Spotting scope experts…

[Flyjunky]

I’m going to start saving for a new spotter purchase next year. I’ve been reading reviews for the past month and I’m still on the fence between ats 65, kowa 55, and the new swaro atc.

I usually don’t pull the spotter until I’ve located something and this will be for deer, elk, and antelope.

I like the idea of the smaller size and weight of the kowa and atc but will these smaller objectives make up in light gathering with better glass than the ats 65? I’m all for smaller and less weight if the optics are as good as the ats65. I’ve read too many conflicting opinions on which way to go.

What say you? Where should I spend my money?

 

[sndmn11]

I have had an ats65 and have looked through a Kowa 55x for a good bit.

If I were buying another spotter, I would either get a 50mm size or a 80-90mm size. I wouldn't play in the middle.

 

[Flyjunky]

I have had an ats65 and have looked through a Kowa 55x for a good bit.

If I were buying another spotter, I would either get a 50mm size or a 80-90mm size. I wouldn't play in the middle.

That’s kind of why I’m leaning smaller. If there isn’t a drastic difference in optic quality then why not go smaller/lighter?

I know I don’t want to go bigger because my partner has an 88mm and it’s just a lot of weight to me.

 

[nobody]

What @sndmn11 said. However I currently run an 85mm objective model, looking to get into a 50ish-mm spotter to round out the kit. The 85 is great for scouting, range work, and road glassing. But it's too heavy for deep backcountry stuff.

Most 65's aren't THAT far off from the weight and footprint of an 85. Not all, but lots of them. So for me, if I'm not gonna pack a 65 into the backcountry because of weight, I might as well pay a couple hundred bucks to get the 85.

The 50/55mm objective spotters are sweet, and because of size you're more likely to pack it because of the size and weight.

Personally, I prefer a big and a small (85 and 50) vs a 65. To me, the 65mm is the quintessential "Jack of all trades and master of none." Too heavy to pack on deep backcountry stuff, not enough zoom for scouting and range work, not enough light gathering for low light stuff. Yes, I know there's caveat's to all of this, and yes I understand there's more to optical performance than objective size. But this is just my opinion and my input.

And hey, I'm just some random guy on the internet...

 

[BBob]

I’ll be the contrarian here I’ve used the little Kowa a bit, sold my ATS-80HD, kept my STM-65HD 25-50 and want to eventually replace the 80 with a Swaro X series 95 or 115. I like having the more versatile 65 in my pack but it’s an M model that’s a little lighter than the S models. I use it often for more than just verification so there’s that. More field of view, more useful magnification and mby an edge at dusk and dawn.

 

[sndmn11]

That’s kind of why I’m leaning smaller. If there isn’t a drastic difference in optic quality then why not go smaller/lighter?

I know I don’t want to go bigger because my partner has an 88mm and it’s just a lot of weight to me.

Drastic is relative. To some a handful of minutes in low light and a couple truck lengths FOV can be huge or inconsequential. For me they aren't a big deal, for some like @BBob , they are a big enough deal and neither of us is right. I don't think that you are giving up "optical quality", but there are surely compromises that will be more noticeable in adverse light conditions.

 

[htlt_surfboards]

I have the Kowa 554 and use it in a similar fashion that you said you will be. I think that in good light you probably wouldn't notice to much difference. The Kowa doesn't loose any clarity even all the way zoomed in. That being said at very first and last light the small objective does leave something to be desired. I have also heard guys complain that it is like looking through a straw because the FOV is small. I also can't disagree with this but I don't really glass with it I just use it for identification or if I need to look into something with more detail so this hasn't been an issue for me. Overall I think it is worth it as I don't think twice about putting it in my pack since it is so small and lightweight.

 

[Flyjunky]

The early and late light thing is my hesitation on the smaller objectives.

I’ve also read the same thing about the tunneling of the kowa, that’s a reason the new swaro has my attention.

I guess I just need to decide on weight vs light gathering importance….the very thing I’ve been debating this whole time.

 

[mtwarden]

I have a 65 ATS, easily the nicest spotter I've owned. I purchased it for an upcoming Dall hunt. If I was doing more goat/sheep hunting I think I would be done w/ spotters. But as this is likely a once in a lifetime hunt (my drawing luck leaves a lot to be desired!!) the ATC has my attention as mule deer/elk I hunt every year and almost exclusively backpack hunting.

