Spotting scope comparisons.

Whenever a person posts a question about a spotting scope, it seems that the replies always echo.

The replies seem to be highly based on ownership. "I have this and I can't see any reason for someone to own anything else."
Or, "this brand is the best in the world and nothing else matters."

It is odd to me that in all the posts that I have read, none have ever actually done any kind of simple testing.

The world has established standards for determining the quality of an optical lens.

The design of these is to establish the lenses ability to evaluate resolution, field distortion, and parafocal stability.

But when we go out to compare one spotting scope to the other, it seems that none of us use any of these tools to make our decision.

More amazing to me, is the conviction that some have in defending their opinions, when their opinion seems to be based on very little.

Don't get me wrong. I am NOT trying to start an argument about your opinions. I am simply saying that if you read most of the opinions, it doesn't seem like they would be admissible in any kind of credible review. Simply because there is NO DATA.

So, what is the point of this post?

Well, I think the it would be a great help to all of us if the retailers had available to us, a simple resolution chart(both black and white and with color to test color fidelity), a pure white - flat sheet for testing the clarity of the glass.



It might just be me, but I put no stock in what a guy says when he tells me to spend $700 or $5,000, based on "I have this, my buddy has that"

Wouldn't you be much more comfortable with your purchase if you pulled out five scopes, put a resolution chart out at 100 yards, and compared what the one could do, compared to the other?

I for one would value a guys opinion more if he posted something like this..... "I was able to get the Vortex razor to resolve at ? level, at ? distance. I was able to get the Swarovski ATX to resolve at ? level at ? distance. I got the Kowa prominar to resolve at ? level at ? distance."

"I noticed that the Zeiss gives a slight yellow tint to the white board. I notice that the Vortex gives a slight magenta tint as well. The Kowa is crystal clear, and gives no color tint."

That's what I am getting at.
Why are we making super expensive purchases, and critical comparisons, based on conjecture. If you don't know the definition of conjecture, look it up. Its what happens when someone posts about spotting scopes.

I for one, would love to see how the Vortex razor hd 85 stacks up against the Kowa prominar 883, the Leica televid apo 82, and the Swarovski atx 85.

I know its not a field test, but none of us are going to get to spend a week in the field with those four scopes at our disposal.

Shouldn't our retailers have available some simple tools for us to use when purchasing something so expensive?

At least that way, we can buy in confidence, knowing that our scopes are able to resolve detail, at high magnification, to our liking. And we will have a clearer understanding of how close they blend certain color schemes.

Maybe your eyeball is able to get excellent results with one model and my eye is only able to get the same result with o different scope.

What the scope does with my eye attached to it is all I really care about anyways.

Thoughts?

Do you think I am over analyzing things?

Do you prefer the zealous opinions that seem to dominate these types of posts?

Next time you are in an optics shop, you might want to ask them if they would be interested in getting some comparison tools for their customers to use.

I have bought 4 spotting scopes over the last 30 years. Started out with a Bushnell. Then I bought a Burris signature. Still wasn't happy, so I gathered a Zeiss, a Leica and a Sworovsky and put them side by side. I compared them over 4 different evenings and bought a Zeiss 15x45x65 angled Diascope. It was obviously better to me and light enough to carry in the field.

However, there were times in the field, I felt I needed more light gathering and power. I then collected the larger Vortex Razor, a Sworovski, and a Kowa Prominar. I compared them after work over a period of a week. I thought the Vortex Razor was the best buy and performed well and compared well with the Sworovski. I thought the Kowa Prominar was way better and busted the bank and bought one. I am still paying for it but have no regrets. It is the angled 20x60x88 and I am amazed everytime I look through it.

I like the angled for most situations, However it is awkward with a window mount.

Most of the Sportsman Warehouse store have a chart like that mounted on a far wall. They work great. With the cheaper scope's you can't even see the fine lines on the chart.

LAST EDITED ON Apr-30-13 AT 08:13PM (MST)[p]Great post and here is another test a person can perform on a scope while in the store. Set up the scope you are interested in and take an index card or a folded piece of paper. While looking through the scope, take the paper and slowly slide slide it on front of the objectice lens and when you can no longer see through the scope stop moving the paper and look and see how much of the lens is covered up. In the picture below you will see the starting point.

This test will tell you how good the light gathering ability of the scope is. Compare scopes and you will be amazed at the difference between them. As told to me by the optics clerk in the Sportsmans Warehouse in Twinn Falls, Idaho, in the cheaper scopes you can sometimes take two exact scopes from the same dealer off of the shelf and set them side by side and one will gather more light than the other. So this is just another thing to consider while choosing your scope. If you are a digiscoper then your gonna want a scope that gathers lots of light.
By the way, this is about where I ended up stopping with my swaro HD 65.

fatrooster.