65 or 80mm

3

300bee

New Member
Dec 10, 2015
39
0
I would like to know which you think is better and why.
Advantages/Disadvantages of 65 vs 80mm spotting scopes of the same power and brand.
Weight really isn't going to be a huge factor in my decision but does play a small part.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
C

crzy_cntryby

Active Member
Dec 9, 2014
269
0
Larger objectives gather more light and provide a wider field of view. If you aren't packing it at all 80. Hiking even just a few miles I would go with 65.
 
hoshour

hoshour

Veteran member
May 31, 2012
1,622
2
North Carolina
www.CornerstoneInvestment.com
If weight is not really an issue now, it will be after you lug it a few miles. If you truly are only going to carry it using a horse or truck and you can afford either size, then buying the 80mm is a no-brainer for the extra light at twilight.

But, my guess is you're not looking at a top-end scope, and if that's the case, you might spend the extra coin you save by going with the 65mm to step up in quality. If you buy a used or sample scope you can step up in quality even more. You will thank yourself many times.

I use a Zeiss 65mm diascope and like the weight savings and think its light gathering capability is still excellent.
 
Shooter09

Shooter09

New Member
Dec 31, 2011
28
0
Pacific NW
65mm vs 80mm only matters if you're comparing the same model and what you're willing to spend. There are quite a few brands that offer a lower power magnification in the 65mm than they do in the 80mm. For example the Vortex Razor comes in 16-48x65 and the 20-60x85. Low end spotters have a narrow window where they are actually clear so you lose a lot of the magnification range because of distortion.

If weight is not a concern, then go with the 80mm for the added light transmission and wider field of view. I use a Swarovski STS 20-60x65mm and it is more than enough for hunting anywhere in the West. If I'm going on a hunt where weight isn't an issue, such as an antelope hunt, then I prefer a larger spotter. Most people are only going to buy one spotting scope so you have to decide what is more important- the weight or field of view and light transmission.
 
H

huntabsarokee

Member
Feb 27, 2012
51
0
Northeast PA
I agree with most but larger objectives do not increase FOV. FOV is usually dependent on the eye piece. Compare the Vortex Razor 65 vs 85 specs and the FOV curve for both are the same at the same magnification. If the scope can go to a lower magnification then it will have a wider FOV at the magnification.
If you are looking for a small scope to carry may I recommend the Pentax ED65. I owned the Nikon ED50 and Razor 50 but wanted a little more light gathering capability so I jumped up to a 65. Didn't want to haul an 80mm. You can find these Pentax used for $350 to $450 and I believe they are just as good as the Vortex Razor line up.
 
Shooter09

Shooter09

New Member
Dec 31, 2011
28
0
Pacific NW
huntabsarokee is correct in that FOV is dependent on the eyepiece. For example, the Swarovski ATS/STS spotters have two options for the eyepiece a 25-50 wide angle or the 20-60. The 25-50 is more popular with the birding crowd for the FOV, where the 20-60 is more popular with the hunting crowd because of the extra magnification.
 
dkopriva

dkopriva

New Member
Dec 2, 2014
34
0
Gove
I'm in agreement with everything above. I happen to be lucking enough to have two vortex Razors. I have the 20-60x80 and the smaller 16-48x65. The 80 is better in low light for sure. When It comes to hiking much distance in rough country the 65 is noticeably. Lighter. For all the hunting I do here in western Kansas I only use the 80. Even if I'm hiking I take it in my pack. Usually my pack is pretty empty anyway and our terrain is mild compared to the Rockies. When I go to the mountains I take the 65 and it does just fine. I think if I was going to go any smaller than the 65 I'd just upgrade to some 12x50 binoculars and leave the scope out of the pack. Just my 2 cents.
 
H

hferrin701

Member
Mar 2, 2014
83
0
I would ask how much you are going to use it. If you sit behind it all day get the 80. I spend all my time behind some swaro ELs and then when I see an animal I want to size up I get the spotter out. I maybe use it for a few minutes at a time and that's it. So the 65 was more suitable for my needs, just a thought.
 
B

Bughalli

Member
Jan 15, 2012
139
1
hferrin701 said:
I would ask how much you are going to use it. If you sit behind it all day get the 80. I spend all my time behind some swaro ELs and then when I see an animal I want to size up I get the spotter out. I maybe use it for a few minutes at a time and that's it. So the 65 was more suitable for my needs, just a thought.
Click to expand...
I have a similar setup and use it this way as well. It might help if you said how you plan on using it and what you're hunting.
 
D

duckbum

New Member
May 29, 2015
35
0
i would say it depends on how much you use your spotter if you use it more than your binos go with the 85 if not go with the 65.
 
M

Micah S

Active Member
Jan 11, 2016
377
771
Sandy Oregon
I have a Kowa tsn 663 66mm with a 20x60 eye piece. Where you lose is during low light higher magnification cuts the light gathering ability of the scope and your fov is smaller. I have a 80mm Leupold also it suck to carry that big thing around all the time it also takes up a lot of area in your pack.
 
mcseal2

mcseal2

Veteran member
Mar 1, 2011
1,171
195
midwest
Something not mentioned yet is the bulk of the 80mm or bigger spotters. They won't fit in some packs side pockets designed for 65mm optics. The bulk can be more of an issue than the weight in some cases. I have a Swaro STM 65mm and an ATS 80mm spotter. I like the 80mm better for everything except hauling it around in a pack. Having both is expensive, but has it's advantages. My 65mm has the adapter for the tripod and stays in my pack, the 80mm is set up with the window mount. When glassing from the vehicle if I spot something I can grab the pack and go, no loading the spotter up or switching the mounts around.

The 80mm is definitely brighter in any light conditions but it's a newer HD model and the 65mm is not, so it's not an apples to apples comparison. Either is pretty darn good, plenty good enough for most conditions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom