Eastmans Spotter Review

[JNDEER]

I was reading over the last issue of Eastmans and it surprised me to see them putting Leica ahead of Swaro and even more so the Leupy HD above the Razor HD.

This finding seems to go against what is "said" or the "norm" feeling of how well the spotters are. I am curious if anyone has actually compared the same spotters side by side and can shed some light on their findings? I am really interested in the Leupy HD vs Razor HD. Before I purchased my 65 spotter (ED60) I was looking at reviews on both and can say that comments from those that really know glass said the Leupy was not in that class of spotters.

 

[Matt Cashell]

Yeah, I disagree with most of that particular article's conclusions, but we all have opinions. Arbitrary "Star" rating systems haven't really appealed to me either.

I have used the Razor 65 and Leupy GR HD, and I would take the Razor every time.

 

[Shrek]

Some reviews are "for sale" and some are not. Eastmans is monetizing just about everything they do. Not all reviewers disclose their professional relationships. If most informal reviews around the net say one thing and a very commercial venue has a review that runs strongly counter then you might wonder. Look at the big picture and judge.

 

[2rocky]

I read the reviews with a bit of a bias myself. It is easier when you don't feel like you have to have the absolute BEST.
I think the reviewer placed a great deal of importance on durability, and the solid Leica got a leg up in that department.
Pretty much any of those reviewed would serve my needs.

 

[Russp17]

I was reading over the last issue of Eastmans and it surprised me to see them putting Leica ahead of Swaro and even more so the Leupy HD above the Razor HD.

This finding seems to go against what is "said" or the "norm" feeling of how well the spotters are. I am curious if anyone has actually compared the same spotters side by side and can shed some light on their findings? I am really interested in the Leupy HD vs Razor HD. Before I purchased my 65 spotter (ED60) I was looking at reviews on both and can say that comments from those that really know glass said the Leupy was not in that class of spotters.

I agreed with the Leica over the swaro after looking through both. I actually compared a Swaro to a Nikon fieldscope ED and while the Swaro's image was better near dark it did not let in near as much light.

 

[JNDEER]

I read the reviews with a bit of a bias myself. It is easier when you don't feel like you have to have the absolute BEST.
I think the reviewer placed a great deal of importance on durability, and the solid Leica got a leg up in that department.
Pretty much any of those reviewed would serve my needs.

I agree with the bias... Always play devils advocate.... They kept referring to the large group of elk on the hill in the review, so that caught my eye as it seemed the review could have withheld bias.

 

[JNDEER]

I agreed with the Leica over the swaro after looking through both. I actually compared a Swaro to a Nikon fieldscope ED and while the Swaro's image was better near dark it did not let in near as much light.

Thanks for your input. Can you elaborate more on your findings between the ED (which model) and the swaro?

 

[RosinBag]

It is all business with their reviews. They have seldom had an honest review over a given length of time. Sometimes they review things after using for an hour.

I have a Swaro STM and it is better than any spotter I have ever used.

The Nikon ED 50 I personally thought was like looking through the bottom if a coke bottle. Although light in weight, I have never understood why people paid as much as they do for them. Just my opinion though.

 

[grizzly]

I wish they would've reviewed the Swaro ATS instead of the ATX. For my eyes, ATS has better glass in both clarity and light-gathering.

I feel the Leica, Zeiss and Swaro ATS are all equals... I'm honestly not that big of a fan of the ATX.

 

[Russp17]

Thanks for your input. Can you elaborate more on your findings between the ED (which model) and the swaro?

The Nikon was the 20-60x60 FieldScope III ED and the Swaro was a Swarovski ATM 65. I found the image to be more clear and bright in the Swaro but towards dark the light gathering lagged behind the Nikon in my honest opinion. I'm not saying the Swaro is a bad scope I just had a similar experience to Eastman's on the light gathering.

 

[MattB]

I agreed with the Leica over the swaro after looking through both. I actually compared a Swaro to a Nikon fieldscope ED and while the Swaro's image was better near dark it did not let in near as much light.

I won a Leica 65MM 3 years ago, but was really disappointed to learn it was only 3.5 oz. lighter than my 80MM Swarovski. The glass was really nice, but it found its way to Ebay a few days after I got it. That 15 oz. eye piece is a monster.

 

[Rent Outdoor Gear]

Well, I knowingly am going to get flamed but I just posted an honest to goodness review of the Vanguard Endeavor 65HD. As much as I expected this scope to disappoint, it just didn't. I almost want to send it to Matt to check my sanity, but I think it's due to be given away in shor order. I have nothing to gain or lose as a result of this review other than my reputation. Neither I or Rokslide are sponsored by Vanguard. I even spent a few extra days trying to "see" what I was missing.

Turns out, it's just a dang good scope for the $$.

Fire up the flame throwers...

 

[JNDEER]

It is all business with their reviews. They have seldom had an honest review over a given length of time. Sometimes they review things after using for an hour.

I have a Swaro STM and it is better than any spotter I have ever used.

The Nikon ED 50 I personally thought was like looking through the bottom if a coke bottle. Although light in weight, I have never understood why people paid as much as they do for them. Just my opinion though.

LOL. I have heard you say that before about the ED50. Sometimes people eyes are just different in that aspect as I use the ED50 and ED60 and can notice a difference, but nothing that extreme.
although the same can be said about me. When I picked up a pair of Viper HD 10x42 I felt like I was looking through a hole the size of a dime compared to any other 10x42 bino.

 

[JNDEER]

Well, I knowingly am going to get flamed but I just posted an honest to goodness review of the Vanguard Endeavor 65HD. As much as I expected this scope to disappoint, it just didn't. I almost want to send it to Matt to check my sanity, but I think it's due to be given away in shor order. I have nothing to gain or lose as a result of this review other than my reputation. Neither I or Rokslide are sponsored by Vanguard. I even spent a few extra days trying to "see" what I was missing.

Turns out, it's just a dang good scope for the $$.

Fire up the flame throwers...

That was a well written review Darin, thanks for posting it up. I personally don't care if someone pays for the scope or not...sponsor or not...Like you stated it is on the reputation of the organization (Eastmans), on BB with his backpack review (sponsors and free backpacks) or in your case, just you (purchased at a discount).

Telling it like you see it is all anyone can ask in an honest review. Two things that have to happen IMO for any optic review to have any merit is it needs something to compare it with AND you need to use it in the field in hunting conditions comparing game. This will allow you to see any actual differences between the optics (just my observations).

 

[JNDEER]

The Nikon was the 20-60x60 FieldScope III ED and the Swaro was a Swarovski ATM 65. I found the image to be more clear and bright in the Swaro but towards dark the light gathering lagged behind the Nikon in my honest opinion. I'm not saying the Swaro is a bad scope I just had a similar experience to Eastman's on the light gathering.

thanks for replying back. that is good to know, I did feel that the ED60 appeared to be very bright at low light conditions (although I have not compared contrast abilities with other scopes).