Swarovski STS: 65 vs 80mm & HD vs non-HD

[vanderb79]

Planning to purchase a Swarovski 20x60 STS spotting scope and wondering if there is a big difference in clarity between the 65 & 80mm and also between an HD scope and a non-HD scope. Any input would be welcome...thanks, Bill VW

 

[Deerlove]

I have both but prefer the HD but dont want to pack the 80mm, that will stay near the vehicle.

 

[littlejoe]

It has been debated many many many times on MM so do a search. I have a non-HD 80mm and my dad has an HD 80mm. HD is great for taking pictures but in my opinion not worth it if you are not digiscoping. I would love to sell my 80mm and go down to the 65mm. The 80mm is just to big to pack around.

 

[cabinfever]

littlejoe +++1

 

[gdog]

I've got a 65mm sts while buddy has 65mm HD sts...hard to tell the difference.

I want to trade my sts for an ats...

 

[antlerquest]

go with ATS. much nicer on the neck.
wes

 

[longshooter338]

I own the 80 mm non high def. Be carefull if you live in the heat as i do you pick up way more heat thermals with the high def at long ranges you cant see your object.

 

[svenelvis]

I agree with those suggesting you consider the ATS. I would never to back to a STS.

 

[rradams]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-09 AT 07:15PM (MST)[p]"you pick up way more heat thermals with the high def at long ranges"

Never heard of that before. Generally, HD is considered an enhancement of contrast and less chromic aberration.

 

[rradams]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-09 AT 09:45PM (MST)[p]

 

[oneshotonekill]

i was told by a Swarovski rep that the human eye can not pick up the differece between the HD glass and the non-HD glass

one shot

 

[rradams]

I am able to see a difference, albeit a small one, which is why I dropped the extra coin. Is the HD worth it? Not sure, but every little bit of improvement helps.