Best spotting scope under $350, Leupold, Zhumell, Minox...?
- Thread starter LandToSea
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Sully2
Well-Known Member
Optical Guru? Not in the slightest...BUT...I have perfect eyesight ( thanks to the eye docs) and much better equipment that a few of you refer to and I cant see pine needles.......so who do you think your kidding.??
I know BS when I see it in print...and especially when Im downwind of a pile....so take it away bowels.!
Sully2
Well-Known Member
Since we are jabbing and being immature...
I can see your tiny wanker (just slightly smaller than pine needles) and I am all the way down in S FL! I have no idea why you think I would say something not true on here when I am looking for advice, Jack *** troll!
Personally I have no idea why you wish to blow such a line of smoke at people. At least when you tell a line of BS make it reasonable.....
jlrookstool
Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 13
I bought one of the cheap Simmons spotting scopes and am not impressed. I can see more of the holes in my target at 600 with my 32x Burris rifle scope than with the 60 x Simmons. The 60x makes things very big but big does not give a qualtiy view.
Ok gawd forbid we use MATH and PHYSICS to solve a disputed point when we have OPINIONS and INTERNET B.S. but here is my best shot.
A 60x optic at 300 yds or 900 ft will make an object APPEAR 60 times closer to the eye. So something seen at 900 ft thru a 60x optic will APPEAR to be 15 ft away. Or 5 yds. If you cant see a pine needle or a nail head at 15 ft you may need vision correction.
Im not a big beleiver in any optic with a $500 price tag but according to MATH it SHOULD be POSSIBLE to resolve the objects listed at 15 ft for an average person.
A $2000 optic will just do it clearer but will still appear to be 15 ft away.
Sully ya might wanna get your swarovs or corneas checked out, 900 ft is really close for any optic.
And just so we are straight I'm in no way saying a $300 scope is the way to go...the thought of it makes my head hurt already.
A 60x optic at 300 yds or 900 ft will make an object APPEAR 60 times closer to the eye. So something seen at 900 ft thru a 60x optic will APPEAR to be 15 ft away. Or 5 yds. If you cant see a pine needle or a nail head at 15 ft you may need vision correction.
Im not a big beleiver in any optic with a $500 price tag but according to MATH it SHOULD be POSSIBLE to resolve the objects listed at 15 ft for an average person.
A $2000 optic will just do it clearer but will still appear to be 15 ft away.
Sully ya might wanna get your swarovs or corneas checked out, 900 ft is really close for any optic.
And just so we are straight I'm in no way saying a $300 scope is the way to go...the thought of it makes my head hurt already.
Sully2
Well-Known Member
toddc: Should be possible... But if a frog had wings..well we all know how that goes.!!!
toddc: Should be possible... But if a frog had wings..well we all know how that goes.!!!
I agree. The math doesnt take into account glare and flare and all the other stuff that makes optics degrade but 900 ft is close. Ive never even used a spotter that close so I wouldnt really know. My canon 15x50IS can see bullet holes at 300 all day long so its not all the mag for darn sure and I nevr push cheap glass. I bought those canons 13 yrs ago for $1300 and thats bout $100 a year for me to not get a headache and get to see bluebirds makin babies at 500 yds. That is priceless my friend. People who dont live on the plains dont realize how important good glass is. I wouldnt even hunt without my glass. I guess I'll have to go look thru a cheapo scope at 300 to see for myself. I just hope I dont give my clerk a heart attack when I ask to look thru a barska or something. Ive known him 20 years and the store is 3 blocks from a mental hospital I'm afraid he'll try to call em on me.
Well fella's, I am quite new to the sport, and when my budget affords me to buy a 3000.00 spotter, you will see me standing in the check-out line, holdin one and smiling!! I do have a sightron 8-32x56 on my savage model 11 .308!! Which I just purchased a month ago! Maybe I should have waited a lil longer and saved a few more pennies and bought a better hunk of glass??!! That being said, what started this whole peein match was sully all but out right callin a couple of guys liars!! Now as I said before, I may be a lot of things but a liar I am not!!! I also realise this is a forum and topics are to be discussed and even at times debated, but you can debate without bein outright ignorant about it!! Some people just don't know tact and think they are smarter and better than most!! You gotta ask yourself - what's wrong in your miserable life when you have to talk to a couple of grown men who you don't know or know anything about like they are beneath you!!! I never said it was the best scope or equal to a swaro or even uttered the words crisp or Sharp!! I did say that I could see gutter nails at 300 and that it gave me hope for the range and that sir is the truth!!
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
Your post reads so much easier with a bit of paragraphing.....
I believe you are taking Sully at more than he meant, IMO reading between the lines. From my experience, Sully is pretty down to earth.
For my part in the fracas, I have a Bushnell spotter that I got from my late uncle, it's got to be 30 years old and works fine. It was free.
Were the gutter nails 10 penny perhapse?
Sorry about the bunched up mess side car!!!
