Vortex razor 65??

[Chad44]

Can Anyone give a review of the 65 spotter?

 

[ElkNut1]

Chad, it looks like a few posts were deleted as the new server for Rokslide is being worked on! Let's see how long this post lasts? (grin)

I had the Razor HD 85 & the Razor HD 65 out yesterday for comparisons. I was viewing various landscapes from 1 mile out to 4 miles out. I'm a big user of that 85, I love that thing! I think it was Aron that stated once you use the 85's for a while it's tough to go down in size! (grin) With the units side by side for an hour of comparisons you can appreciate his statement. Both did well & the 65 was every bit as clear & focused in exactly as the 85, very impressive! I thought maybe the 65 would lack a bit more behind but it held up well. Between the two the field of view was better on the 85 & I just liked it better especially at the longer distances. I just don't want to pack it miles into the mountains. I will never give up the 85 but will add the 50mm for packing back in, that Spotter really impressed me for its size & crystal clear viewing! All in all, if only one spotter could be owned the 65mm is a great all purpose size!

I did switch eyepieces, both work just fine on one another, the 85 eyepiece goes to 60X & the 65 goes to 48X, once switched the 65 with the now 60X eyepiece it never did magnify over the 48X, so although interchangeable the magnification is not increased.

ElkNut1

 

[Chad44]

Thanks. So you think the 65 being 1lb more then the 85 is worth owning if its my only scope? In the high country every lb adds up fast.

 

[ElkNut1]

No, I personally would use a 65mm much more if it were my only Spotter, it's versatile enough to pack with or use near the vehicle. The 85mm is not only a pound more but it's bigger & bulkier, to some it doesn't matter but it does to most hunters. Personally I like 2 Spotters, a big one & a smaller one like the 50mm.

Where I hunted & what type of tag I had also dictates what I'm taking in the woods! (grin)

ElkNut1

 

[Beastmode]

Thanks. So you think the 65 being 1lb more then the 85 is worth owning if its my only scope? In the high country every lb adds up fast.

You mean one lb lighter? For an all around scope if you are only going to have one, from what I can tell so far, the 65 is a great option. Of course it all depends what your glassing style is. Judging animals 2 or 3 miles occasionally is about all I need. Most of the time its under a mile and a half.

The 85 is a great scope, just not what I need right now and not worth the extra few hundred bucks ans extra lb to me. A lot of guys love their 85s and dont leave home without them.

It all depends what your personal style of glassing is.

 

[Chad44]

Ok. Thanks. I'll stick with the 65.

 

[DEW]

Any more info on these??

 

[Beastmode]

Any more info on these??

What do you want to know?

 

[DEW]

Just looking for some review info. Would like to see if anyone has compared it to the big 3 yet...

 

[Chad44]

+1 I'd like that too

 

[Matt Cashell]

Chad, it looks like a few posts were deleted as the new server for Rokslide is being worked on! Let's see how long this post lasts? (grin)

I had the Razor HD 85 & the Razor HD 65 out yesterday for comparisons. I was viewing various landscapes from 1 mile out to 4 miles out. I'm a big user of that 85, I love that thing! I think it was Aron that stated once you use the 85's for a while it's tough to go down in size! (grin) With the units side by side for an hour of comparisons you can appreciate his statement. Both did well & the 65 was every bit as clear & focused in exactly as the 85, very impressive! I thought maybe the 65 would lack a bit more behind but it held up well. Between the two the field of view was better on the 85 & I just liked it better especially at the longer distances. I just don't want to pack it miles into the mountains. I will never give up the 85 but will add the 50mm for packing back in, that Spotter really impressed me for its size & crystal clear viewing! All in all, if only one spotter could be owned the 65mm is a great all purpose size!

I did switch eyepieces, both work just fine on one another, the 85 eyepiece goes to 60X & the 65 goes to 48X, once switched the 65 with the now 60X eyepiece it never did magnify over the 48X, so although interchangeable the magnification is not increased.

ElkNut1

Paul,

This post has me with a few questions.

1. Does the 85 with the 20-60 seem to have a wider FOV than the 65mm w/ the 18-48?

The specs from Vortex show the 65mm w/ the wider FOV, which would be expected on a lower mag eyepiece.

