Spotting scope - 65 or 80?

[Echo]

I’m looking to buy a spotting scope for the first time and would love some advice on what to pursue between a 65mm and 80mm objective. I just purchased a quality pair of binos (Nikon monarch hg 10 x 42) and would love to round out my optics ahead of next season.

a few things to note:
- I’m looking to keep it under 1000 (vortex razor and maven cs1 are top of my list so far)
- I live and hunt in the west. Primarily in high country situations where I’m covering quite a bit of ground looking for elk. However, I also do a fair amount of antelope/deer hunting which is more glassing intensive.

what would y’all say the pros/cons are for size of scope? Recommendations on specific scopes are also welcome.

thanks in advance!

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I like the bigger spotters personally, I had a 60mm swarovski but after looking through my friends 80, I sold the 60 and am getting the bigger one. I think for sheep hunting it’s worth the weight.

 

[Echo]

I like the bigger spotters personally, I had a 60mm swarovski but after looking through my friends 80, I sold the 60 and am getting the bigger one. I think for sheep hunting it’s worth the weight.

Thank you thinhorn! That’s helpful.

 

[willfrye027]

I have used both. The 80mm will allow you to field judge better at low light. It will also work better at the highest power compared to a 65mm.

that being said you usually need a beefier tripod...it’s bulkier and heavier...and it’s not always necessary. For backpacking I’d go with a smaller scope..I hardly ever bring my big spotter backpacking unless it’s going to be absolutely necessary

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I have used both. The 80mm will allow you to field judge better at low light. It will also work better at the highest power compared to a 65mm.

that being said you usually need a beefier tripod...it’s bulkier and heavier...and it’s not always necessary. For backpacking I’d go with a smaller scope..I hardly ever bring my big spotter backpacking unless it’s going to be absolutely necessary

I agree that for backpacking the smaller ones are nicer I just found over the years that the only time I take the scope is on sheep hunts and the 80 just gives me a better view.

 

[Echo]

I have used both. The 80mm will allow you to field judge better at low light. It will also work better at the highest power compared to a 65mm.

that being said you usually need a beefier tripod...it’s bulkier and heavier...and it’s not always necessary. For backpacking I’d go with a smaller scope..I hardly ever bring my big spotter backpacking unless it’s going to be absolutely necessary

Thank you Willfrye. I see myself using this primarily for backpack hunting, as that’s what I mostly do. This brings up another question - do you think a spotting scope is absolutely necessary for backpack elk hunting if a quality pair of binos are on hand?

 

[willfrye027]

I agree that for backpacking the smaller ones are nicer I just found over the years that the only time I take the scope is on sheep hunts and the 80 just gives me a better view.

I can see that, especially in a game of inches like sheep hunting.

 

[willfrye027]

Thank you Willfrye. I see myself using this primarily for backpack hunting, as that’s what I mostly do. This brings up another question - do you think a spotting scope is absolutely necessary for backpack elk hunting if a quality pair of binos are on hand?

Nope, I would not bring one (I’m not much for elk hunting tho so take it with a grain of salt). Elk are big. If I was scouting then maybe use it to look from miles away. Otherwise 10x42s on a tripod can give you an incredible view.

 

[rcdinaz]

If you spend your time hiking get the smaller one. You will still see plenty far in the woods. I drag around the larger spotter but I leave it and just carry the 12's if I plan on going more than a couple of miles.

 

[gr8fuldoug]

As a long standing supporting vendor of this forum it would be our pleasure to discuss options with you if you've got the time to give a call, 516-217-1000. This way we can discuss what would be best for you.

 

[JFIGHTINGFALCON]

As others have said, it allll depends on how much walking you're going to do. When you've got your eye to it, bigger is always better but you've gotta make you're own decision on how much of a weight penalty you're willing to pay. Also keep in mind the tripod is a huge part of both weight and usability. Buy a nice but heavy scope and attempt to save weight with a lighter duty tripod and at higher magnifications, just a light breeze on thinner legs will cause enough vibration to make it completely useless. Carbon fiber legs are a huge benefit because not only are they far lighter than similarly sized aluminum, but the natural vibration dampening properties of the material really help quite a lot. Of course the downside is they're also rather pricey. Personally, I'd save up, shop the used market, whatever you've gotta do and get the nicest (large objective) scope you can possibly afford and a carbon leg tripod to go with it. They'll last a lifetime and I don't think anyone has ever regretted spending extra on glass.
For what it's worth I run the Vortex 27-60x85 Angled on Manfrotto 055 size legs with fluid head. It's hefty, but completely worth it to me, but I'm not backpacking into a wilderness for a week either.

 

[JiminAZ]

My current setup is what JFIGHTINGFALCON has (both scope and tripod). Happy with the performance but for traipsing around it's just too large. I'm in the market for the right used 65mm Swaro.

Where we hunt Elk it's often across a canyon. Might be over 1000 yds. Do we want to try to close the distance or move on? Sometimes the binos can't quite answer that question. And my spotting scope is back in camp because its just too large.

