Spotters that are “easier” to look through

[TimberHunter]

I’ve had a Gen 1 razor 85, currently have the new mini razor 56. They both work just fine but I struggle to look through them for any amount of time especially with eye glasses

From the little time I’ve spent looking through the ATC/STC, they seem to have a bit more forgiveness with the eye relief.

What are some of the easiest spotters to sit behind with glasses?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PathFinder]

The fixed power, wide angle eyepieces help a lot. The 30x on a Swaro ATS/STS is much more comfortable to spend long sessions behind than the 20-60 zoom eyepiece.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

I’ve had a Gen 1 razor 85, currently have the new mini razor 56. They both work just fine but I struggle to look through them for any amount of time especially with eye glasses

From the little time I’ve spent looking through the ATC/STC, they seem to have a bit more forgiveness with the eye relief.

What are some of the easiest spotters to sit behind with glasses?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They all suck in that regard save one. The Leupold Mark 4 12-40x60mm and Gold rings are the best field spotters on the market currently because of exactly that.

 

[WRO]

They all suck in that regard save one. The Leupold Mark 4 12-40x60mm and Gold rings are the best field spotters on the market currently because of exactly that.

I’ve had that scope and I currently have an atx and stc. I don’t remember it being better than my current as far as eye relief goes and ease of getting behind. That being said I don’t wear glasses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TimberHunter]

They all suck in that regard save one. The Leupold Mark 4 12-40x60mm and Gold rings are the best field spotters on the market currently because of exactly that.

The eye relief was impressive at S2H. How does the spotter do with resolution compared to swaro/kowa/etc?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

The eye relief was impressive at S2H. How does the spotter do with resolution compared to swaro/kowa/etc?

The Swaros are better. But, they aren’t better enough to overcome the truly awful eye relief. Unless you are trying to count rings at longer range on sheep, I have not seen a situation where the difference was meaningful. I took the Swaro on a sheep hunt a couple years ago, and immediately wished that I had the Leupold or even the 15x Swaro binos.

 

[Ajsomp]

The Swaros are better. But, they aren’t better enough to overcome the truly awful eye relief. Unless you are trying to count rings at longer range on sheep, I have not seen a situation where the difference was meaningful. I took the Swaro on a sheep hunt a couple years ago, and immediately wished that I had the Leupold or even the 15x Swaro binos.

So are you bringing a spotter or NL pures these days? I find myself wanting binos more than a spotter for my hunting

 

[Formidilosus]

So are you bringing a spotter or NL pures these days? I find myself wanting binos more than a spotter for my hunting

When it’s just me, it’s almost always 15x binos.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

So are you bringing a spotter or NL pures these days? I find myself wanting binos more than a spotter for my hunting

15 Meoptas, 15 Swaros, 14 NLs (with the 14 NLs being the clear winner) when used side by side with guys and gals using spotters, nearly always find more game and have much less eye fatigue (and less frequent breaks while glassing).

 

[TimberHunter]

15 Meoptas, 15 Swaros, 14 NLs (with the 14 NLs being the clear winner) when used side by side with guys and gals using spotters, nearly always find more game and have much less eye fatigue (and less frequent breaks while glassing).

I agree with this, but my B1.1 plus 15’s only have 15mm of eye relief and require me to take my glasses off (I’ve broke pairs doing this by setting them on the ground)

15s are in a weird niche spot for me. My zeiss SF 10x have a large field of view so those are a go to on a tripod for picking up game. The 15s are of great use at say 800-1500 yards but past that stating around .75 miles and further, I still want to bust my spotter out for a closer look to judge the deer that I found with my 15’s

I think I’m going to go away from a the 15a and stick with 10s and a spotter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[willfrye027]

Unless you need to count rings, kickers, eye guards or whatever a good pair of 15s will do the trick. When you do have a spotting scope in the pack, there is a tendency to reach for it the moment when a buck is spotted. When you don’t have a spotter and just keep watching with the 15s, as the animal moves and turns its head etc you end up getting a very good idea of the trophy quality without needing the spotter. The spotter can almost be a crutch that you think is necessary because you keep using it. Depends on the actual distances but if forced to choose just one, it’s going to be 15s for just about every hunt for me.

Also have used the leupy spotter, non HD version…it’s a good scope very ergonomic and excellent eye relief. It’s a good tool paired with 10s or 12s if you really want a spotter. Magnification is overrated, it’s rare in my experience that atmospheric conditions will allow for use of much beyond 40x magnification anyways. You need cold, snow, good lighting, etc for the higher magnification to actually reveal significantly more detail. If you are truly needing to assess detailed trophy quality then maybe you want a giant objective lens and high zoom…but if you just need to verify he’s a big deer/elk/etc than I think magnification is way overrated and you can get a ton of information and a lot more use from 15s, or the leupy spotter in question.

 

[WRO]

Unless you need to count rings, kickers, eye guards or whatever a good pair of 15s will do the trick. When you do have a spotting scope in the pack, there is a tendency to reach for it the moment when a buck is spotted. When you don’t have a spotter and just keep watching with the 15s, as the animal moves and turns its head etc you end up getting a very good idea of the trophy quality without needing the spotter. The spotter can almost be a crutch that you think is necessary because you keep using it. Depends on the actual distances but if forced to choose just one, it’s going to be 15s for just about every hunt for me.

Also have used the leupy spotter, non HD version…it’s a good scope very ergonomic and excellent eye relief. It’s a good tool paired with 10s or 12s if you really want a spotter. Magnification is overrated, it’s rare in my experience that atmospheric conditions will allow for use of much beyond 40x magnification anyways. You need cold, snow, good lighting, etc for the higher magnification to actually reveal significantly more detail. If you are truly needing to assess detailed trophy quality then maybe you want a giant objective lens and high zoom…but if you just need to verify he’s a big deer/elk/etc than I think magnification is way overrated and you can get a ton of information and a lot more use from 15s, or the leupy spotter in question.

I hunt some big country, the spotter has absolutely lead to filled tags. I remember spotting elk for clients at 3 miles a few years back and there was no way to tell if it was a raghorn or cow with 15s at that distance. I find mine usable up 50x most of the time except during heat waves and the 15s aren’t usable then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chaser_2332]

ive had a ton of spotters and currently have a swaro 80mm, even with that i find myself migrating toward my 15x SLC's more than anything else.

 

[kodyshriver]

Another thing to consider: my buddy’s Leupold at 12x is usable in the heat of the day, while my ATS 25-50 is not due to mirage at a higher power (25x).

 

[huntnful]

Serious question.

Have you considered lasik?

My glasses pretty much made everything hunting related a PITA. Rain, fog, binos, spotting scopes, shooting a bow ect. all sucked with glasses on.

I got lasik maybe 6-7 years ago and don’t regret it one bit. Just mentioning it is all .

 

[TimberHunter]

Serious question.

Have you considered lasik?

My glasses pretty much made everything hunting related a PITA. Rain, fog, binos, spotting scopes, shooting a bow ect. all sucked with glasses on.

I got lasik maybe 6-7 years ago and don’t regret it one bit. Just mentioning it is all .

Appreciate the thought. When I first when to glasses about 10 years ago, I thought about it. But the more I used glasses, the more I didn’t mind them. They actually save my eyes from getting smacked by bushes lol

My vision is like 20/40 so not super bad, but need glasses to see small things at distance


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pattimusprime22]

The benefit of lasik far exceeded the cost for me. Not needing to worry about contact lenses/backup glasses in the backcountry and on regular vacations