I am a liar!

fatrooster · Jun 20, 2013

Several months ago I made a comment that I felt all of the new optics of the big three where getting too expensive and I was just gonna stay where I'm at or buy cheaper optics in the future but I just couldn't do it. My weakness is optics and I bought the new swarovski spotting scope and the new el swarovision binoculars. Luckily I have the older style swarovski optics that I can sell and not feel the pain so badly. So if you see pictures of me using the new stuff after I said I refuse to fall for the hype of the new stuff, well I am guilty. But sometimes being guilty is sweeeeeeet, ha ha. fatrooster.

Jingow · Jun 22, 2013

Post a pic and we'll believe you. You're still a liar until proof.

fatrooster · Jun 23, 2013

Ha ha, you crack me up jingow. Here is a picture of the spotter. I got the 65mm and 95mm objective lense. I didn't figure I needed the 80mm objective lense. 65mm for backpack hunting and the 95mm for digiscoping and everything else. The bino's won't ship out until Monday the 24th of June and I won't be able to post a picture until next weekend. Until then you'll just have to call me liar! fatrooster.

elkun · Jun 23, 2013

a fool and his?????? and they know it,,,,,,,,

fatrooster · Jun 23, 2013

elkun, none of us hunt because we have to. We hunt because we want to. That makes us all fools. fatrooster.

GLEDEASY · Jun 25, 2013

Congrats with the guilty pleasure. You'll have to let us know how you like that spotter. The EL swarovision bino's are by far my favorite I've ever put to my eyes.

Willametteriveroutlaw · Jun 25, 2013

I have that same spotter and love it!

I only have the 85 right now, but I will be getting the 95 and 65 within the next year.

fatrooster · Jun 26, 2013

Thanks GLEDEASY, I'll admit it hurts the pocket book but I love it. fatrooster.

WapitiBob · Jun 26, 2013

When you're layin in that bed waitin to take your last breath, you gunna say, "sure am glad I didn't buy those Swaros"?

I think not. Enjoy

Dreamin_of_elk · Jun 27, 2013

That's the exact same combo I have. After getting over the kicked in the nuts feeling of knowing what I spent on them I have never regretted the purchase. I'd dare say its my favorite piece of equipment that I own! The 65 is great for hiking and the 95 is unreal for light, digiscoping and longer ranges!!

fatrooster · Jun 28, 2013

Ha ha Wapiti thats funny. But I will have to respectfully disagree with you. I've never regretted my past swaro purchases and I'll not regret this one.
Dreamin_of_elk, congrats on your purchase. Sounds like we think the same. fatrooster.

O_S_O_K · Aug 29, 2013

Hey Rooster,

How much did that set-up run ya?
How much does the 65mm weigh as a unit?

Just curious. I have the older stlye 80 HD and was thinking about purchasing a lighter weight spotter for backpacking to go along with it. I never thought of this option though. I'm thinking I would be much better off if the weight on the 65mm is in line and I can afford it

Thanks

"The problem with quotes on Internet Forums is that it is often difficult to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln

grizzly · Aug 29, 2013

The ATX series is fairly heavy. I have the ATM 80 HD and it weighs 55.6 ounces. The ATX 65 is 55.9 ounces ( .3 ounces heavier than the ATM 80!). The ATX 85 is 67.4 ounces and the 95 is 75.8 ounces.

I decided to stay with the ATM 80 HD and get more glass for slightly less weight than a ATX 65. My buddy did the opposite. They are both great glass and the 65 is definitely easier to pack if you break it in two.

To each their own.

Grizzly

PS. Tristate, please be an adult and respect my wishes that you do not respond to any of my posts. I, in turn, will do you the courtesy of not responding to any of yours. I simply do not wish to converse with you.

O_S_O_K · Aug 29, 2013

Thanks Grizz,

I relly like my 80 HD as well and based on the specs I am not gaining much for backpacking by going to the 65mm other than breakdown ability.

There was a good review in the last Elk Hunter Mag comparing multiple lightweight spotters and the Vortex 11-35 X 50mm was their top pic for overall quality and weight. they also show the Nikon ED with a good score.

Do you have a lightwieght packing scope? If so what are you using?

Thanks again!

"The problem with quotes on Internet Forums is that it is often difficult to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln

grizzly · Aug 29, 2013

I saw that review, too. I haven't bought a small spotter yet. I've seriously considered it, but I kind of feel like if I spent the money on top-notch glass... I should at least be tough enough to carry it.

I kind of buy into the theory that there are a lot of places to cut weight, but optics aren't one of them. If I were to buy another scope, it would probably be the Vortex 50.

I have a serious inner-battle going on... I can't think of a place that is worth packing into and hunting hard on foot, that isn't worth carrying the best glass that I own. It is a weight saving of 30 ounces, but you also lose picture quality, objective lens (light gathering), and zoom power. That is a lot to give up for less than 2 lbs.

I'm still young and dumb, maybe that will change when I get a little older and wise up.

Grizzly

PS. Tristate, please be an adult and respect my wishes that you do not respond to any of my posts. I, in turn, will do you the courtesy of not responding to any of yours. I simply do not wish to converse with you.

nfh · Aug 31, 2013

Very nice. I just cant justify the cost on them cause I am so hard on binos.

jarheadhunter · Sep 3, 2013

I had the chance to check out this set up this weekend while hunting. A guy in camp had the 90 and 65. I thought they were pretty sweet, but don't think I could spend $1k more then I already did on my 65 and I couldn't tell much of a difference in the two. The 90 on the other hand. WOW

goldhunter · Sep 6, 2013

How are the new ATX/STX's with glasses? Eye relief ok?

mtmuleys · Sep 6, 2013

I know....

broomd · Sep 8, 2013

>The ATX series is fairly heavy.
> I have the ATM
>80 HD and it weighs
>55.6 ounces. The ATX
>65 is 55.9 ounces (
>.3 ounces heavier than the
>ATM 80!). The ATX
>85 is 67.4 ounces and
>the 95 is 75.8 ounces.
>
>
>I decided to stay with the
>ATM 80 HD and get
>more glass for slightly less
>weight than a ATX 65.
> My buddy did the
>opposite. They are both
>great glass and the 65
>is definitely easier to pack
>if you break it in
>two.
>
>To each their own.
>
>Grizzly
>
>PS. Tristate, please be an adult
>and respect my wishes that
>you do not respond to
>any of my posts. I,
>in turn, will do you
>the courtesy of not responding
>to any of yours. I
>simply do not wish to
>converse with you.

Wow, that ATX 65mm is a heavy mofo, I'll guess I'll be sticking with my Leica 62mm apo at 1/3 less weight.

The new Swaro glass is probably incredible, but at that weight forget it, I (and probably many here) do too many boot miles to justify it.