Spotter testing

[Work2hunt]

I'm looking at getting a new spotter. I know there has been lots of posts about what do you think of this spotter, however I am open to feedback on spotters. However, I have the opportunity to be able to test most of the spotters at my house. Got a buddy who works at cabelas!

My question is how would one go about testing and evaluating each spotter to pick one.

 

[Ikeepitcold]

Side by side comparison then narrow down by what you can afford

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

Get them side by side away from the store. Compare in good light and poor light. If you can get your hands on a resolution chart, do it and do a comparison at 50 yards and 100 yards. If you can't get a chart, then find something with fine detail around 50-100 yards away and compare. Then find something around 500 yards away and do the same. Then a mile. This isn't just for comparing spotter models, but also trying to find the best particular unit of the model you want, if you have multiple units available.

Optimally, you could learn how to do a proper star test and check each unit for optical aberrations.

 

[Work2hunt]

Get them side by side away from the store. Compare in good light and poor light. If you can get your hands on a resolution chart, do it and do a comparison at 50 yards and 100 yards. If you can't get a chart, then find something with fine detail around 50-100 yards away and compare. Then find something around 500 yards away and do the same. Then a mile. This isn't just for comparing spotter models, but also trying to find the best particular unit of the model you want, if you have multiple units available.

Optimally, you could learn how to do a proper star test and check each unit for optical aberrations.

Thanks! I was hoping you would respond. I seem to remember in past posts you had lots of knowledge with optics. I'll have to google resolution chart and star test to figure out what the heck those are.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

A google search won't be enough for star testing. I have an entire academic reference text on the subject.

http://www.amazon.com/Star-Testing-Astronomical-Telescopes-Evaluation/dp/0943396905

As far as resolution charts, the Air Force 1951 Standard Resolving Power Chart is the gold standard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_USAF_resolution_test_chart

These are some of the steps I take to test scopes, but you could just look through a bunch of them and choose the one that tickles your fancy. Might be easier.

 

[Ikeepitcold]

Dam BB why to I feel freakin stupid after reading that last post? Brainiac! Lol

 

[480/277]

Pickup a Leica or Swarovski in the size you like, boom done.
I like the Leica 62

 

[Work2hunt]

Dam BB why to I feel freakin stupid after reading that last post? Brainiac! Lol

I'm with you. My head hurts a little after reading that post.

 

[ddress00]

I'm looking at getting a new spotter. I know there has been lots of posts about what do you think of this spotter, however I am open to feedback on spotters. However, I have the opportunity to be able to test most of the spotters at my house. Got a buddy who works at cabelas!

My question is how would one go about testing and evaluating each spotter to pick one.

Spotters are only has good as the amount of money you can spend. Optics are somthing i've skimmped on once or twice and I always regret it. I've had all the "big brands" spotters and i loved them, but honestly they are not worth 2000 to me. I've had a vortex i got for 1000 and its the best spotter i've had. its light, its short. i've got other ways to test them since your going to be taking them home, pm me if you wanna chat more in depth

 

[BrettKoenecke]

How I would go about it:

Does it fit in my pack?
What does it weigh?
How much light does it gather v. how much I need?
How much usable magnification does it have? I find that 25-30X is plenty. Your mileage may vary.
How much resolution does it have? Can I see the details I need to see?
What does it cost?
What else do i need to buy? Eye pieces, tripod, etc.
Where can I get it cheap v. local sales and service?

I ended up with an open box Nikon Tactical Fieldscope 20-45x, 60mm ED from Cameraland.
What is right for me, might not be for you.

 

[270whiz]

You get what you pay for mostly. When were getting ready for 1st out west hunt i bought a redfield and thought i was good to go . [not] . When i was looking at antelope and trying to judge between 14" and 14 1/2 or 13 3/4 at 500-600 yards it was tough. As luck would have it the rancher let us use his leupold goldring. 15x48 [i think it was]
anyway it made a big difference and i am saving my $ for a quality piece of glass.

 

[JNDEER]

I cannot say I have done extensive spotter tests, but I did do a very big bino test.

for me, I found that there was a significant difference using a bino in the terrain I was going to hunt compared to looking around at my house, down the street, at signs etc.

so, I would suggest doing what BB suggested, but doing it in a type of terrain similar to what you will be hunting, or at least in the outdoors somewhere away from the city, lights, buildings etc.

 

[clacklin009]

I've been looking at getting a new 60-65mm scope and have been comparing them in the store. I know that it is not kosher to say testing optics in the store is okay; however, I think it is fine. I have looked through the Leice, Zeiss, and Swarovski (ATS) and I found the Swarovski worked best for me. I liked having the focus ring on the body, and the eye relief worked well for how I like to use the optic. I felt the Zeiss was nicer to look through in regard to color but I didn't like the eye relief. I actually have compared the scopes twice and the first time I looked through the Zeiss I didn't like the edge but the second time I had no problem with it. I guess the point is I think our eyes can get a little funky on us when looking through optics so you might need to look and then take a break and look again and see if your first choice stays there. If it is good twice in a row it probably is the right choice. When I went back to look the second time I wasn't trying to make the Zeiss look better, rather, I was trying to see if the Swaro was the right choice. Good Luck.

