Backpacking Spotter

[TaperPin]

I agree with everything.

I would add that I dont know any hunter around here that doesn’t use 12 or 15x binos to catch animals in the shadows or standing up to move. And, out past a mile. Spotters get pulled out after animals are spotted.

Did it just yesterday with a buddy, and I glassed up a buck at 2300 yards with 15s. We’ve spotted game at miles if they are out in the open and it’s light. Being in glass for 8 hours a day, the binos get the nod above a spotter for glassing, for field of view, for stereo vision.

That’s why I asked for use of the spotter.
View attachment 806657View attachment 806658

Good words of wisdom. That’s also a great photo giving someone an idea of distance that is huntable with optics. It can be shocking to a hunter new to open country hunting that setting up that far away can be productive, but it is, and it doesn’t take all that long to move into position for a shot.


Here’s one of my favorite mermaids that calls to hunters and sucks days out of their hunt - every hunter on the side the picture is taken from looks across with a spotter and sees deer with antlers of some kind and human nature kicks in and they want to take a day to hunt it and get a closer look. I do have a good story of a big mulie taken from there, but even more stories from our side. As the crow flies it’s not far, but the passable game trails are 4 miles down to the bottom of the drainage, then another three or four miles up the only decent trail into that place. Everyone seems to try it once no matter what you tell ‘em, wastes a day getting over there, sees a few mediocre bucks, another day getting back, then they’re wiped out and half ass for another day. *chuckle*

 

[Brandon.miller.4]

I bought the 16s to try. They are amazing for quick handholding during daylight. I loved them for that. If I never stopped to use a tripod, I would find a use for them. The IS tech is very cool.

I really want IS and LRF with alpha glass in a package, lol.

They don’t compare to 15/18s on a tripod all day or in low light conditions.

The limitations are the objective size and money put into the electronics compared to glass.

They are two different products with some crossover.

That is what I assumed. I would think the better optic would largely depend on what your primary type of hunting is. For me, the majority of my time is spent in small broken terrain, to spend all day behind glass from one location would be foolishness. Moving from one break to another is much more effective for spotting game since there is little to no master vantage points. This is where IS excels. I should clarify that I'm hunting mule deer in this terrain so a spotter and tripod are always with me as well. I also think for bear and elk, it's nice to ditch the tripod and spotter all together (which i would never do without IS).

 

[StupidLightweight]

Here's my 2 cents. I've owned Nikon's ED50 with fixed 27X wide angle lens for the last 15 years. Superb optics, lightweight at maybe a pound, glorious field of view, and great to use. However, you need a tripod and can't use both eyes.

When I bought 15x56 Swaros, I carried the Nikon much less. While heavier, it beats any similar-sized spotter purely because you use both eyes. The resolution you gain with both eyes is astonishing. With a tripod, the total weight is close to a lightweight rifle, so that sucks.

Honestly, after using SIG's ZULU6 HDX Pro 14x50s this season, I too am rethinking my glassing game. Image stabilization is miraculous and makes me a far better hunter. True, the glass isn't great, but the technology elevates it above anything else I've used.

For your purposes, I'd look hard at a higher-power image stabilized binocular. They don't weigh or cost a ton, and the fact that you can leave the tripod at home saves a bunch of weight/bulk/hassle. If you're set on a spotter, don't buy an entry-level unit. You will be disappointed.

 

[hereinaz]

That is what I assumed. I would think the better optic would largely depend on what your primary type of hunting is. For me, the majority of my time is spent in small broken terrain, to spend all day behind glass from one location would be foolishness. Moving from one break to another is much more effective for spotting game since there is little to no master vantage points. This is where IS excels. I should clarify that I'm hunting mule deer in this terrain so a spotter and tripod are always with me as well. I also think for bear and elk, it's nice to ditch the tripod and spotter all together (which i would never do without IS).

100% IS for that. I’d also say it is good for something like Alaska where you are always moving and game stands out in the tundra.

 

[hereinaz]

Here's my 2 cents. I've owned Nikon's ED50 with fixed 27X wide angle lens for the last 15 years. Superb optics, lightweight at maybe a pound, glorious field of view, and great to use. However, you need a tripod and can't use both eyes.

When I bought 15x56 Swaros, I carried the Nikon much less. While heavier, it beats any similar-sized spotter purely because you use both eyes. The resolution you gain with both eyes is astonishing. With a tripod, the total weight is close to a lightweight rifle, so that sucks.

Honestly, after using SIG's ZULU6 HDX Pro 14x50s this season, I too am rethinking my glassing game. Image stabilization is miraculous and makes me a far better hunter. True, the glass isn't great, but the technology elevates it above anything else I've used.

For your purposes, I'd look hard at a higher-power image stabilized binocular. They don't weigh or cost a ton, and the fact that you can leave the tripod at home saves a bunch of weight/bulk/hassle. If you're set on a spotter, don't buy an entry-level unit. You will be disappointed.

I had the OG IS and I think as tech evolves it will improve. The Pro version has better glass and larger objectives too.

 

[hereinaz]

Good words of wisdom. That’s also a great photo giving someone an idea of distance that is huntable with optics. It can be shocking to a hunter new to open country hunting that setting up that far away can be productive, but it is, and it doesn’t take all that long to move into position for a shot.


Here’s one of my favorite mermaids that calls to hunters and sucks days out of their hunt - every hunter on the side the picture is taken from looks across with a spotter and sees deer with antlers of some kind and human nature kicks in and they want to take a day to hunt it and get a closer look. I do have a good story of a big mulie taken from there, but even more stories from our side. As the crow flies it’s not far, but the passable game trails are 4 miles down to the bottom of the drainage, then another three or four miles up the only decent trail into that place. Everyone seems to try it once no matter what you tell ‘em, wastes a day getting over there, sees a few mediocre bucks, another day getting back, then they’re wiped out and half ass for another day. *chuckle*
View attachment 806676

Gorgeous!!

In AZ, there’s usually and unfortunately a road or two or three to get you a mile or two closer…

 

[farmermail]

Good words of wisdom. That’s also a great photo giving someone an idea of distance that is huntable with optics. It can be shocking to a hunter new to open country hunting that setting up that far away can be productive, but it is, and it doesn’t take all that long to move into position for a shot.


Here’s one of my favorite mermaids that calls to hunters and sucks days out of their hunt - every hunter on the side the picture is taken from looks across with a spotter and sees deer with antlers of some kind and human nature kicks in and they want to take a day to hunt it and get a closer look. I do have a good story of a big mulie taken from there, but even more stories from our side. As the crow flies it’s not far, but the passable game trails are 4 miles down to the bottom of the drainage, then another three or four miles up the only decent trail into that place. Everyone seems to try it once no matter what you tell ‘em, wastes a day getting over there, sees a few mediocre bucks, another day getting back, then they’re wiped out and half ass for another day. *chuckle*
View attachment 806676

Quit spying on me. Pretty sure I was one of those guys.

 

[Brandon.miller.4]

I had the OG IS and I think as tech evolves it will improve. The Pro version has better glass and larger objectives too.

I never bought the original purely because of the small size (horrible ergos) and the small objective (poor light transmission)

 

[hereinaz]

I never bought the original purely because of the small size (horrible ergos) and the small objective (poor light transmission)

I am a sucker to try something new, lol. Bought it off eBay and sold it for the same amount, just paid shipping as a “rental fee.”

If I had unlimited money, I would buy the 16 Pro for the scenarios where it excels.