That being said, as far as sully goes, did you read the thread?? As far as him bein down to earth, well you claim to know him, I do not!!! First impressions speak volumes and he spoke as if we were claiming to see lil green martians on the moon through a 10 dollar scope!!!
About the nails , I assume, hell I think a gutter nail is bigger than that even, aren't they??!! Which even brings more validity to my original statement!!!
I don't know man, what I do know is I would never get on here and act like what someone is sayin is a load, at least not without some facts to support my position, and there is definitely a more tactful way of doing it!!! Talkin about flyin frogs and wind blowin crap!!! Whatever!!! Down to earth don't carry themselves like that!!!
On a diff note, I would love to take a peak through that 30yr old bushy!!! Cuz optics really are my new fascination!!!
That being said, as far as sully goes, did you read the thread?? As far as him bein down to earth, well you claim to know him, I do not!!! First impressions speak volumes and he spoke as if we were claiming to see lil green martians on the moon through a 10 dollar scope!!!
About the nails , I assume, hell I think a gutter nail is bigger than that even, aren't they??!! Which even brings more validity to my original statement!!!
I don't know man, what I do know is I would never get on here and act like what someone is sayin is a load, at least not without some facts to support my position, and there is definitely a more tactful way of doing it!!! Talkin about flyin frogs and wind blowin crap!!! Whatever!!! Down to earth don't carry themselves like that!!!
On a diff note, I would love to take a peak through that 30yr old bushy!!! Cuz optics really are my new fascination!!!
Sully2
Well-Known Member
Sidecar: It dont matter to me how people take me...or even if they like me or not. Some things are what they are..and nothing is going to change that. Some that boast they can see the birth of bacteria on a table top with their $300 scopes...I call BS..plain and simple.
I worked for more than 30 years in a room with more than 100 other designers...and we had an old saying of..."First liar dont stand a chance".....
"I caught a fish the other day...weighed 65 lbs..Took a picture of it. Picture weighed 4."
See what I mean....
Happy 2013 to all!
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
Being a designer, Sully is always more critical. I'm very used to that. My BIL is a designer for Ford Motor. They are always analytical, sometimes to the point of being obnoxious.
I take it all with a grain of salt. Has to do with age for one and for another, I take as gospel, about 1% of what I read on the Internet.
The Internet is all about what he said, that she said, that they said and oftentimes the actual facts get lost in the transition.
My 30 yeard old Bushy looks 30 years old but works fine. My hunting partner has one too.
I take it all with a grain of salt. Has to do with age for one and for another, I take as gospel, about 1% of what I read on the Internet.
The Internet is all about what he said, that she said, that they said and oftentimes the actual facts get lost in the transition.
My 30 yeard old Bushy looks 30 years old but works fine. My hunting partner has one too.
Since I too am overly analytical, although not a designer, I had to go verify my claim the best possible. I setup a small yellow paper target at 317yds using GPS and walking to measure several times. 317 instead of 300yds simply because I did not have anything to attach the target to and had to use the closest tree over 300yds. I popped 4 holes in the target the size of .223 holes. I got the Zhumell dialed in as good as can be on the target and while I could not clearly see the 4 holes I could locate two of them. I will admit that if I did not know where the holes were I would not have been able to confirm them! So, I would say in perfect conditions I may be able to discern .223 holes at 300yds instead of the 317yds tested in overcast skies? With a splatter target I will probably be able to see what I need to since they leave a visible mark over 3-4x the hole diameter. At 200yds and likely 250yds I could see them all day long (maybe with a headache after?). I tried to take a pic of my eyepiece view, but without the proper camera attachments it is not a great result. The target was visible, but not what I was seeing bare eye so no point in sharing.
That all being said, I would like to know that in daylight conditions I can see holes at 300yds with my spotter. I guess the only way this will happen is to go with the Leupold Gold Ring option I listed and bump up to at least 40x if not 60x? These are not even close to my budget unless I want to take the bus to work and sell my car...lol. AND I would be carrying all of my belongings around since I would be homeless also as my wife would not tolerate me spending 3% of our annual income on a scope. If the Leupold 30x would solve the problem I would grab it and return the Zhumell 60x?
My solution is to use my $210 scope to see holes at the range up to ~250yds and anything beyond that I will ask one of my fellow shooters on the line to borrow their glass for a minute to verify my shots while the line is hot.
That all being said, I would like to know that in daylight conditions I can see holes at 300yds with my spotter. I guess the only way this will happen is to go with the Leupold Gold Ring option I listed and bump up to at least 40x if not 60x? These are not even close to my budget unless I want to take the bus to work and sell my car...lol. AND I would be carrying all of my belongings around since I would be homeless also as my wife would not tolerate me spending 3% of our annual income on a scope. If the Leupold 30x would solve the problem I would grab it and return the Zhumell 60x?
My solution is to use my $210 scope to see holes at the range up to ~250yds and anything beyond that I will ask one of my fellow shooters on the line to borrow their glass for a minute to verify my shots while the line is hot.
