Spotting scope recommendation

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by timeless61, Sep 12, 2009.

  1. timeless61

    timeless61 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    215
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    I have been using an older scope for awhile now, but want to purchase something newer and better. I initially wanted to spend in the 400-600 range, but if it is suggested that most of the scopes in that range are not that much better than cheaper scopes, and not near as good as something in the 1000 range my price will change. So for 400-600, what is the best spotting scope? And around 1000 what would the best spotting scope be?

    I have searched, and there is information, but there are so many different threads asking different questions, it was kind of hard to get much out of the threads. Thanks in advance for replies.
     
  2. ZSteinle

    ZSteinle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    920
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    I would start your search at the bushnell excursion i have a 20-60X80 and was very impressed for the price. Wish i would have purchased the smaller compack 15-45X60. I wrote a review on it a while back. In the $1000 dollar range i would look at the nikon fieldscope. if you have any questions about the bushnell just ask

    review

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG][​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     

  3. timeless61

    timeless61 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    215
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    how far were those pictures? i looked at the bushnell somewhat after reading your review. also, i was told to look at the burris landmark and vortex also. but tonight i talked to a friend who has an older nikon from 4-5 years ago. i am not sure on the model, but i believe it is one of the better ones from back then. you know anything about the bushnell compared to a spotter 2 from nikon or the other two i mentioned?
     
  4. ZSteinle

    ZSteinle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    920
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    let me see the ones of the construction site are around 250-350 yards. The pictures dont look the best but looking through the scope it looks much better! the one of the shack on the hill is 1450 yards and the pine tree is around 500 yards. I had a Burris XTS 25-75 and sold that to buy the excursion and there is absolutely NO comparison! As far as nikon goes, the only nikon i have used would be a the fieldscope ED and would deffinatly be a major improvement over the bushnell. Its no leica or swaro but at half the price to 1/3 the price i personally beleive it is one of the better price concious choices out. I only wish the Fieldscope with 60mm obj was 15-45 and the 82mm was 20-60.
     
  5. jmason

    jmason Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,527
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    I have the 20-60-x80mm Excursion as well. The bad is the eye relief (on mine) is a little light for eye glass wearers, and there is some minor blurring at the extreme edges of the FOV. Others have also noted this on their scopes.

    The good is for the price I think it's a very favorable scope. Really good resolution. I was (in perfect) conditions able to see the little stickers that are placed over bullet holes on F-class targets. I could see black stickers on black paper, and white stickers on white paper at 1000 yards. I could see them so well that I am positive I could have see the bullets holes also if they hadn't been covered by the stickers.

    I think the only other scope owners you'll hear make that comment are going to be Swaro owners. I'm not comparing the two by any means I'm just giving you the good and bad as seen by my eyes.