Swarovski AT Balance 18-45x65 Stabilized Spotting Scope Tested and Reviewed

[SLDMTN]

The mini Marsupial Gear spotter case fits the scope like a glove.

Another feature I really appreciated was the ARCA base included with the scope is pinned to lock it from loosening the mounting screw when you move the spotter. Never once did the mounting screw back off or loosen. Might not be new tech to everyone but it was for me.

Compared to my older ATS they finally updated the objective cap! No more springs a weird little slide locks to fail. Again, might not be new but it was another upgrade for me.

 

[SLDMTN]

I should have titled this video; “How to sell an AT Balance in 13 seconds.”

 

[ruffledfeathers]

That is impressive. Nikon had a stabilised edg 85 scope back in the day but it didn’t seem like it got any traction.

 

[robby denning]

For those of you who bird as well as hunt, how do you like the compact 50 mm spotters for long days in the field? I spend a lot of time glassing shorebirds and raptors, and I’m wondering if the 11–33x range on the Viper HD 50 class is enough for ID work out past 300–400 yards, or if I’d immediately wish I’d gone with a bigger 60–65 mm objective. Curious what you’ve actually seen in terms of resolution on fine field marks and heat shimmer.

I don't bird unless it involves a shotgun but I've had both the 56mm ATC and STS the last 3 years. I also had the 65 STS.

I finally sold the 65. The difference in light transmission wasn't worth the extra weight. I couldn't tell a difference in resolution (@Matt Cashell might have done a USAF Resolution test between the two, chime in buddy if you did).

I still have my 80mm STS if I really need more performance but the gap between 56 and 80 wasn't (to me) worth keeping the 65.

 

[elsb0048]

I don't bird unless it involves a shotgun but I've had both the 56mm ATC and STS the last 3 years. I also had the 65 STS.

I finally sold the 65. The difference in light transmission wasn't worth the extra weight. I couldn't tell a difference in resolution (@Matt Cashell might have done a USAF Resolution test between the two, chime in buddy if you did).

I still have my 80mm STS if I really need more performance but the gap between 56 and 80 wasn't (to me) worth keeping the 65.

What tasks do grab the 80 for over the compact?

 

[robby denning]

What tasks do grab the 80 for over the compact?

I'll rephrase your Q. "what tasks do grab compact over the 80?"

When weight/bulk is an issue which is almost always for me.

My 80 mostly gets used from the truck or short hikes. I'm giving up some performance for sure, but I don't like heavy bulky stuff. Just call me lazy lol

 

[elsb0048]

I'll rephrase your Q. "what tasks do grab compact over the 80?"

When weight/bulk is an issue which is almost always for me.

My 80 mostly gets used from the truck or short hikes. I'm giving up some performance for sure, but I don't like heavy bulky stuff. Just call me lazy lol

So take that to mean: you prefer the 80 for all optical performance tasks.
But the size and weight benefit of the little guy is a big enough difference that you use the little guy anytime you have to walk a long way essentially regardless of what you're looking at.

I had wondered if you used the little guy for scouting missions and the like but maybe still buckled down and brought the big boy to really size a buck during the season or for specific bigger terrain types.

I think that I too am pretty lazy as far as big spotters go