 

[sneakypete]

One word " VORTEX" I have the new 50mm spotter, great optics, very clear and light enough for the back pack!

 

[Work2hunt]

Ok guys. After a weekend of staring through swarovski atx, the swarovski high definition, leupold gold ring, vortex razor, zeiss victory fl, cabelas euro hd, and the Nikon edg I've narrowed my list down a little. I'm still looking at the vortex, both swarovski's, zeiss and the cabelas.

Can someone tell me the difference between the swarovski atx and the swarovski high definition besides price and the modular ability of the atx. I haven't been able to tell a difference in low light, clouds, sun, close distance or medium distance (<1000yds). I need to go to a different spot to do some viewing in the 1 mile to 2 mile ranges.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

The modular design is the biggest difference.

So it sounds like you are saying the 80HD and ATX85 resolve about the same amount of detail. This isn't surprising. I tested these two scopes side by side myself. I was able to resolve one element finer detail on a resolution chart with the ATX. The chart helped here, as the difference was not very noticeable when simply looking at different objects.

however, resolution isn't everything. The ATX also had a little more vibrant color providing a more saturated image. A really big difference was in FOV the ATX is very wide for a zoom and provides a full 60x magnifcation while if you want a wide angle zoom on the ATS, you have to get the 25-50 WA, and are limited to 50x.

The ATX also has a field flattener, providing a very low distortion image sharp to the edge, while the ATS shows noticeable pincushion distortion.

The ATS does have the advantage of being lighter.

 

[grizzly]

Work2hunt, Bitterroot Bulls has probably forgotten more about optics than I will ever know. But the one thing that I would add is that the flattener on the ATX is very beneficial to help the flat sensor on your camera if you intend to digiscope heavily.

Here is the mechanical difference in the two Swarovski's from my research... this might save you some time. I was comparing the ATX 85 to the ATM 80HD with the 25-50 WA lens (the lens I would recommend for hunting). The ATX weights 11.8 ounces more (67.4 - 55.6 ounces) and is 1.4" longer (14.6 - 13.2 inches). These were important numbers to me since I am an "ounce-counter". The FOV is 124-68 @ 1,000 yards with the ATX. It is 126-81 @ 1,000 yards with the ATM (but the magnification is lower on the ATM).

I found a demo unit of the ATM on Cameraland for 2439 (including eyepiece) so bought that. It drop-shipped straight from Swaro to my door... totally unused. I couldn't be happier. Some of my buddies bought the ATX... they couldn't be happier. You can't go wrong either way.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

Work2hunt, Bitterroot Bulls has probably forgotten more about optics than I will ever know. But the one thing that I would add is that the flattener on the ATX is very beneficial to help the flat sensor on your camera if you intend to digiscope heavily.

Here is the mechanical difference in the two Swarovski's from my research... this might save you some time. I was comparing the ATX 85 to the ATM 80HD with the 25-50 WA lens (the lens I would recommend for hunting). The ATX weights 11.8 ounces more (67.4 - 55.6 ounces) and is 1.4" longer (14.6 - 13.2 inches). These were important numbers to me since I am an "ounce-counter". The FOV is 124-68 @ 1,000 yards with the ATX. It is 126-81 @ 1,000 yards with the ATM (but the magnification is lower on the ATM).

I found a demo unit of the ATM on Cameraland for 2439 (including eyepiece) so bought that. It drop-shipped straight from Swaro to my door... totally unused. I couldn't be happier. Some of my buddies bought the ATX... they couldn't be happier. You can't go wrong either way.

Grizzly,

Thanks for the vote of confidence.

One note, while the ATM80HD is lighter as you noted, the ATX85 is actually shorter than the ATM80HD. The specs you listed was without eyepiece for the ATM.

 

[Work2hunt]

The modular design is the biggest difference.

So it sounds like you are saying the 80HD and ATX85 resolve about the same amount of detail. This isn't surprising. I tested these two scopes side by side myself. I was able to resolve one element finer detail on a resolution chart with the ATX. The chart helped here, as the difference was not very noticeable when simply looking at different objects.

however, resolution isn't everything. The ATX also had a little more vibrant color providing a more saturated image. A really big difference was in FOV the ATX is very wide for a zoom and provides a full 60x magnifcation while if you want a wide angle zoom on the ATS, you have to get the 25-50 WA, and are limited to 50x.

The ATX also has a field flattener, providing a very low distortion image sharp to the edge, while the ATS shows noticeable pincushion distortion.

The ATS does have the advantage of being lighter.

BB,
You are correct in that I believe the 80hd and the 85atx resolve the same amount of detail. After printing off and posting the resolution chart you recommend at 100 and 500 yds I couldn't descerne any difference. I did think I noticed a little more brightness with the atx, but I would like to stare through both some more. As for any distortion at the edges I didn't pick up on it but I want to spend some more time with both of these along with the cabelas and the vortex.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

The distortion will be easy to see.

Put a straight line (like a power pole) in the center of the field and move it toward the edge by panning the scope. You will see it appear to bend as you move the scope.

Warning***** When you start looking for these things, you will end up seeing them all the time!!!!