 

[Bubblehide]

I have been dragging around an ED82 for years. It has been invaluable on many many occasions. However, I purchased swaro 15s. After learning the areas I primarily hunt, I now find the spotter less important, but 15's or a spotter still necessary; one or the other. Could I still use a spotter, absolutely I can. However, knowing the areas I primarily hunt, as well as I do,, and my willingness to travel in the dark to the specific sub-area, I no longer need to take views from distances that 15s won't cover well. However, when hunting new areas, I still pack my spotter. But it comes along with a significant weight penalty. Could I still benefit from packing a spotter, yes, but I find the weight penalty no longer worth it since I know the areas and animals within them so well. But then, I am generally scouting year round.

When it comes to sheep hunting, the bigger the better. For sheep, personally, I consider an 80mm the minimum.

 

[Echo]

As a long standing supporting vendor of this forum it would be our pleasure to discuss options with you if you've got the time to give a call, 516-217-1000. This way we can discuss what would be best for you.

Thank you, Doug! I’ll plan on giving you a call in the next few weeks to discuss.

 

[Echo]

As others have said, it allll depends on how much walking you're going to do. When you've got your eye to it, bigger is always better but you've gotta make you're own decision on how much of a weight penalty you're willing to pay. Also keep in mind the tripod is a huge part of both weight and usability. Buy a nice but heavy scope and attempt to save weight with a lighter duty tripod and at higher magnifications, just a light breeze on thinner legs will cause enough vibration to make it completely useless. Carbon fiber legs are a huge benefit because not only are they far lighter than similarly sized aluminum, but the natural vibration dampening properties of the material really help quite a lot. Of course the downside is they're also rather pricey. Personally, I'd save up, shop the used market, whatever you've gotta do and get the nicest (large objective) scope you can possibly afford and a carbon leg tripod to go with it. They'll last a lifetime and I don't think anyone has ever regretted spending extra on glass.
For what it's worth I run the Vortex 27-60x85 Angled on Manfrotto 055 size legs with fluid head. It's hefty, but completely worth it to me, but I'm not backpacking into a wilderness for a week either.

This is a great advice. I’ll admit I hadn’t thought much about the tripod as part of the equation, but I can see the need for a stable tripod in anything but ideal conditions. Thanks for the help!

 

[thewileyone]

I have had a couple of both 65's and 80's. The 65's are great especially if you are planning on packing it around. You are giving up some valuable advantages though but if you are hunting where it's windy, the 80's seem to shake more (catch more wind due to size and weight) but the 80's are great for combing through the area and finding animals.

 

[Echo]

I have had a couple of both 65's and 80's. The 65's are great especially if you are planning on packing it around. You are giving up some valuable advantages though but if you are hunting where it's windy, the 80's seem to shake more (catch more wind due to size and weight) but the 80's are great for combing through the area and finding animals.

Thank you!

 

[KRoch]

I had an 82 meopta and upgraded to the 95 Swarovski Atx and I can say without a doubt you will never regret having a bigger objective. I backpack hunt with a 35-50 lbs day pack because the reality is I only have a limited time in the woods and I will use every advantage I can to be successful. The larger objective will give you the ability to see during those crucial morning and evening moments when pressured animals are moving. However I am hunting species with sex, point or curl restrictions. If you are hunting in areas without restrictions I would skip the spotter. As others have said glass is a buy once cry once purchase not a budget purchase. A good tripod will run you $500-1000.
As was mentioned above if you are hunting in areas without restrictions and are just looking for game I would look at some 15s.
They are way easier on the eyes and if you get a decent set you will spend a lot of time behind them vs one eyeballing an area. Also with the bigger FOV you may catch some movement that you may miss with the spotter.
My recommendation is save up until you can get the best optics within reason especially with spotters or anything with higher magnification, those extra $$$ make a world of difference.
Lbs may equal pain but if you can save miles and time by having good glass you will be better off in the long run.

 

[seanspade6]

if you are willing to get a razor thats what i would get personally. the razor at 65x is more than clear enough, you could probably spot a coues deer on mars

 

[Echo]

I had an 82 meopta and upgraded to the 95 Swarovski Atx and I can say without a doubt you will never regret having a bigger objective. I backpack hunt with a 35-50 lbs day pack because the reality is I only have a limited time in the woods and I will use every advantage I can to be successful. The larger objective will give you the ability to see during those crucial morning and evening moments when pressured animals are moving. However I am hunting species with sex, point or curl restrictions. If you are hunting in areas without restrictions I would skip the spotter. As others have said glass is a buy once cry once purchase not a budget purchase. A good tripod will run you $500-1000.
As was mentioned above if you are hunting in areas without restrictions and are just looking for game I would look at some 15s.
They are way easier on the eyes and if you get a decent set you will spend a lot of time behind them vs one eyeballing an area. Also with the bigger FOV you may catch some movement that you may miss with the spotter.
My recommendation is save up until you can get the best optics within reason especially with spotters or anything with higher magnification, those extra $$$ make a world of difference.
Lbs may equal pain but if you can save miles and time by having good glass you will be better off in the long run.

Thank you for the detailed response, this is very helpful and much appreciated.