SCOPE eye rel. CF FOV Length Weight
20-60x85 Angled 18-20 mm 16.4' 117-60' / 2.2-1.1° 15.3" 65.7 oz
16-48x65 Angled 18-20 mm 11.5' 138-75' / 2.7-1.4° 14.1" 48.4 oz
11-33x50 Angled 20 mm 11.5' 191-96' / 3.6-1.8° 10.3" 25.0 oz

2. Are you saying that the 20-60 mounts to the 65mm, but won't turn past 48x?

Thanks.

 

[ElkNut1]

1 - Matt the 65mm Razor HD is a 16X at lowest setting, the Razor HD 85 is a 20X at lowest setting, less magnification & bigger FOV when both are set on lowest magnification. I'm fairly certain this is how the FOV per unit is established at 1000yds. When I compared units side by side I stayed at exactly the same power range per unit, 20X on both then 30X then 40X out to 48X, the 85 had the larger field of view at these long distances, I was viewing close to 4 miles out. Of course when I turned the 85mm to 60X the FOV shrunk in size when looking at the exact sight picture. Throughout the entire range I left with the impression that the 85 had a bigger FOV than the 65 did. I did not measure landscape with landmarks but it seemed obvious at the time.

2 - I switched the eyepieces from one unit to the other, meaning I put the 20-60X85 eyepiece onto the 65 unit, I then put the 16-48X65 eyepiece on the 85 unit. I turned both units magnifications up to 48X & viewed for a few minutes I then slowly turned magnification up on the 65 spotter to 50X 55X 60X & saw no magnification difference, it did not draw subject closer, it looked the same from 48X to 60X. I then returned eyepieces to original units & did it again, the 85 drew the subject in as I turned up magnification from 50X to 60X which was easily seen & expected.

So yes the 85mm 60X eyepiece mounts to the 65mm scope body but it did not show any difference from 48X out to 60X even though the adjustable eyepiece turned up to 60X.

ElkNut1

 

[Matt Cashell]

Paul,

Now you are really making work for me! That's OK, I love this stuff!

That magnification deal really has me stumped. As I am sure you know, magnification is a function of the focal length of the scope divided by the focal length of the eyepiece, just like an astronomical telescope.

So most 80mm class spotter bodies have a focal length of around 502mm (This IS the focal length of the Zeiss Diascope 85). The standard Vario eyepiece has a focal length range of 25.1 to 8.4mm. So when you calculate it: 502/25.1 = 20. Then on the high end 502/8.4 = 59.76 (the TRUE 60x magnification)

So since the eyepiece is the same, on the Diascope 65, we see that the focal length of the body is shorter at 376.5mm with low end magnification of 376.5/25.1 = 15x and high end of 376.5/8.4 = 44.82x

Keeping this in mind, I can't figure out why the 20-60 would stop magnifying the image past 48x, since the body has a fixed focal length, and the zoom must decrease focal length to increase magnification on the 85mm.

My initial thought is the eyepiece IS magnifying the image past 48x, but some construction element of the 65mm is making the FOV constant from 48x-60x (a field stop), and since the image is still filling up the same amount of FOV "circle" it appears that it is no longer further magnifying the image, when it really is.

One way to check is to look at the exit pupil, and see if it gets smaller as you go past 48x. If it does, it is magnifying the image further.

Anyway, fascinating stuff, and i appreciate you filling us in on these.

I

 

[ElkNut1]

Matt, if I follow you correctly????? (big grin) I think we are on the same page minus all the math on my part. It's true that the limited focal length on the 65mm is the reason for that spotter to only be able to entertain up to the 48X no matter the eyepiece. What I didn't realize until now is that the 16-48X eyepiece from the 65mm when installed on the 85mm is now a 20-60X eyepiece. I think this is what you are saying? If so we got it! (grin) I talked with Vortex a few minutes ago & this is info straight from them.

You see between you & them I'm even better educated. Good stuff! I also found out that between the 65 & the 85 when on equal X settings that the bigger FOV will be with the Spotter with the larger objective lens. This is how I personally saw it as well in my side by side comparisons over the weekend. Thanks!

I hope you get a chance to play with these two side by side, they are very impressive.

ElkNut1

 

[Matt Cashell]

It's true that the limited focal length on the 65mm is the reason for that spotter to only be able to entertain up to the 48X no matter the eyepiece.

