Cheap spotting scope will still do the job?

[tactice]

I'm looking for a spotting scope for range days.

Just fun, not competitions.

Price varies a lot obviously from "pro" ones to cheapies off ebay.

All I want to do though is see where holes are in the paper. Nothing more than that.

A cheapie ebay spotting scope will do the trick, right?

[harlow]

I had an old rubbish one which I ended up binning.

The image was just so unclear at distance.

Looking through my rifle scope was crystal clear, looking through the spotting scope was like it had a mild frost effect or something on it.

s**ty glass I suppose.

[Gregg]

Looking through my rifle scope was crystal clear, looking through the spotting scope was like it had a mild frost effect or something on it.

s**ty glass I suppose.

If it was even glass.

More likely plastic lenses.

[Baldrick314]

I'm looking for a spotting scope for range days.

Just fun, not competitions.

Price varies a lot obviously from "pro" ones to cheapies off ebay.

All I want to do though is see where holes are in the paper. Nothing more than that.

A cheapie ebay spotting scope will do the trick, right?

I paid $99 for an ebay job. Works well at 100 yards but at 200 it's too fuzzy to clearly make out bullet holes

[Aster]

I paid $99 for an ebay job. Works well at 100 yards but at 200 it's too fuzzy to clearly make out bullet holes

That's the problem with cheap optics.

Just about everything looks fine when you're looking at the shop wall.

Getting it out in the field and at distance is another story.

[Joom]

Some seriously are terrible...

For 100m most are probably ok, but I'd have a look through some before buying if you need anything further than that. Just in case.

[Igoe]

I bought a 20-60x spotting scope from a Ted's Camera Store locally. I figured any scope in there should be reasonable at least.
I had a look through it in the shopping centre, and seemed ok, although the distance was probably only 50m or so.

It cost me the best part of $200, but I can tell you it wasn't worth it.
Out beyond 100m at the range, it is just not clear enough to tell what you are looking at. It's a struggle to see .22 size holes at 100m, and anything less than a .30 size holes at 150m is pretty much invisible.

Ian

[Releb]

Man, $200 isn't exactly cheap either

I'd be pretty dirty on Ted's gear after that...

[Hucka]

Man, $200 isn't exactly cheap either

I'd be pretty dirty on Ted's gear after that...

I reckon...

If you got a $60 off ebay, that kind of thing is to be expected I suppose.

But for $200 I'd want to see a damn sight further than a fuzzy 100m.

[Warrigul]

I have an old 25x KOWA full bore scope(the long bodied one not short) that I paid $100 for, I have yet to try anything under $1500 that comes even close to clarity.

Many cheap scopes try to compensate for lack of lense quality by extra magnification, it just doesn't work. Often price is no guide either though if you go for a good name brand you are safer. Like others have said take it outside the shop/shopping center and look down the street in the daylight.

Surprisingly there was a 20-60x scope at Australia Post shops a couple of years ago that ended up on clearance after Christmas that was decent, hard to pick.

[salate]

I have an old 25x KOWA full bore scope(the long bodied one not short) that I paid $100 for, I have yet to try anything under $1500 that comes even close to clarity.

That's true of so many things these days.

I have a pair of computer speakers I got 16 years ago for $500. They're great.

A couple of years ago I saw a pair of $200 speakers on sale for half price and thought they must be better as they're 10 years newer... Wrong.

They were complete rubbish compared to my existing ones, so I tried the $350 pair. Rubbish again.

Tried the $500 pair. Still crap.

Next step up was an $800 pair and I didn't bother even trying them.

[Xerox]

Many cheap scopes try to compensate for lack of lense quality by extra magnification, it just doesn't work.

Normally it's worse even.

For the same money I'd take a quality 20x scope over a s**ty 60x scope any day.

[Bark]

For the same money I'd take a quality 20x scope over a s**ty 60x scope any day.

Good philosophy.

[reddog]

Don't think there is such a thing as cheap optics it really is one area where you get what you pay for
IMHO you cant get a decent 4x scope for under $200 so I wouldn't think you would get a decent
spotting scope for that money .

[Rakk]

Don't think there is such a thing as cheap optics it really is one area where you get what you pay for

IMHO you cant get a decent 4x scope for under $200 so I wouldn't think you would get a decent spotting scope for that money .

Yep. Take that out to 60x and you need to spend a lot more to get something really good.

[vexesus]

I've got an cheapy Visionking 25-75 spotting scope, can't really take it past 35x though because of lack of clarity.

Pretty sure it was off Ebay. Got given it though, didn't buy it so can't really complain.

[tarnagulla]

Just out of curiosity - what is the maximum useable range for a spotting scope? Is 500m expecting a bit much?

[Seik]

I think that would be pushing it.

I figure that at 100m, to get a useful enough view of your group to be able to gauge group size, stringing etc. you need at least a 20x zoom. And that's talking sharp, clear glass.

For 500m then, 100x zoom while maintaining that quality? That's going to be a seriously expensive spotting scope.

Doing this is my head a bit obviously, but I think no.

[tactice]

I had a look at a few cheap ones at national Geographic and Teds.

Seriously unimpressed with the quality at range, and this was limited to inside a shopping centre