 

[NuclearGrave]

I don’t think these are bad problems to have. I went through this decision the last few months. I have used a cheaper 50mm for confirmation and got tired of the poor glass. After looking at everything I came down to kowa 554 or sts 65. They released stc and I spoke to two optic companies and both said stc glass is as good as stx and blows kowa away. I placed an order on a Swarovski stc.

I haven’t seen it or looked through it yet but I decided on the 55mm range and a 85. I may loose a little light gathering but can live with that for the use of my spotters. I use them for confirmation or checking those shadows. Just my thoughts.

 

[Flyjunky]

I don’t think these are bad problems to have. I went through this decision the last few months. I have used a cheaper 50mm for confirmation and got tired of the poor glass. After looking at everything I came down to kowa 554 or sts 65. They released stc and I spoke to two optic companies and both said stc glass is as good as stx and blows kowa away. I placed an order on a Swarovski stc.

I haven’t seen it or looked through it yet but I decided on the 55mm range and a 85. I may loose a little light gathering but can live with that for the use of my spotters. I use them for confirmation or checking those shadows. Just my thoughts.

Thank you for that.

If I’m being honest I’ve been leaning towards the atc because I think the newer glass and coatings will be close to equaling the 65 ats despite the objective difference. I just wish the atc collar rotated.

Please let me know your thoughts after spending time with your stc.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

I have the Kowa 554 and Swaro STX 65/95; spent plenty of time looking through friends' and guides' STS 65 on a variety of hunts. This is my personal experience using these optics in a wide range of terrain, weather, elevations, temperatures, etc.

No single spotting scope works well for all hunting scenarios. Everything is a compromise between size, weight, and clarity. That's the reason 65s are so popular: tend to be "good enough".

Everyone's eyes are different. Some may agree with what I have and others may disagree.
------

The STS 65 is nice but dated. For its price, look hard at the Kowa 77X or Kowa 88x (fluorite). Shop around and you can get the 77x for about $2000 and the 88x for about $2400.

Go with the ATX/STX if you must have Swarovski and plan on using multiple objectives. Otherwise save your money and some weight. No qualms about optical quality.

The Kowa 554 (fluorite) is a rock star. Offers a ton of "bang for the buck" especially when you can get it for under $1400. Very competitive against the STS 65 and mostly competitive with the STX 65. Light SOB which is great. I only use it for confirmations and not glassing so the FOV is a non-issue for me.

If you want an awesome setup at a great price, grab the Kowa 55X and 88X.

Read the Rokslide review on Kowa. There is a great photo comparing the SIZE of the various scopes. We tend to focus a lot of weight and never on size. Read the Backwoods Pursuit review on 20+ spotting scopes. Like anything else, take it with a grain of salt but does provide a lot of info.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

I've never had an issue with light gathering capability, with a 65mm objective lens. So, for me personally, I definitely do not and would never go with a larger objective.

 

[Flyjunky]

I just found the Marsupial gear comparison between the stx 65 and the stc during that “lowish” light. Wow, I didn’t see much difference between them, at least in that lighting.

 

[AkMtnRunner]

Going between my Kowa 55 and 88, I’ve found 3 major differences to consider.

The weight difference of course, but also the amount of tripod to stabilize each are huge. Like probably 2 lbs and hundreds of dollars in quality more to stabilize the 88’s picture as much as the 55 at the same height.

The field of view of the larger 88 makes glassing with it a joy. I’ve found more animals gridding with the 88 on 25x than my binoculars. I can’t really do that with the 55 since I have to back off the magnification so much to open the field of view that the binos are much better. But, if the spotter is just needed to get a closer look at a found animal, the smaller spotter is very close to the larger spotter.

The extra light gathering of the 88 extends the glassing window significantly. Enough that if your game is highly active at first and last light, I wouldn’t play around with a smaller spotter. During midday though, honestly it’s hard to tell a difference.

 

[ClearCreek]

I know you did not have this one on your list, but Maven makes a nice little compact spotter. I had a chance to look through it last week at a rifle sighting-in event and it was very clear and easy to see 243 Win holes in the target at 100 yards.

ClearCreek

 

[pc3]

Pretty happy with the Meopat S2 88mm I own, I also have access to my daughters little Kowa, and on dusk there is no comparison re light gathering etc. And I reckon my sons 68mm Hawke is not smaller enough to worry about. From 65mm up there all bulky etc. so you may as well have the extra light gathering ability for mine

 

[HenChamp]

Always go as large as you can carry and use, IMO.