Paul, this isn't true. The scope has no limit to the magnification that could be attained by using an eyepiece of a shorter and shorter focal length. If vortex offered an eyepiece with a 4mm focal length, the magnification would be something like 125.5x on the 85mm. The problem would be that the exit pupil would be ridiculously small at somehwere around .67mm, and the view would be dim and low resolution, even in good light.

Vortex could have used an eyepiece with a shorter focal length to produce 60x on the 65mm Razor, but they didn't for any number of reasons like exit pupil size, or tests of the design showed image degredation past 48x.

If Vortex is telling you the 16-48 is a 20-60 on the 85mm, then the 65mm and 85 mm have different focal lengths, like the Diascopes. the 85mm is longer. However, that is a design choice, and not necessary. Swarovski's 65mm and 80mm scope bodies have identical focal lengths, and the 20-60 eyepice produces the SAME magnifications AND FOVs on both the 65mm and 80mm ATM scopes.

This also illustrates the field of view is determined by the eyepiece, and not the objective diameter. It confuses me why someone from Vortex would tell you that, unless they misspoke.

Take Vortex' Viper HD binoculars:

http://www.vortexoptics.com/category/viper_hd_binoculars

As you can see the FOV's actually get wider as you go down in objective size.

So the Vortex 85mm's 20-60 must have a wider FOV eyepiece (at the same powers) as the 65mm's 18-48 eyepiece. This is of course why the same spotter can use a wide angle eyepiece, and a regular eyepiece on the same body. 50x on the WA zoom from Swarovski is MUCH WIDER than 50x on the standard 20-60 zoom.

 

[ElkNut1]

Matt I believe it is true. You answered your own question in this paragraph.

"If Vortex is telling you the 16-48 is a 20-60 on the 85mm, then the 65mm and 85 mm have different focal lengths, like the Diascopes. the 85mm is longer. However, that is a design choice, and not necessary. Swarovski's 65mm and 80mm scope bodies have identical focal lengths, and the 20-60 eyepice produces the SAME magnifications AND FOVs on both the 65mm and 80mm ATM scopes."

This is the reason as I stated above why the eyepieces entertain the magnifications that they do. There is a difference in the focal lengths! If this also transpires into a difference in eyepieces to be on par with the findings between the two spotters then that is the difference there too. Vortex was very clear as I stated above in the differences between the two Spotters made by them. It appears different manufacturers do things differently & that's OK but I was correct in my above explanation.

ElkNut1

 

[Matt Cashell]

Oh Paul, I misunderstood you, and you misunderstood me.

I think I get what you are saying now:

You are saying the 20-60 eyepiece on the 65mm body only provides a true magnification range of 16-48, due to the shorter focal length of the 65mm body. SO both eyepieces have the same focal lengths and so both are 16-48 on the 65mm and both are 20-60 on the 85mm. Now I get it.

My post was that a person could get higher magnifications from the 65mm body IF Vortex would have manufactured a shorter focal length eyepiece (which does not exist, and was purely hypothetical), OR if a personal adapted say a 6mm astronomical eyepiece to work with the Vortex body.

My point was that the body could, in theory, provide a higher magnification, but just doesn't, because there isn't a higher magnification eyepiece available.

Sorry about the confusion, and I sure appreciate the discussion.

I do hope to see these soon.

 

[ElkNut1]

Hey no problem sir! I was getting a bit confused myself. You're a tough guy to keep with. (grin)

You are spot on with this comment!

"My point was that the body could, in theory, provide a higher magnification, but just doesn't, because there isn't a higher magnification eyepiece available."

Thanks/ElkNut1

 

[Matt Palmquist]

You guys are way above my head, but one question. If the eye pieces are the same wouldn't the 60X setting on the 65 be 48x? The way I was understanding Paul, and maybe I misunderstood, is that with the eye piece from the 85 once you turn it past 48X it doesn't do anything. Is that how it worked? So you had a 20-48x on the 65 and a 20-60x on the 85? I would think regardless of which scope the eye piece is on the magnification would be the same unless they eye pieces are also different.

Sorry, I am slow and a bit confused sometimes so if this is a stupid question just ignore me

Matt

 

[Matt Cashell]

Matt, that is the same confusion I had at first.

The 20-60 from the 85 is ACTUALLY a 16-48 on the 65mm.

I contacted Vortex as well, and have a question into the engineers on why they changed the eyepiece at all for the 65mm. I am sure they had a good reason.