15x binos vs spotting scope

[idahohikker]

I can use the 65mm up to 5 miles. I've spotted elk with it at that range. I like the smaller size.

I saw on another post that you want 15s and a 65mm. I think for most guys it's an either/or. Maybe if you were packing in or had a group of guys it would be nice to have both. Normally, guys develop a preference. I plan on staying with the spotter.

 

[PredatorX]

I've spent a lot of time, energy and money into trimming pounds/ounces down that I think I could roll with an 8x32, 15's and a big spotter and still have a 40# pack for a 7 day adventure, not counting what is outside my pack but that is including a rifle in the 40#. Most guys do share the load but unfortunately I am forced into lone wolfing it.

It just seems to me that trying to cover too many bases with too few optics is not best route. Granted it is pricey with a 3 optic setup. The 15's seem like they would fill the gap where the 10x's or 8x's peter out (2-3miles). (Talking grid searching here) Spotter would then resume duty at 3+ miles. Granted this is all predicated on glassing an area where you could see this far.




Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[timberbuck]

Backcountry=10x42 and 65mm spotter for me.

Day hunts from camp and truck hunts I also add the 15x56.

I do not know anyone who backpack hunts with all three but with two guys you can split the load just fine and have all the bases covered with one taking the 15x56 and the other the spotter. Both with tripods .

 

[PredatorX]

My thought is a guy could add just 2 extra pounds to his total weight by adding the 15's and dropping from a 10x42 to an 8x32. A 2 pound penalty and one could argue would then have the best optic for each application. Shaving 2 pounds should be relatively easy for a pack that has some opportunity for weight reduction.

It's funny because most guys laugh at the ounce counters but then they always want to cut back on the weight of optics. That's the last place I want to look.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

I do 12x50s and a 95mm..

I'm thinking of going 8x32s and a btx.

 

[AndyB]

On the few occasions I have been out with the spotter I could glass form anywhere from half a mile out to between 8-15, I chose an elevated position with good panoramas and lots of farm animals to compare.

I am not knocking the spotter, I know its a good one and to be honest I had the same reaction when I got my 15's and compared them to my 8xslc's, you know, less field of view, less bright an image. I will say that the longer I have my 15's the more I am impressed by them, they still amaze me with the view in certain landscapes.

I am sure the 65 spotter will grow on me too as its benefits become apparent, I suppose its knowing when to use a specific optic to reap its full benefits.

I did consider changing to a bigger scope, but I want to pack my scope on bivy type hunts, where the altitude puts 10 yrs on me,

What kind of distance are are talking about with the 15's? Also I know the 65 is a good one but I can't help but wonder if an 80+ scope will light things up for you. I had my S2 out today in an overcast sky and could pick out an elk at 5 miles if he was standing in the quarry I was looking at in Wisconsin.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[fatrascal]

As a bivvy hunter I have no room for three sets of optics. To me a spotter is just to important of a piece of equipment to leave behind. You cannot always use 60 power effectively but there are too many times when I can use it effectively. Ive had the 15's and the 10's side by side on tripods several times and to my eyes the 15's were not much better than the 10's. I sold the 15's and never looked back. The Swaro EL 10x42's are deadly on a tripod and paired up with a spotter is a great combination. I would not dream of going without a good quality spotting scope. Now a 20 power bino or the BTX would be worth having for truck hunting but when I go bivvy hunting give me 10 power bino's and a spotter. Fatrascal

 

[FlyGuy]

I am still adding to my optics, upgrading, and learning; but in my limited experience I think it all comes down to the particular hunt you are on. For me, that is typically archery elk in the timber, and my 8x32 EL's are absolutely perfect for that. Light, wide field of view, easy to hold.

I have a razor 80. I never pack it in, exclusively used from the truck. I want to upgrade to Swaro atx 65 (Or similar), but that will be down the road when I draw the right tag to justify it. Other than Aoudad hunting, I really have not hunted in country that required a spotter.

I just added MeoPro 15's and used them last week for Spring Bear in MT. The ranges we were in had a lot more open tops than anywhere else that I've hunted thus far. The 8's were still awesome in the timber, though a little underpowered for the long range stuff. But man the 15's on a tripod were game finding machines. I am really happy with this addition to my kit for hunts with more glassing opportunities/requirements.

I also used the spotter more on this hunt, but again it was only from the truck and after I had located game with the 15's. I find it much easier to cover the grid with the 15's than with a spotter. I'd put the spotter on to get a closer look, or to go back over some spots with higher magnification, but I never found anything with the spotter that I had missed with the binos. For this hunt the spotter (no matter what brand) would not be worth the weight penalty. These were 1-3 mile distances we were glassing. I have had very few opportunities to glass any further than that on any hunts thus far, but if I regularly hunted country like that then the spotter would probably be the go-to if I couldn't have both.

Anyway, I plan to have the 8's, 15's, and one day a good spotter in my arsenal. Then I just pick the combo that's most appropriate for the country I'm hunting, the conditions (solo, truck camp, etc) and the tag in my pocket.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I do get eye strain so using 15x56s is nicer for me when I want to glass for longer periods of time versus a spotter, I do USUALLY see more with the 15x56 than 8x42s due to the extra magnification however I say usually because the narrower field of view sometimes means I can't see something pop up closer to me off to the side (good reminder to take a break and look around from time to time, haha). That said the 15s fall short on giving up specific details on something glassed at distance that a spotter cranked up might provide. If I personally could glass comfortable for sustained periods with a spotter I think I'd use a 55-65mm spotter but I personally can't so the 15s are nice for me if I want more than my 8x42s.

 

[PredatorX]

How far do you all think you could make out a bull and mule deer buck at with 15's? 5 miles doable?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

How far do you all think you could make out a bull and mule deer buck at with 15's? 5 miles doable?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Not consistently imho, bulls maybe, bucks no.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Blockcaver]

Too many variable to tell how far away you can see a given critter....Sun angle...at back or looking into the sun or before or after sunset, atmospheric conditions, steadiness of the optic, color of the critter versus background, skylined, etc. I've seen mountain goats at at 6 miles in a Swaro 10x42 EL (pre-Swarovision) and at 9 miles with a Leupold 12-40x60 Goldring spotter (pre-HD). Neither of those optics are as good as today's high end glass are...and goats are easy to see. I've also missed seeing critters up close due to a variety of things.

 

[Nolan_]

Does anybody here ever bring 15's for high country mule deer and leave the spotter behind?

 

[BBob]

Does anybody here ever bring 15's for high country mule deer and leave the spotter behind?

No

 

[Blue72]

How far do you all think you could make out a bull and mule deer buck at with 15's? 5 miles doable?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

You could with a really good pair

but 15x really shine around 2-3 miles and in, which is a lot of area to cover