85mm pros over 65mm spotting scope while backpacking

[huntnful]

These are all from a Kowa 554

540 yards bedded Muley.


600 yards bedded Muley in snow


400 yards

 

[huntnful]

Everything is a compromise; have to figure out what works best for you for the bulk of your hunting and accept any and all limitations for everything else.

Want less weight? Go smaller. (Kowa 554: 28.2 ounce, Kowa 774: 60.0 ounce, Kowa 884: 66.7 ounce)
Want more magnification? Go larger. (Kowa 554: 15-45x, Kowa 774 (WA): 25-60x, Kowa 884 (WA): 25-60x)
Want more light gathering? Go larger. (Kowa 554: 3.7mm-1.22mm, Kowa 774 (WA): 3.3mm-1.4mm, Kowa 884 (WA): 3.3mm-1.4mm)

From a physical dimension perceptive, you do not save that much pack space. Look at the Rokslide review for the Kowa 99X: https://www.rokslide.com/kowa-prominar-tsn-99a-te-80xw-eyepiece-review/

I have the Kowa 554 and the Swarovski STX 65/95. The little Kowa can do a lot but it is not perfect for all uses. The same holds true to for the STX 65 and the STX 95. With all of them, there are times I want more magnification and was the glass to be clearer.

Great summary.

 

[nphunter]

I have an S2 82mm spotter, previously I had a Razor 65mm I originally planned to keep the 65mm but after using the S2 and seeing how much better it is I ended up selling the 65mm scope. I had the Razor for years and it was a good scope, my friend has an STS 65mm and we have spent hours glassing side by side and I could never see a huge advantage using the STS except for the little extra zoom.

With the S2 the difference is night and day going from 65mm to 82mm with Floride. I personally would skimp on a lot of other gear before skimping on my spotter when it comes to weight. I've always carried my 5lb tripod as well on glassing intense hunts. Normally I stash my spotter setup when stalking an animal and come back for it on my way back out to camp.

It's easy to drop weight to make up the difference between a 65 and 80+mm spotter, as far as volume, I find it easier to fit my 82mm S2 with a barrel focus than it was to fit my 65mm Razor with dual focus knobs. My 82mm S2 is 62oz, and 15.5" long compared to 48oz and 14", so 14oz difference. Just for reference switching from a 3L water bladder to a 2L would save you 35oz.

One thing I know for sure is every time I decide to go on a backpacking trip and chose to leave the spotter I regret it. Very few times have I taken it and regretted having the extra weight.

Meopta S2, Razor 65mm, Viper 80mm, you can easily see how much more slender the 82mm is than the 65mm due to the type of focus.

 

[Steve O]

This is 2.5 miles away 1/2 hour before dark thru my 65 ATX. Not bad, but I think I’d rather have the 85 no matter the distance. Right now I can’t say I will take my 95mm 5 miles in and 2500’ up but I’d trade the 65 for an 85…

Buy quality no matter the size.

 

[reloader41]

The Rangers used to have an expression “ travel light, freeze at night”. Stalking I would say “Pack heavy, see at night”…..

 

[tdhanses]

I didn’t say in the original post, but let’s say 5 miles or so back with at least a few thousand feet in elevation climb.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitely a 55!

 

[tdhanses]

wow i was going to get a 554 but now you got me second guessing that one big time and might do a 884

Thing about digiscoped pics is the phones camera, no settings are ever equal. The 553 stays in my pack all the time and it’s easy to say you’ll pack a big one around, i have a 773 as well but for general hunting the 55 series Kowa does a great job.

In the pics posted you can clearly see all the animals and their horns, the 80hd swaro has the benefit of extra zoom over the 55 series but it is also going to take up twice the space in your pack.

 

[68Plexi]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I can only afford one spotter for now and I’m leaning toward the 80/85 and cutting weight somewhere else in my pack.

I’m sure I can find 1+ lbs to cut somewhere, even if it’s the water in my hydration bladder as suggested.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Elk botherer]

In my opinion the real estate taken up by the larger scopes are a bigger issue than the weight

I pack camp in from three to six miles and from two to three thousand vertical feet and I made the jump from a 65 mm spotter to an 85 mm last year because I’m not afraid of an extra pound if it results in better optical performance. What I found out for me personally was that the pack space lost was worse than the weight factor. Or maybe I just need a bigger pack. Good luck.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

20mm difference in diameter of objective lens isn't hardly measurable to the naked eye, in terms of practical light enhancement.

So why carry the wider diameter glass?

I do a helluva lot of packing stuff around on my back while climbing around in the mountains of North America.

For me, a 20-60x variable scope with 60mm or 65mm objective lens is plenty, plenty, plenty, even after sundown at over 2 miles distance.

 

[nphunter]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I can only afford one spotter for now and I’m leaning toward the 80/85 and cutting weight somewhere else in my pack.

I’m sure I can find 1+ lbs to cut somewhere, even if it’s the water in my hydration bladder as suggested.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don’t overlook the Meopta S2, there are a couple on eBay and you won’t find a better scope anywhere near their price!

 

[Steve O]

I pack camp in from three to six miles and from two to three thousand vertical feet and I made the jump from a 65 mm spotter to an 85 mm last year because I’m not afraid of an extra pound if it results in better optical performance. What I found out for me personally was that the pack space lost was worse than the weight factor. Or maybe I just need a bigger pack. Good luck.

On that note, my 95 BTX is a space hog. I bought a Marsupial Case for it and strap it to the outside side of my pack. Balances out the rifle…

 

[Nimrod85]

I wonder this myself on most hunts. I have a Vortex 85mm Razor HD and a Vortex 50mm Razor HD. There's really not that much of a weight difference between the 85mm and 65mm, so I elected to get the larger one. If I'm going to pack a larger scope, I'll pack the big 85mm scope. If I'm trying to save weight or not needing to glass in the early morning or late evening, or not needing to glass at extreme distances, I'll pack the 50mm scope. This last weekend, my brother and I were comparing my 50mm to his 85mm at about a mile on a few bighorn rams, and there was surprisingly little difference. I could tell the approximate size of the rams with the 50mm spotter nearly as well as with his larger 85mm model. This was at about 2pm in the afternoon. The 85mm has proved its worth especially in big open elk country and on pronghorn hunts in open country. I'm still conflicted about which to carry. But I think the relevant comparison, at least for the Vortex line, is 85mm and 50mm, since there is a significant (nearly 3 lbs) weight difference between the two, and not as much of a weight difference between their 65mm and 85mm.