the highest consistently usable power in average daylight is approximately equal to the aperture of the scope in mm divided by 2 – 30x with a 60mm scope, 40x with a 77mm to 80mm scope, etc.

[aaronoto]

I'd be looking at stepping up to the 85mm if I went the 60x route.  According to that site, still way beyond useable power though.  Great site by the way!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SteelheadTed]

I just listened to the latest Meateater podcast episode where they talked to some guys from Vortex Optics.  It was a really good episode.  To a man they all said they would trade magnification for clarity.  Most admitted they rarely go beyond 40x, especially in warmer weather where the mirageing makes it impossible to see anyway.

[Taco280AI]

I would absolutely take clarity over magnification, every time. Went scouting with a buddy over the weekend, he had Vortex Viper 10x42s and I had 8.5x42 El Swarovisions. We swapped a few times and there was no comparison. Looking at elk about 460 away inside a burn I could see them much better with mine than his.

[JDHasty]

We have a Leupold 12-40x60 & a Razor 85 that came with 20-60 eyepiece and the only time we really use anything much above 40 is looking at planets, stars and the moon.  We actually use the fixed 30 power eyepiece more than the variable on the big scope. 

[jjhunter]

I've used 70x on my 95mm Swarovski with excellent results.   In big country, it is a very nice option to have.

[JDHasty]

I've used 70x on my 95mm Swarovski with excellent results.   In big country, it is a very nice option to have.

When atmospheric conditions allow it, it can be very nice to have that kind of power available.   

[jjhunter]

I bought the 1.7x extender, so I actually have up 120x with the 95mm objective.  Reviews say that usable power is 95-100x.   We'll see?  I bought it  for extra big country where I can use the 60x95mm BTX and most likely won't use with the stx eye piece.

Never hurts to have the option of more power.  There will be times when you wish you had it!

[aaronoto]

Thanks guys!  I think I'm going to pull the trigger on a 48x 65mm.  Living on the westside I rarely get into big country, and if I ever get into big game hunting I'm sure the lighter 65mm will be easier to pack around. 

[coachcw]

I just bought a 20x60x80 hd el swaro ! said screwe it and went with the 80  !

[Stein]

I'm seriously looking at the Vortex Razor 11-33x 50 due to the price and packability.  I don't really field judge, but need something that could put animals into the small, decent and big categories.