Spotting Scope

[iMagUdspEllr]

I'm looking for a quality spotting scope to spot 5.56 size holes in black/white paper at up to 200 yards.

I want something that is durable (I'm going to throw it in the back of my jeep with lens covers on). If they don't make spotting scopes that durable or if they are that durable they are very expensive... please recommend good protective cases for spotting scopes.

Thanks for all the suggestions in advance!

 

[billnourse]

I have a Nikon that is adaquate, but not great. Avoid the Leupold Sequoia at all costs. I had one and it wasn't adaquate even at 100 yards.

If I was a serious bench shooter or hunter and needed really good glass I would get a Swarvorski, Ziess, Lieca, or the high end Leupold or Vortex. Any good spotting scope is going to be 800+.

Any hard case with foam inside will protect the scope. Just cut the foam out to fit the scope.

Bill

 

[iMagUdspEllr]

Thanks for the awesome reply. Any good spotting scope is going to be $800+? That is ridiculous. I mean I just want to be able to see the 5.56 holes at up to that 200 yards. Are cheaper scopes not able to do that up to 200 yards?

What model Nikon do you have and why is it only adequate? What capability is it lacking? Is it difficult to see the holes in the paper?

 

[JR_Roosa]

Mirage is going to be a bigger problem than optics. Early in the morning, I can see .30 cal holes easily at 200 with my cheapo ($100) Kowa TS-501 with a 50mm objective and 20x fixed mag. Once the mirage starts to boil as it gets warmer I can't see them well anymore, especially on the black of the bullseye.

If you can find a TS-500 (501-504) series Kowa scope, the optics are nice (I can see the moons of jupiter easily with mine) and they're less expensive than the more serious Kowa scopes. If you can find one it might be a nice place to start, but they were discontinued.

The spotting scopes mentioned above are all really nice, but what they lack are long eye relief eyepieces (and so does my Kowa TS-501). If you don't have that, it's a pain to use with your shooting glasses on.

Most of the competition rifle shooters use Kowa spotting scopes for this reason. Other than the bargain 50mm series, the rest use changeable eyepieces. You can get a scope from 60mm to 80mm, and you can get a fixed 25x eyepiece with long eye relief or a standard 20-60x zoom. You can get a soft case for it that will protect it enough from anything other than a drop.

You can get the 60mm scope here (angled is easier to use for shooting) for $490.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/kowa-60mm-high-performance-spotting-scopes.html

Long eye relief eyepiece is here for $240. Zoom is $385.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/kowa-interchangeable-eyepieces-for-66mm-and-60mm-spotting-scopes.html

On a calm cool day you can probably see your 200yd groups without much trouble, probably even further depending on conditions. The other nice thing is that if you want to upgrade to a bigger scope, your eyepieces are interchangeable.

It's a bummer, but quality optics cost real money. Guns are cheap in comparison.

-J.

 

[4EVERM-14]

As JR_ROOSA posted there are conditions when even seeing at 100 yards is going to be difficult. Obtaining the largest objective lens you can afford [60mm or bigger ]and limiting power to 20-25X is the best bet for seeing little bullet holes. There are some bargains in scopes. Konus offers a decent product for low cost.
www.champchoice.com

 

[C7AR15]

Bushnell

Bushnell makes a 15x-45x Spotting scope for about $550.

You are going to have to spend at least this amount to see at 200YDS

Also using shoot and see targets is huge boost to seeing those tiny .223 holes

PS - It took me 3 cheap scopes to learn this lesson and I'm still looking to upgrade , but $1500 - $2500 blows my budget.

 

[Clifford L. Hughes]

iMagUdspEilr:

A scope's ability to show bullet holes at any range depends on its resolution. When I was shooting on several Marine Corps rifle teams all members were issued a twenty power Bush and Lomb fixed power scopes. The scopes did well when the afternoon mirage came up. Using the twenty power scope I could lay beside a team member and spot his 200 and 300 rapid fire strings. On a sunny day I could spot the break of the bullet to the target and tell him where the bullet hit. Seeing thrity caliber holes was no problem at 300 yds. What would have been nice is a variable fifteen to thirty or forty power that could be adjust down when the mirage was in impenetrable. (a quality glass)

No matter how you cut it, a serious shooter need a quality glass: that means spending some money.

