Swaro ATS vs ATX

[Highcountry_Hellrazor]

In the market for a new spotting scope. I just want to know the optical difference between these two models if any. I won't be switching lenses on the ATX I would stick with the 85.

Is there any advantages between these two scopes?

 

[Bearhunter]

Low light the ATX will out perform the ATS. The ATS 65mm is a fair amount Lighter than the 65mm ATX same goes for the 80mm ATS compared to the 85mm ATX. Field Flatner lenses are in the new ATX as well, there are a few extra pieces of glass in the ATX that increase the weight. You wont be disappointed in the 85mm ATX its truly the best do everything spotter in the world....

 

[CodyB]

I am not sure about all the differences but I've had my ATX 65 for about two years and have been very pleased with it. Been saving since I got the 65 to also get a 95 objective to go with it. My only complaint is the Swarovski case can interfere with the zoom and focus dials.

 

[greyghostnw]

super happy with my 80mm ats. although the atx seems to be a better image for my eye. i chose less weight over a little better glass. i do not think you can go wrong with either. ill never sell my ats.

 

[Shrek]

I own an ATS and have looked through an ATX a few times with my ATS right beside it looking at birds and the view through the ATX is stunningly beautiful. If the money difference isn't an issue I'd take an ATX every time over the ATS. You can resolve a little more with ATX but the real advantage is the way the little advantages add up to a totally different level of performance. Wider field of view , flattener lens , and bigger objective make the glass seem better quality which it may be. Since I've had them side by side I've developed a serious fever to buy an ATX.

 

[shaun]

Main difference to me is the additional FOV you gain with the 85 vs the 80. Optically it is the same as comparing a set of SLC HDs to a Set of ELs w/ swarovision. ATX is the heavier of the two but I think it's worth the additional weight especially with the option of changing objective lenses

 

[Matt Cashell]

The optical differences are:

The ATX has a field flattened wide angle zoom eyepiece. This means almost no distortion, sharp edges, and an extremely wide FOV, especially at 60x.

The ATS has simpler eyepieces. You can go with a traditional 20-60 or the 25-50 wide angle. The WA is really wide, but has a lot of distortion. The 20-60 offers a little more magnification.

The centerfield image in the ATX is a little nicer, IMO, but the ATS does have slightly better off-axis CA control than the ATX.

 

[Highcountry_Hellrazor]

I should mention I'm a true backpack hunter, and weight is an obvious concern. I'm also a young hunter on a budget. That being said if the ATX is optically superior it may be worth the weight and money.

My buddy went through the same issue as me and he sold his ATX to get the lighter ATS. He's looked through about every optic there is.

 

[Shrek]

Honestly , I don't think the ATX is going to find much more game than the ATS but the viewing experience is definitely better and less fatiguing but the optical performance of the ATS is more than good enough to find and judge anything most of us will ever need. The ATS is a superb instrument and only suffers in comparison to one or two scopes and then only marginally. As a view / cost / weight compromise you might look at the Meopta S2 30-60 × 82 wide. It weights the same as the ATX and has very close optical quality to the ATS but has a wide field of view. I had one and sold it to buy the lighter ATS but I question that choice every time I use the ATS. The Meopta may even optically beat the ATS but I haven't had them both at the same time to compare. I went with weight savings but I question the choice constantly. Finding the money to buy an ATX would be my ideal solution because there would be real optical superiority to justify the weight penalty.

 

[Matt Cashell]

I should mention I'm a true backpack hunter, and weight is an obvious concern. I'm also a young hunter on a budget. That being said if the ATX is optically superior it may be worth the weight and money.

My buddy went through the same issue as me and he sold his ATX to get the lighter ATS. He's looked through about every optic there is.

HH,

Both the ATS and ATX are fantastic, optically. If you aren't switching objectives, what the ATX really gains you is a flat wide FOV. If you can live without that feature , by all means save the weight and money and go with the ATS.

 

[Highcountry_Hellrazor]

HH,

Both the ATS and ATX are fantastic, optically. If you aren't switching objectives, what the ATX really gains you is a flat wide FOV. If you can live without that feature , by all means save the weight and money and go with the ATS.

Thanks BB! I appreciate your feedback. I think I'm going to go with the 80 ATS. Wish they still made the magnesium housed ATS.

 

[Shrek]

HH , I looked for months trying to find an ATM used and no cigar . You'll love the ATS and save yourself the heartache and don't look through an ATX....ever