Swarovski spotting scope help

JeremyKS · Dec 28, 2008

Guys Im trying to make a decision on what scope to buy. I don't pack a lot so I have decided on the 80mm.

What I can't decide is wether I need the HD and if I want the ats or sts. I have been told that the color is better with the HD and I believe color is an important thing when picking out animals. I will use the scope for some digiscoping but not planning on taking pics on the professional level just more of the hobby deal.

I will also use the scope on a window mount quite a bit so I didn't know how well the ats does from the truck?

Thanks for any help at all.

inline · Dec 28, 2008

If your not going to use it for packing I would go with the STS. The ATS is nice when your packing because you can use a smaller tripod. And using an ATS off a window mount can take some getting used to.

You will hear a lot of different opinions on HD vs. Non HD. From what I have been told the colors that are improved by the HD aren't your browns and whites that your going to use to spot deer.

Inline

Take out more than you brought in!

JeremyKS · Dec 28, 2008

Well I will day back the scope just not very often will it be used on long extended back trips. Thanks for the help.

TheGreatWhiteHunter · Dec 28, 2008

JeremyKS I sent you a PM

THE LORD IS MY ROCK
COLORADO,USA
NRA LIFE MEMBER
HUNTING PASS IT ON

DIYHunt · Jan 13, 2009

You may have already purchased a scope, but if you haven't you might want to wait until the new Swarovski model hits the shelves. it is magnesium and weighs 4 ozs. less than the older one. it looks like they are discontinuing the ATS/STS series so it could hurt your resale value if you decide to sell them in a year or two. I don't know what the pricing is going to be but with Swarovski's track record I'm sure it will be quite a bit more. the new line is ATM/STM, M for magnesium. You can tell by looking at them if they are the M series as the shade ring is black on the magnesium units. the rest of the unit is the same color. it looks like there is no difference in the optics at all, only in the housing.

porterrockwell · Jan 13, 2009

I just went through this agony this past month. Using a Cabelas 10% off coupon I purchased the non HD 65 STS for several reasons.

1) I have used both looking at elk on Mt. Timpanogos two miles away from the bay window and front step of my home. Very little difference between HD and non HD. Honestly details were only minutely better and hardly discernable with a $600 more in the HD version. It is there, but I would only purchase the HD version if you want to take real high quality photos.
The color fringing really is not apparent to me with the the non HD version. Color looks great in both. I plan on using the non HD version I own for photos, but the primary application with be hunting.

2) I chose the sts because it is much easier to acquire the animals. You can do it witht he angled version, but it takes practice.

3) I also chose the STS because it fits better in all 3 of my Badlands packs. I own the 2200, the hypervent and the superday. The STS is much easier to get into the dedicated scope pockets on the 2200 and the hypervent.

That is my .02

Porter

Gator · Jan 13, 2009

That the stuff we wanted to hear, thanks I think that help in making the choice easier.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".

gdog · Jan 14, 2009

I just picked up a 65mm non HD. Look around for a used scope. Folks are unloading stuff due to economy and there are some good deals to be had.

A few weeks back, I found a 65 HD STS (with 20-60 eyepiece) with DCA camera adapter for $1750. I was going to get it, but ended up with a big vet bill and had to pass. My buddy picked that one up. Last week, I found a 65 sts with zoom eyepiece for $1300, that I ended up buying. Both were brand new...not a scratch on them.

As for the difference in the HD to Non HD...being able to put the two side by side..the difference is not much at all.

porterrockwell · Jan 16, 2009

Good job gdog, nice finds! I hope you enjoy your non HD as much as I have been enjoying mine (although this crappy muck in the valley air makes it a little more difficult to see clearly at times).

Porter

JeremyKS · Jan 19, 2009

Porter thanks for the post. How much room do you have left in your 2200 scope pocket with your 65mm? Will a 80mm sts fit in the 2200 scope pocket?

porterrockwell · Jan 21, 2009

I have never tried an 80. However, I did own the 82 mm Nikon Ed last year and it would NOT fit. It was just too big (not to mention heavy!)

I know of some guys who carry the 80 mm, but I don't know if they carry it in a 2200. Sorry I could not be of more help.
I think the Sawro is a tad slimmer and may fit in the 2200. You are always welcome to come by and try it out on mine if you are in the area (Pleasant Grove).

Deerlove · Jan 21, 2009

I bought the 80 and 60 Hd last year for a sheep hunt, and I dont think I'll use the 80 as much. It's just too big imo. Russ

lip_curl · Jan 25, 2009

i have the badlands hyrdrovent and the swaro STS in 80mm. It fits perfectly in the scope pocket. I cant say enough about the scope, its changed the way i hunt. i could tell a gray faced muley buck from his does at a distance of >3 miles this fall.