 

[Clifford L. Hughes]

iMagUdspEllr:

Seeing bullet holes of any size at any range requires resolution that is only found in quality scopes. When I was shooting on several Marine Corps rifle teams I was issued a twenty power Bush and Loam forty millimeter spotting scope. The twenty power did pretty good looking through the the thick afternoon mirage. I had no trouble spotting thirty caliber bullet holes at 300 yards. On a sunny day I could lay beside a team mate and watch the break of his bullet out to 300 yards and tell him where his bullet hit. The lower the power of the scope the better it penetrates the mirage. What would have been nice is a quality fifteen to fifty, fifty millimeter scope. No matter how you cut it, though, a serious shooter needs a quality scope. $$$$

Semper Fi.

Gunnery sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired

 

[Slamfire]

I bought this Celestron 18-55X 65 mm scope and am very impressed with it. It cost me right around $100 delivered.

It did not come with scope lense caps, a disappointment, the scope cover, and it does not have the rotating barrel feature.

It is optically excellent, very bright around 18-25X and I cannot complain about the performance for the price.

I took it out to 600 yards and compared against my $1K Pentax. The Pentax was better at high magnifications, but at lower magnifications it would take teenaged eyeballs to see differences.

 

[ms6852]

Imag, read this article, I have purchased to spotting scopes based on her advice and she has never lead me wrong.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/spotting-scopes-for-target-shooting.html

I have the small leupold 10-20x40. At $500 dollars it is expensive but I am able to see 22lr bullet holds at 200 yds. I bought this to carry as a handheld when I go hunting. My other baby is awesome which is the Nikon Fieldscope with ED 25-75x82. I bought that one a few years ago for $1000, I think it has double in price now.

http://www.leupold.com/observation/...otting-scopes/golden-ring-10-20x40mm-compact/

Anyway read the article, she tells you what you need for 200 yds and the price range. She has tested most of the brands herself. Anyway you will need to spend at lest $300 with a 60mm objective to be happy with a budget.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

Ill tell you one to stay away from. Im a big leupold fan and probably 3/4s of my rifles wear them. So when i want a new spotting scope i figured to go the same way and bought a leupold wind river. I think i paid 300 bucks for it. It is not a lick better then my old cheap simmons spotter. Its one leupold product id never recomend

 

[iMagUdspEllr]

Wow! All this information is so good. Its going to take me a while to sort through/read. I really appreciate the help!

 

[billnourse]

My Nikon is a Spotter XL II 16 to 48X 60mm that runs about 649.00. While it will show 22 cal. holes at 200 yards most of the time, it won't always, and it certainly is not very bright at higher powers. It just doesn't have the resolution needed to be a good scope. I would not go cheap again, it's just not worth the frustration in the long run. The 6.5x20 VX3 LR that I have on my 22/250 is actually better than the spotting scope.

Bill

 

[hoffbill]

If you are only worried about out to 200 yds a $150 on sale variable to 24 power rifle scope will show 22 holes at that range.

 

[phil mcwilliam]

I recently purchased a Bushnell Trophy spotting scope 20-60x65mm. This spotting scope allows me to see .17hmr holes in paper targets at 200 yards, but it helps to have a dark background. The image is a little grainy on the upper magnification, probably where you get a crisper image with the high end expensive European brands, but for a $200 spotting scope it does what I require. I would also suggest the Redfield 20-60x60mm for around the same price.
I actually own hunting scopes & binos from Swarovski, Kahles & Zeiss, so I can appreciate what fine optics can offer, but for a spotting scope that I only use occasionally for sighting in rifles at 100 & 200 yards the Bushnell suited me.
The Bushnell comes with its own carry case.

 

[frumious]

I second the Celestron line. Go to amazon and read reviews. I got a Celestron 52229 with a 60mm objective and 20x-60x zoom for $90. It has a soft case, hard case, and a little tripod. Here it is.

I don't think you can do better for twice the money. My scope has no blurry spots and is usable at all zoom levels. Much better than the crap Barska I bought at Cabela's and subsequently returned. My smallest caliber is .308 and the longest I shoot at is 100 yards, but I can see those .308 holes at 100 yards clearly all the way down on 20x. I imagine I could see .22's at 200. I will have a .22-250 soon to look at at 100 and I am not worried at all.

-cls

 

[jsimmons]

I also have a Celestron, but I don't remember which one. It's freakin huge (might be 22-66x100mm).

EDIT ============

It is the 100mm version.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

I bought this Celestron 18-55X 65 mm scope and am very impressed with it. It cost me right around $100 delivered.

Thank you to the guys who brought up Celestron. I have an old Tasco from when it was still made in Japan. It's 15-45X and it's been good to me all these years, especially for .30 caliber holes at 100 yards. Now, though, I'm much older and branching out to 200 yards in the immediate future. I know I'll be needing more power, but being a tightwad, I was of course wondering what would be available without breaking the bank. These may very well fit the bill.