What spotter to get for packing out ?

[matt1glenn]

I'm looking into getting something lighter then my 68 oz spotter now. Seems I leave it at camp more then it goes with me because of size and weight. Looking at getting something that maybe is smaller and less weight . Trying to decide between a 50 or a 65 objective .

On list so Far

1. Vortex Razor HD 11-30 x 50

2. GR 20- 40 x 60

3. Vortex Razor HD 16-48 x 65


Will be used mostly for elk and mule deer hunting . Field judging to see if it is worth going after . No plans for sheep for at least 5-10 years

Thanks guys

 

[Solitude]

What spotter brand, model and zoom range do you currently have and are you looking to upgrade?

 

[Stid2677]

I can only tell you this,, don't make the mistake of looking through a spotter that is heavier or higher quality than you want to pack or pay for. Since I bought my Swaro ATX 95mm, my Swaro ATM 65mm has not left the house. I love spotting with the fat girl.

 

[bjaegers]

I can only tell you this,, don't make the mistake of looking through a spotter that is heavier or higher quality than you want to pack or pay for. Since I bought my Swaro ATX 95mm, my Swaro ATM 65mm has not left the house. I love spotting with the fat girl.

Ha... That is great advise.

I just went with the Razor 50mm for price and weight but my Father has a Swaro 85mm. So I have the option to go big or small as situation dictates.

 

[matt1glenn]

Any other ideas , leaning toward the razor 50 mm. Do you guys think the 30 will be enough 1-2 miles away to judge a mule deer or elk ?

 

[5MilesBack]

Any other ideas , leaning toward the razor 50 mm.

I started with the 65mm Swaro, then leaned toward the 50mm Razor and hated it. Went back to 65mm, now looking to go even bigger again. I'm with Stid on this one.

 

[Tony Trietch]

Hauled my swaro sts 80 all around the high country this year.
Would a lighter 65 work? Sure, but I would rather eat less food than degrade my big eye.

 

[matt1glenn]

any others with exp on the small razor

 

[BigDog00]

Not so much with the 50mm…but I originally bought the 65mm razor and then sold it to buy the 85mm. The 65mm left me wanting just a little bit more. I'm happy with the 85mm.

 

[LaHunter]

I have had the Vortex Razor 65 mm spotter for the past 2 seasons. My spotter/tripod/pan head setup weighs about 6 lbs. I would not want to pack a spotter setup any heavier than this. This spotter is good glass. Just for comparison, my hunting partner has a 65 mm Swaro spotter, his is just a little sharper and brighter, but not by much. I have been able to evaluate mule deer at distances of over 1 mile away as far as 'good frame shooter' or 'small', but I am not able to count every single point and feature of their antlers at this distance, especially in dim light. I never feel 'under glassed' with my 65 mm Razor. In my opinion, my 65 mm spotter is the perfect compromise between weight and performance. Hope this helps.

 

[Ryan R]

I used the razor 65 this year on my sheep hunts. Impressed with the optic quality for sure (most expensive glass I've looked through though). Spotter and summit ss tripod = 5 lbs so quite light. In a few situations I was left wanting another 10x zoom that one of the big dogs would have supplied, but whatever, that's why I brought boots. Mostly happy with it.

 

[Ironman8]

I took the 50mm Razor with me to Idaho this year and was able to pretty clearly see a spike elk at 1.25 miles away at dusk. For me personally, the 50mm does everything I need it to. Would I like to be able to see further? Sure...but there's a weight and cost penalty to play that game.

 

[ckleeves]

On elk it really isn't that hard to rough field judge them with a good set of 10x as long as they aren't miles away. Your not going to know every detail of a bull but you usually tell a spike vs rag or mature bull pretty easily. I guess the little spotters would be helpful for this but I still wouldn't carry one. On deer I'm constantly wishing for a little more with a 20x60-65 swaro and my next purchase will be a STX 95mm as soon as I save for 20 more years to get one lol. I know a lot of people love the little spotters so they obviously work well for some people but I'm just not one of them.

 

[castandblast]

I'll throw in a vote for the GR 12-40x60 on a slik carbon tripod and light ball head. Works great for exactly the scenario described, but never stays behind due to weight. Had to chuckle when the guys glassing with me with 10x binocs proclaimed "Bull" but couldn't make out the calf nursing under the "Bull"!

 

[bmart2622]

Nikon ed 50 is nearly identical to the 50mm razor in size and weight. I own the nikon and have looked through the razor and didnt notice much difference.

 

[GibsonKuenzi]

Had a 65mm, 80mm and now a razor hd 50mm.

The 50mm works best for where I've been hunting lately.

 

[justin davis]

Had a Vortex 85mm. Too dang heavy to have in the pack all the time. Went to a 65 mm and really like that for keeping in the pack on hikes. Works well. I would like to get a bigger one someday just to add to the arsenal. I know a few of my buddies prefer 65 mm over 80 mm as well because of the weight.

 

[brettpsu]

I took my 50mm spotter to the Wyoming high country this fall. I absolutely needed more power. Regretted not bringing the big spotter the whole time.

 

[squeekieslayer]

Look.... you are not going to get the performance of the 85+mm big three spotters out of a 50 mm scope. I think he probably gets that. (if he didnt he does now after 12 posts telling hims so haha.) But if you have to compromise for weight or size, this is the absolute way to go.

I personally have the Zeiss 85mm diascope, the thing is flat out amazing, but for general deer and elk hunting, it was overkill and I left it in the truck most of the time. I broke down and got the razor 50mm and a slik sprint mini tripod and fell in love. Very light, packs into a very small area, and has extremely good optics for its size. I set them both at 33 power and in good light, the only difference is the FOV. I was very suprised at how this scope did at low light as well for its size. This scope is WAY WAY better than similar priced larger scope in many ways. If I was forced to sell one of mine right now it would be the big dog.

If you are on a sheep hunt and you need to count rings or the difference between half an inch on a goat... this may not be your best bet. I still take my big spotter to the breaks and very wide open country because I know i will be behind it for hours on end. But for run and gun... the 50s are great.

People pay no attention to details... Just be cause a scope is bigger does not make it better. If the optics are similar... yes the biger the better. But often times i see someone compare the razor 50 to other scope in the 500 dollar range. I can almost guarantee that the larger 500 dollar scopes are using cheaper lenses and components or they would cost much more. So if you go bigger, you better spend the money.

You are better with a high end small scope that a shitty large one... every time.

joe

 

[luke moffat]

L
You are better with a high end small scope that a shitty large one... every time.

joe

Well said Joe especially your last line there!

I went from a Swaro 65mm non-hd to a 65mm Swaro HD, then picked up a 85mm Zeiss 20-75X 3 years ago. I prefer it over the smaller swaros cause of the extra light and zoom. But I didn't initially like the extra bulk nor the extra 1.5 pounds over the Swaro. So I picked up a Vortex 50mm. Cute little guy and funny that the objective is the same size as one of my binocular objectives on my 12X50 Razor HDs

That said I rarely felt a time when I was reaching for the little vortex when I went to the field. The extra 3 pounds in the pack always seemed worth it cause I was nervous about giving up that 75X zoom.

If you are just looking for antlers on an animal inside 3 miles in most cases the 50mm Vortex is just what you need. If you are looking at counting tips and tines then likely you'll be disappointed Its a great little scope, just really comes down to your needs/expectations.