Why not more DIY “big eyes”?

[Block]

I own BTX, a pair of Swaro Twin 65’s and NL 12’s. Nothing wrong with the BTX but at even greater weight and bulk I prefer the Twins and use them almost exclusively now. I’ve posted mby in this thread or another on why I prefer them. Friends have BTX and we glass side by side and we all do pretty well with both. I think I do better but that just might be my opinion

Yeah I hear ya! I think a lot of that could totally depend on ur style of hunting too. I do a lot of long day hikes 5-10 miles each way,,, and then Az OTC… for the Az stuff I could see big eyes bein as good or better,, I always said if they made BTX that zoom like 20-40x they would take over.

 

[4090Sharps]

Yeah I hear ya! I think a lot of that could totally depend on ur style of hunting too. I do a lot of long day hikes 5-10 miles each way,,, and then Az OTC… for the Az stuff I could see big eyes bein as good or better,, I always said if they made BTX that zoom like 20-40x they would take over.

FWIW, my mini big eyes fit in my K4 side pocket or lid. I'm currently working on new lid for my K4 with a padded compartment for the big eyes, and a pocket for my snackies and other typical lid contents.

I always ended up strapping the BTX to the outside of my pack.

 

[Asheron]

I've decided I want to invest in a big eyes setup primarly for hunting, and secondarily use on the rifle range. I'm having a hard time trying to decide between the Kowa TSN-884 setup @ 10.64 lbs vs the Swarovski STS-80 setup @ 8.56 lbs.

The TSN-884 has 121.64 cm^2 of surface area, while the STS-80 is 100.53 cm^2. If I divide the area by the weight we get nearly identical weight/performance of 11.43 cm^2/lb for the Kowa and 13.86 cm^2/lb for the Swaro. So the Swaro slightly wins on weight/performance figures.

I'm wondering if it is worth the extra 2.08 lbs to have the Kowa vs the Swaro. That's almost the weight of a tripod. The swaro also has rubber coating which might provide more protection out hunting, definitely feels nicer to use in cold weather, etc. The swarovski also has a fitted case from Adam's Adapters, while there is no case for the Kowa 884 setup.

On the other hand I also wonder if having that extra 20% (21 cm^2) of resolution from the Kowa is worth the weight penalty. I also wonder if I'd spot something with it that I wouldn't spot with the swarovski.

What are peoples thoughts on the Kowa 884 vs the Swaro 80 setups?

 

[BBob]

Personally I’d pass on 80mm systems for hunting if carrying around in a pack. The 65’s do great plus lighter and smaller. Any reason in particular for wanting the 80’s?

 

[Asheron]

Personally I’d pass on 80mm systems for hunting if carrying around in a pack. The 65’s do great plus lighter and smaller. Any reason in particular for wanting the 80’s?

Good point on them being smaller. On my spreadsheet the TSN-664 comes to 7.98 lbs after I add in the adapter's weight. They have 68.42 cm^2 so it's 8.57 cm^2/lb of performance. I had previously ruled them out as at 7.98 lbs makes the 80mm a no brainer weight-wise. I didn't think about dimensions though in doing this exercise.

I'm also concerned with exit pupil too. At min zoom the 66s has 2.64 exit pupil vs the 3.20 of the 80mm, or 3.52 of the 88mm. So the Swaro 80s will have better low light performance in not just resolution but eye box.

Then I forgot to mention in my first post I wear glasses, the Kowas has 17mm of eye relief while the Swaros have 20mm. So that is another consideration of mine that makes me lean towards Swarovski.

I also forgot to mention I have some swaro NL pures 14.7x52s - so outside the ability to zoom on 65s, I don't feel going from 52mm -> 65mm would be a big enough step up for me.

I also forgot to mention I do western style hunting - elk, mule deer, new mexico oryx & ibex, pretty much any big game hunt you can do in the west I do. My first off range NM oryx took almost the entire month doing it every day - and that hunt personally taught me that I need better glass. At the time I only had some mid range 8x42s binoculars, and a low end 20-60x80mm conus spotter.

I'm thinking if the 65s do a great job for you then I think the 80 swaros will definitely do a great job for me. I still have some "what if" concerns if I went with those vs the kowa 88s.

Like for NM off range oryx - that's not something you're packing in, but driving miles and miles of hill looking at desert cactus to spot two horns and a clown face out in the wild . I definitely think 2x 80mm swaros would be a huge upgrade vs what I have.

Do you have any more thoughts on my situation?

 

[BBob]

I've owned both (Swaro 80 & 65's) and the 65 and the 65 twins have not in my mind in any way contributed to not seeing something in dark conditions. I'll take the trade off for smaller and lighter. If you can deal with the size and weight of the 80's and have to have every advantage go for it.

 

[4th_point]

I would expect the 65 to be better corrected than the 80.

 

[Asheron]

I would expect the 65 to be better corrected than the 80.

Why would that be? Less margin of error?

 

[4th_point]

Why would that be? Less margin of error?

Focal length.

 

[BBob]

Well if the 65 has a better correction I never saw it. I would never say the 80 was worse in any way than the 65. All I’ve owned have been HD models. Comparing the early scopes with 20-60 lenses the 65 couldn’t compete with the 80 and that lens. Once the 25-50’s came along they got much much closer in performance. Once I had a 25-50 the 20-60’s got sold.

 

[4th_point]

Well if the 65 has a better correction I never saw it.

How did you test for correction?

 

[BBob]

How did you test for correction?

I didn’t test for correction. I just looked through them many times over the years side by side and couldn’t care one way or another if one was corrected better. My sole purpose was to see if I/we could see if you could see things better out of one or the other. With either ocular the 65HD was never better in any way visually that I could ever see than the 80 so IMO if you want everything you can get out of either of those two buy the 80.