Spotting scope comparison

[OSOK]

I recently had the new Bushnell HD Elite 8-40 x 60mm spotter for nearly a week as it took that long to get weather conditions right to get the best from the scopes . I wanted to know if this new Tactical style spotter was as good as they claimed or just ' Fur coat & No knickers ' for weekend warrior types .

 

I compared it to the two spotters I use which consist of ;

 

Swarovski HD65 with a fixed 20x eyepiece

 

Vortex 30x eyepiece with MOA ret which fits the Swarovski

 

Bushnell Legend HD 10x42 Monocular

 

The new Bushnell Elite was longer and heavier than I'd expected but i have to say It felt great to hold and had a feeling of quality all over . There were no eyepice covers supplied which was poor considering the cost of these spotters , this one was around the £1,300 mark as it was the non ret version . They come with several ret options but the more common seems to be the Horus 32 which is a fair bit more money .

 

 

From a purely optic quality through my eyes ;

 

The Swarovski with the 20x was a lot clearer , brighter with more natural colours than the Bushnell set at 20x and had a greater FOV than the Bushnell set at 15x .

 

I also feel the Swarovski with the Vortex 30x had exactly the same advantages compared to the Bushnell set at 30x

 

I also have an Opticron 2.5x eyepiece doubler which when put on the Swarovski / 20x combination gave better definition at 50x than the Bushnell gave at 40x however there was no difference in brightness that i could see between the two .

 

There seemed to be a yellow ish tone when looking through the Bushnell from 20x onwards but as you went down to 8x to 15x was not nocticeable to my eyes . At the lower end of the zoom you seem to get a slight distorting effect around the outer 1/3 of the view but the centre 2/3's were sharp .

 

When i compared the two Bushnell's at 10x I found no difference in definition but the New Elite was a lot brighter as long as you can put up with the outer distortion which i found annoying .

 

To summarize , I found myself wanting to find a strong point about the Bushnell other than the build quality but I just couldn't . Perhaps If anyone uses Horus or Mils and was prepared to overlook the optical short comings for the advantages of the reticle version then yes maybe .

 

Again let me emphasize that the above whilst very basic was as my eyes saw it .

 

OSOK

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AIlswell]

Thanks for taking the time to write this up - very interesting to get an independent group test. When I have had the chance to take a look through the Leupold 12-40x60 (either tactical or GR versions) I have been very impressed with the quality of the image but I've never had chance to do a side-by-side comparison with Swaro etc.....have you any experience with the Leupold as, if so, I'd be interested in your thoughts on that model versus the others tested here?

[OSOK]

Hi , I've had both the Leupold's BUT I have to say It was many years back and maybe Leupold have changed glass specs since . I can remember changing from the tactical to the Golden ring as the optics were better at the time .

I've had the Swarovski HD 80 too but for my usage i saw no difference to the HD 65 and It's a lot easier to handle etc .

I've used the new ATX and that's in another league to anything I've seen to date ( Imho ) but It's also Big and heavy for my needs and I'd loose the ability to use the Vortex eyepiece .

 

OSOK

[AIlswell]

Many thanks for the update. From your recollections of using the Leupold (GR version), how would you rate it IQ-wise versus the HD 65?

[OSOK]

I changed from the Gold Ring to the HD80 for two reasons back then , I felt the optics in the Swarovski were much better from a brightness , definition and the colours seemed more natural . The other reason was i wanted to go to an angled scope as my shooting was mainly prone and i feel it's easier on the neck .

 

I find that when either standing , sitting or prone an angled spotter makes keeping the head still at higher mag easier for some reason .

 

Looking through Swarovski HD's , Leica Televid's , Zeiss diascope's & Razor HD's may only show a difference in colour tones and what seems more natural to your eyes . I think buying a Leupold with a Reticle makes sense if you shoot in Mils etc but buying one without when there's all the above to choose from would be a mistake .... again imho .

 

Cost always comes into buying a scope but there are great spotters for under £1k , The older model Leica televid 62 is one of the best top end buys and with the fixed 27x is wonderful and I've seen these for around £700 .

 

They are selling new Swarovski HD 65 bodies in either ATS or STS for £1100 and £200 will buy you a fixed 20x or 30x eyepiece which is the same money as the Bushnell Elite !

 

I've always gone down the fixed power eyepieces only because of FOV which is important to what i need .

 

I hope that helps

 

OSOK

[AIlswell]

Many thanks for the additional information - very useful.

[ds1]

OSOK, what are you using the spotting scope for please? What I mean is that I think it makes a big difference to scope selection , or at least eye piece selection depending on specific purpose. If you are trying to watch the wind, marker-disk and targets either side of you that is one set of circumstances and I can see the advantage of a 27x wide fov eye piece.

 

The same does not really work for me as out to 300m I tend to use the March on the rifle and from 300m to 500m with the spotting scope ( a bit further if I am lucky - all on weather conditions) I am trying to spot bullet holes as we do not have marked shots or sighters, so the application is a bit different. I went from an Optolyth TBA 100 (70x) to a Zeiss diascope 85mm, 20-75x zoom. Both scopes are very good but I prefer the Zeiss eye piece . Really for my purpose seeing bullet holes as far as I can is the only important criteria.

[Murph]

OSOK, what are you using the spotting scope for please? What I mean is that I think it makes a big difference to scope selection , or at least eye piece selection depending on specific purpose. If you are trying to watch the wind, marker-disk and targets either side of you that is one set of circumstances and I can see the advantage of a 27x wide fov eye piece.

The same does not really work for me as out to 300m I tend to use the March on the rifle and from 300m to 500m with the spotting scope ( a bit further if I am lucky - all on weather conditions) I am trying to spot bullet holes as we do not have marked shots or sighters, so the application is a bit different. I went from an Optolyth TBA 100 (70x) to a Zeiss diascope 85mm, 20-75x zoom. Both scopes are very good but I prefer the Zeiss eye piece . Really for my purpose seeing bullet holes as far as I can is the only important criteria.

If you are looking to see bullets as far as possible I would look at a Swarovski atx 95. Not the ideal spotter for the hills, but on a good tripod I can make out 223 bullet holes on white paper to 800 yards depending on weather conditions.

[OSOK]

ds1 , I agree totally with Murph that if your needs are only to spot bullet holes then buy an ATX with the 95mm objective and you'll see everything that the conditions allow and when the conditions don't allow you'll still see more than any other optics .

 

The Vortex 30x allows me to see and correct from splash at longer distance with better FOV than any zoom at that mag whilst the 20x is as good as anything I've ever used with massive FOV . ( If your familiar with Stickledown then Ten target boards at 1000 yards )

 

We all have different uses for our scopes and these are just my finding .

 

OSOK

[ds1]

OSOK and Murphy, I have not had any experience with the ATX, not yet anyway but think after the recommendations from you gents I should have a look at one.

 

Fully agree with Murphy that a good tripod is essential ( have been through most - Gitzo,manfrotto, ray-vin, Ewing etc). Again it's a use thing - if you can stand behind a tripod / scope what you see is a lot better than using the same kit prone from ground and barrel heat but getting up to use a spotting scope screws your position - tried both ways but no really good answer.

[OSOK]

ds1 , I don't want to change my position either and i shoot from prone , It's just a matter of trying different setup's until one suits . Using the reticle in the spotter at the side of my rifle allows me to move my head six inches or so after firing to check strike , assuming flight time allows which at distance it does .

Recoil and magnification always caused me the issues when i tried to use the rifle scope to see my own strikes but getting the spotter low enough so the only body movement involves the head works best for me .

I use a tripod that can sit two inches off the ground but then i sacrifice weight and height to use a geared head rather than a Ball head , Ball heads drove me mad with the reticle as the moment you tighten them they spring just away from where you set them . If your not using the reticle then perhaps the head is not as critical but once you use one you won't want to go back to a ball head .

OSOK

 

[ds1]

I would say that my set up is a bit more of a compromise because I use the tripod for the rifle also, however the principle is the same in keeping the spotting scope close to your eye.

 

Agreed that a normal ball head is a pain - very much full lock or too loose. I need it smooth so found a hydrostatic ball head with variable tension to work well. It takes the jumping out of the head and gives a smooth pan if the rifle is mounted on it.

 

"]http://s111.photobucket.com/user/davids-s1/media/28122013314_zps8cd1691a.jpg.html]

 

The DTA has been replaced with an AIAXMC though.

[Murph]

I use a manfrotto tripod with mine.i have a small digital camera which swings down into place. I tested bullets last year and wasn't convinced about whether they would stabilise well in my 1-9 twist. They were 75gr amax. I fired 5 shots at 600 yards whilst recording them. When I had finished my session I replayed the footage on a big tv in the house. You could actually see the bullets going off stability downrange. I can freezeframe the footage inflight and actually see the vapour trail going off course. You can see the vapour trail so easily with scope. On that day the group was well over 2 foot!. I would recommend one of these scopes to anyone. One of shooting buddies took one look through it and went out and bought one himself. He use the same tripod as me but uses the tls apo pancake lense for his dslr. The pictures and videos through his are stunning.