binocular or spotting scope

[P.Charm]

I shoot at an out door range, what does everyone use?


I used my buddies spotting scope last time and and it didn't have any eye relief, so thought of getting binoculars, but then liked the idea of it on a tripod.

can you guys suggest a spotting scope or binoculars that won't break the bank. (rather spend the money on ammo)

thanks.


eric.

[OpticsPlanet]

Need a little more info. What distances are you shooting and what calibers? Also, are you an eyeglass wearer? That will change the eye relief that you need. lastly, what price range did you want to stay around. Let us know then we can make some suggestions.

Trevor B.

[P.Charm]

range at the ver most 200 yards

I'm shooting 5.56mm I wear eyeglasses but not when I shoot. I'm far sighted so don't need them to shoot.

I'm just a weekend shooter not into competition so 60 bucks or so for a budget.

[P.Charm]

I was thinking something like this

http://www.opticsplanet.net/barska-colorado-7-21x40mm-zoom-binoculars.html

[HK Dave]

They are two different animals.

If you're using the optics to look at bullet holes at say 100 yards or more, binoculars simply won't do it.

Great for bird watching though!

[P.Charm]

They are two different animals.

If you're using the optics to look at bullet holes at say 100 yards or more, binoculars simply won't do it.

Great for bird watching though!

funny, my wife asked the same thing "what shooting or bird watching?"lol

I guess i'm leaning towards a spotting scope than, but what makes the binoculars unuseable?

[P.Charm]

how about this?

http://www.opticsplanet.net/barska-8-24x58-benchmark-dfs-spotting-scope-ad10786.html

most thing I'm concerned with is the eye relief because it can get annoying jamming my eye against the thing to see down the range.

[NeilM]

how about this?

http://www.opticsplanet.net/barska-8-24x58-benchmark-dfs-spotting-scope-ad10786.html

most thing I'm concerned with is the eye relief because it can get annoying jamming my eye against the thing to see down the range.

This model has very minimal eye-relief. Only 19mm to 14.5mm. That's less than an inch. You'd have to remove your shooting glasses to view your shots especially at 24X magnification which is a pain.

I would suggest spending close to $100-$120 and getting something with at least 1.5 inches (38mm) relief. Buy once and get the right one.

I'm currently in the market for a new spotting scope as well....one with at least 2 inches of eye relief. I have the Barska AD11114 model(18-36x50) which i purchased 3 wks ago. The eye relief on this model is approx .6 inch. I'll be selling this one.

[P.Charm]

ok eye relief is in MM. got it. half an inch has got to be annoying too. so anything in the 38mm range will be over 100?

[ExtremeX]

I use both... Some good 10X binos for general shooting since its a lot more compact and easier to use without any stabilization, and a spotting scope on a quality tripod for long range shooting or to look at groups on paper at a longer distance. My magnification ranges don't overlap across the two optics. Fixed 10x on the binos and 20x-60x on the spotting scope.

I honestly would take a lower quality spotting scope with a solid tripod over a higher end one with a wobbly tripod. If you ever tried looking thought a high magnification spotting scope using a wobbly tripod its going to be almost unusable.

Not all spotting scopes are created equal, just like buying rifle scopes, they can get very expensive. in terms of optical clarify, eye releif, field of view, all that good stuff, you get what you pay for.

OP: To the items you have linked, ill just say Barska is Barska, I have a Barska spotting scope, the optical clarity isn't that great, and eye relief and field of view drop off significantly at high mags. I also prefer a fixed magnification on my binoculars since they usually have better optical clarity, and if you are looking for a spotting scope, I would look in the 20-60x zoom range. You might want to consider Redfield products if you are on a budget, they are far better than the entry level Barska products.

I would pass on the 8-24x Barska all together, you would be better off using a 16x or 24x rifle scope with a Mill or MOA reticle mounted to a tripod, that was you can at least measure and call out correction if you are doing long range target shooting.

We are currently using a Alpen 20-60x80 spotting scope on a bogen manfrotto tripod with a ball head. It was a real game changer for the guys I go shooting with. Its a pleasure to use and makes target shooting a lot more fun when you can actually see whats going on downrange.

[NeilM]

ok eye relief is in MM. got it. half an inch has got to be annoying too. so anything in the 38mm range will be over 100?

Yes, $100 or certainly more. 1 inch would be acceptable. You'll have to balance eye relief and clarity of glass(especially at high mag) if you're on a budget.

Personally, I don't believe in spending a whole lot of money on a spotting scope if I'm only going to use it for 100-200 yrds target shooting looking at small holes on paper. Just my opinion.

Bottom line, think about the most important features to you and stick to your budget. Then get the best scope based on those. The reality is that you'll be compromising anyway(unless you want to spend $500+).

[P.Charm]

that is very true. all I'm trying to acomplish is seeing some holes in paper at 100 yds without walking down to it. so i could live with short eye relief if it will save me money. I bench shoot and take my time.

[P.Charm]

I don't plan on anything further than 100 yards any time soon. so maybe binocular is a route I can look into. although mounting it on my manfrotto legs does sound nice, it's just heavy.

[ExtremeX]

For seeing holes at 100 yards on a target the Barska will work for you. It worked for me as well; but there are certain things you wont appreciate or realize you might want or need until you start using slightly better spotting scopes. As long as you know what they are, you can make an informed decision. For your needs, the Barska will fulfill it, until you see the need to upgrade down the road. The main thing I wanted was the same as you, to see my holes at 100 to zero my rifles without having to leave the bench. The barska did take care of me in that aspect.

My biggest gripe with the Barska was at higher magnifications. The picture gets a lot darker, optical quality drops off, lots of chromatic aberration, and the field of view was so narrow that an 8" shoot&see target is about all I could see.

As my needs and application changed, so did my needs for a spotting scope. The wider field of view on a better spotting scope allowed me to get on target faster, bigger objective had a brighter and clearer picture at higher magnifications for shooting in bad light. I wear glasses, and anything past 20x on the Barska I had to remove them to see. The exit pupil on the barska was so small it was a lot of stress on my eye for extended usage. Without getting too into detail, the better spotting scopes alleviated a lot of the things that made it difficult to use. I remember going to Angelas shooting range trying to use it at 60x, and the RO told me to put my glasses back on.

If you already have a set of manfrotto legs, its going to make a huge difference. As long as you know what you are buying, and its limitations, go for the Barska. I wish I got the Redfield or the Alpen from the get-go, because no one wants to buy my Barska haha.

[HK Dave]

You guys can see bullet holes on paper at 100 yards with sub $100 binoculars?!