Swarovski 20-60x, or 25-50x eye piece?

[Villreinjeger]

Thanks for the advice! I'll shop around for a 20-60x then.

I'll be hunting om my own, and together with friends some of the time. I worked in NZ 11yrs ago, and spent some time hunting Thar back then. Also went over last year visiting friends and hunting a bit. Know a few spots in the Rangitata worth checking out, and want to fly in to the Copland or walk in the Karangarua river area this time.

I really enjoy the accomplishment of doing it myself without a professional guide.
I'm happy with my chamois scoring 24 1/2. I'd like to come across s Bull of 12"+ which shouldn't be impossible given a reasonable effort.

I've got bitten by the bug and got the Thar-hunting in the blood now, and enjoy every minute of the hardships beeing in the southern alps.
You have a wonderful country!

 

[NZ Longranger]

Villreinjeger,
Good for you!
Very pleased to hear you're hunting thar and chamois the same way we do - on foot! If you want any advice just sing out and I'll do my best to help. Was heading into the Mt cook region for 6 days this week hunting Bull tahr, but the weather is looking poopy, so might pospone till next week now.
Greg

 

[Trickymissfit]

Not trying to hi-jack your thread here, although I have a few questions about swaro too.

I bought a secondhand Mint Swaro Ats 65mm HD, with 30x and 45x eyepieces.
I was planning to get the 25-50x, so advertised the two... In the end I sold the 30x rather fast, and got stuck with the 45x...

Now, I'll be taking that spotter to NZ in june/july 2012 - to hunt Thar and probably champis. Any real need for a different eyepiece? I also ser that they don't sell that eyepiece anymore..?

I reckon a fixed wide angle 45 will be as good as the variable one as long as I find my target? Cheaper too.

As to 25-50 or 20-60: i suppose a 2x zoom is brighter than a 3x zoom, giving the 25-50 an edge?

I would think that looking thru any 65mm scope at 45x would be somewhat on the dark side with a 1.4 factor. While the 30x would be a solid 2.16. That's well over a 25% increase in light going thru the eyepiece. Even with an 80mm lense the light factor is down to 1.77 using the 45x eyepiece. You should be looking for a light factor of 2.5 or better.
gary

 

[Villreinjeger]

I know it is handy with a rule of thumb, but does it apply equally well to very good HD glass as compared to other glass? Also, it isn't only objective diametter and magnification that counts - equally important is the number of lenses, and the quality on these. The angled versions is also lesser than the straight ones, although I don't want to bend my neck spotting upwards with a straight spotter....

I find the 65 Swaro HD as good as the Zeiss 20-60x85 that I just sold, due to bulk and weight, with that 45x..
But as you say, it isn't as bright as the 30x for general viewing, but neither was the Zeiss at high magnification under field conditions.
I Carried that Zeiss along with a good fiber tripod when hunting tahr in the southern alps last year. Never again - too heavy and bulky...!
I find the Swaro 65 HD very hard to beat on performance - it's not very light, but lighter and more compact. It also seem to be more solid, not having many focusparts sticking out like the Zeiss.

I've decided to have a look at a 20-60 zoom for it. Nice to have the 60x when assessing trophy potential on long distances.

 

[Trickymissfit]

I know it is handy with a rule og thumb, but does it apply equally to very good HD glass as compared to other glass?
I find the 65 Swaro HD as good as the Zeiss 20-60x85 that I sold due to bulk and weight with that 45x.. But as you say, it isn't as bright as the 30x for general viewing, but neither is the Zeiss at high magnification under field conditions. Carried that one along with a good fiber tripod when hunting tahr in the southern alps, Never again - too heavy and bulky...!
I find the Swaro 65 HD hard to beat on performance.

I'decided to have a look at a 20-60 zoom for it - Nice to have the 60 on midday when they're bedded down at their highest altitude.

In optics the coating cannot reduce or increase the light going thru the scope body and eyepiece. That part is engineering alone. Plus you also have a focal point (or F Stop) that is a ratio of the over all length to lense diameter. I'm not all that good at the f stop stuff, but the higher the number, the better the resolution and depth of field. What's interesting here is that few companys state the f stop in the literature, but all astronomy telescopes do.
gary