New swaro ATX 115mm spotter

[Cody_W]

This thing is gonna be slick if you’re packing in on a team or some sort of short hike hunt. Nearly 30oz heavier than my already anchor weighted 95 though puts it out of most other applications for me. Maintains the same mag range as they 95 for an atx, so FOV will be awesome. Adds an extra 5x for the btx, that’ll be handy.

 

[Rent Outdoor Gear]

It’s primarily designed for the BTX to serve more light to that system. It’s got 46% more surface area on that objective!!! It will also provide another step up in resolution because of the objective diameter. That should help a bunch at higher power in the right conditions using ATX/STX, but heat waves are always going to be a limiting factor.

It balances perfect with the BTX so no need for a balance rail.

At 1.68 pounds heavier than the 95mm and another 5/8” longer and almost an inch greater objective diameter, It’s truck glass for sure unless you have a spare pack goat like [mention]Ryan Avery [/mention]

We’ll have them available to rent & demo sometime in October in case you gotta see it for yourself - https://www.RgunsNgear.com


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chlanoue]

This thing is unreal!

 

[Hatchet Jack]

my guess is also that it was meant for the btx, as the main knock i've heard about the btx is the lack of brightness as compared to the other big glass options such as the highlanders or twin spotter setups.

 

[skierhs]

I'm in.

I do a lot of Coues hunting. Has anybody heard if it is in stock any where? I'll call Outdoorsman.

TIA

I think it’s supposed to come out October 1st or sometime around then.

 

[coues32]

I would love to see the comparison 115 vs 85 btx in the field far as clarity and brightness

 

[Brix06]

Kinda disappointed I met Swarovski Glass..... my bank account has been taking it in the shorts ever since.

New products every month ain't helping!

 

[Vaultman]

I wont be using it for hunting, but I could see getting it for whale watching. That way it is for the whole family, not just a hunting tool.

 

[Sadler]

I would love to see the comparison 115 vs 85 btx in the field far as clarity and brightness

I just ordered the 115 and currently have the 85 on my BTX. If it’s here before October 12th, I’ll be able to take it hunting with me and Compare the two for ya.

 

[Greasewyo]

Huge!!!!

 

[coues32]

I just ordered the 115 and currently have the 85 on my BTX. If it’s here before October 12th, I’ll be able to take it hunting with me and Compare the two for ya.

Cool, interested in how it compares. Are gonna pack it around or just truck glass?

 

[Sadler]

Cool, interested in how it compares. Are gonna pack it around or just truck glass?

I’ll pack the 115 around on day hunts but when I compare them, it’ll be from or close to the truck.

 

[Amasaback]

I just got back last night from 3 days in Yellowstone doing some end of the season poking around the Lamar Valley. I had the new 115MM which arrived the day we left and the 95MM so we were able to do a side by side. We were able to go back and forth between the 2. My wife has very high expectations for optics and was going to end up with whichever was clearly better. Just jumping to the answer - she is indifferent between the 2. A few observations.

1. The 115 is huge. Makes you think the 95mm might be an 85mm. Also - barely fit in my bag that holds both the 95mm and the 115mm lens with ATX and STX. I will need to find a new bag really.

2. The 115 is heavy. VERY heavy. It is front heavy. It needs a balance rail. The Swavorski it intended to be adjusting for rear weight of BX or Digiscope - so I ordered the outdoorsman - hoping that helps. I was basically overloading my Sirui VA-5. It might send me up to a Benro 26 or similar. Also - I ended up removing the center column and direct mounting on my Sirui R3213-x tripod (which is a bit like the 3204 but fewer legs).

3. The optics performance seems identical between the 2, in almost ever situation. Throughout the day, in good to decent light, really all of the way to sunset they were indistinguishable. There may be a way to measure with instruments it but we could not find an advantage - including tracking a grizzly deeply into the shadows of the woods. We assumed that after sunset there would be a huge difference. There really was not initially. It was not until it was 30 minutes plus past sunset is where the advantage showed up. The one place it really showed up was near dark AND zoomed in. Once we got to 50 - 70X it was noticeable. Basically 50X on the 155M looked like 30X on the 95M. I also made me wonder if there was more opportunities for difference with DSLR digiscoping in lens resolution.

Just some thoughts. It make you appreciate how great the 95MM is. Glad we have the 115MM but I don't think we will sell the other 95MM to get a second 115MM. In fact were were more wishing we had a 65MM for some hiking we did.

 

[Brix06]

I just got back last night from 3 days in Yellowstone doing some end of the season poking around the Lamar Valley. I had the new 115MM which arrived the day we left and the 95MM so we were able to do a side by side. We were able to go back and forth between the 2. My wife has very high expectations for optics and was going to end up with whichever was clearly better. Just jumping to the answer - she is indifferent between the 2. A few observations.

1. The 115 is huge. Makes you think the 95mm might be an 85mm. Also - barely fit in my bag that holds both the 95mm and the 115mm lens with ATX and STX. I will need to find a new bag really.

2. The 115 is heavy. VERY heavy. It is front heavy. It needs a balance rail. The Swavorski it intended to be adjusting for rear weight of BX or Digiscope - so I ordered the outdoorsman - hoping that helps. I was basically overloading my Sirui VA-5. It might send me up to a Benro 26 or similar. Also - I ended up removing the center column and direct mounting on my Sirui R3213-x tripod (which is a bit like the 3204 but fewer legs).

3. The optics performance seems identical between the 2, in almost ever situation. Throughout the day, in good to decent light, really all of the way to sunset they were indistinguishable. There may be a way to measure with instruments it but we could not find an advantage - including tracking a grizzly deeply into the shadows of the woods. We assumed that after sunset there would be a huge difference. There really was not initially. It was not until it was 30 minutes plus past sunset is where the advantage showed up. The one place it really showed up was near dark AND zoomed in. Once we got to 50 - 70X it was noticeable. Basically 50X on the 155M looked like 30X on the 95M. I also made me wonder if there was more opportunities for difference with DSLR digiscoping in lens resolution.

Just some thoughts. It make you appreciate how great the 95MM is. Glad we have the 115MM but I don't think we will sell the other 95MM to get a second 115MM. In fact were were more wishing we had a 65MM for some hiking we did.

Thank you for this unbiased assessment, appreciate the detailed observations!

 

[fatrascal]

So you also have to think about the 1.7 magnifier. When using it with the ATX I found that light transmission was not great but with the 115mm that might change everything. Fatrascal

 

[Amasaback]

I agree. In fact I have a 1.7x but didn’t bring it. I have a feeling that it will help. Hope to try somewhere near by this weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk