Spotting Scope on sale at CTC
- Thread starter berger
- Start date
The kind of optical quality that can be had for around $100 is limited, but can be worthwhile in certain applications. If that's sufficient for your needs, getting it for $50 is pretty good.
I've got a Bushnell Sentry 16-32x50 that Costco offers on-line incl. UPS delivery for $99.99 (and that Wholesale Sports offers for $125) and it works o.k. for .303 and .223 holes in paper at 100m, which is what I bought it for.
- Location
- British Canuckistan
that's interesting...the website has the Celestron Mak (I believe it's 60mm) and wasn't the flyer a 50mm Bushnell?
for $50, it wouldn't hurt to give it a shot, tho on astronomy based websites, it didn't get very good reviews. but then, night viewing requires aperture, whereas daytime doesn't so much.
for $50, it wouldn't hurt to give it a shot, tho on astronomy based websites, it didn't get very good reviews. but then, night viewing requires aperture, whereas daytime doesn't so much.
If it is a Mini Mak then it is a reflector design which uses a parabolic mirror to magnify the image. Since it is easier to make a good mirror than optical glass, $50 might actually get you a much better image compared to a $50 refractor scope.
That said, apparently this one is junk.
Apparently the 90mm Mak is much better.
Last edited:
The c65 mini mac gets absolutely terrible reviews.
In the local flyer it shows the bushmaster (not the mini mac like it does online) and when I went to the store it was the bushmaster they had and not the celestron mini mac. In any case, I couldn't resist buying the bushmaster and trying it out since I knew I would have no trouble returning it if it turned out to be a dud. It is a 20-60x60 by the way. I took it up to the range today along with the $100 bushnell 15-45x50 that I already have. With the 15-45x50, its a decent little scope but I sometimes have trouble discerning 22 cal holes at 200 yards (as far as our range goes), especially if the holes are on a dark line or dark area on the target. Anyhow, I shot some targets with my .223 and set the 2 scopes up side by side for comparison. To make a long story short, I found the bushmaster took me in closer and the image was clearer than the bushnell. Keep in mind this isn't a big dollar scope but the difference was noticable and this scope does outperform the cheap bushnell. It does a decent job for what I want it for (.22 holes at 200 yrds) and for $50 how can you complain.
This scope comes with a very cheap carry bag (non padded) and cheap table top tripod (cheap but works ok). Its a 45 degree angle view through it but it has a nice feature in that you can swivel the scope inside the tripod mount (ring) so that you can make the 45 degree viewing angle at the top or at either side. It comes with a eyepiece rubber cap and a objective hard plastic cap that is connected to the scope and flips up out of the way. The objective end also has a small built in lens hood that extends out about 2 or so inches.
A couple of cons with this (of course, its a $50 scope
):
the focusing dial is almost too easy to turn. Its position is a bit annoying (facing forward). The focusing has a bit of a weird spot in that at a certain point in focusing, the image will move a tad left or right (not sure why it does this or if its meant to do it) and you sometimes need to reposition slightly.
Anyhow that's my mini review of this el cheapo scope and as far as I'm concerned its definitely worth the $50. In any case if you don't like it, bring it back . (I'm keeping mine).
In the local flyer it shows the bushmaster (not the mini mac like it does online) and when I went to the store it was the bushmaster they had and not the celestron mini mac. In any case, I couldn't resist buying the bushmaster and trying it out since I knew I would have no trouble returning it if it turned out to be a dud. It is a 20-60x60 by the way. I took it up to the range today along with the $100 bushnell 15-45x50 that I already have. With the 15-45x50, its a decent little scope but I sometimes have trouble discerning 22 cal holes at 200 yards (as far as our range goes), especially if the holes are on a dark line or dark area on the target. Anyhow, I shot some targets with my .223 and set the 2 scopes up side by side for comparison. To make a long story short, I found the bushmaster took me in closer and the image was clearer than the bushnell. Keep in mind this isn't a big dollar scope but the difference was noticable and this scope does outperform the cheap bushnell. It does a decent job for what I want it for (.22 holes at 200 yrds) and for $50 how can you complain.
This scope comes with a very cheap carry bag (non padded) and cheap table top tripod (cheap but works ok). Its a 45 degree angle view through it but it has a nice feature in that you can swivel the scope inside the tripod mount (ring) so that you can make the 45 degree viewing angle at the top or at either side. It comes with a eyepiece rubber cap and a objective hard plastic cap that is connected to the scope and flips up out of the way. The objective end also has a small built in lens hood that extends out about 2 or so inches.
A couple of cons with this (of course, its a $50 scope
): the focusing dial is almost too easy to turn. Its position is a bit annoying (facing forward). The focusing has a bit of a weird spot in that at a certain point in focusing, the image will move a tad left or right (not sure why it does this or if its meant to do it) and you sometimes need to reposition slightly.
Anyhow that's my mini review of this el cheapo scope and as far as I'm concerned its definitely worth the $50. In any case if you don't like it, bring it back
. (I'm keeping mine).
Last edited:
- Location
- Alberta Free State
I picked up one of the $49.95 Bushmaster scopes at CTC on my way to the range.
Like Super7, I set it up side-by-side with a medium-grade Bushnell (60's vintage) spotter. I found the optical quality quite decent for spotting .22 hits at 200 yards. The scope was brighter than the Bushnell, and is about double the power of the one I've been using. The focus knob seems to be in kind of an odd location, but it works fine. The zoom works well and is repeatable. The rotary mounting of the barrel is quite clever. The attached flip-up cover seems sturdy, and the overall fit/finish of the scope seems quite decent.
The best thing you can say about the tripod is that it does, in fact, have three legs. The soft case is not padded, but for $50 I was surprised that it had any kind of case at all. These two downchecks are not dealbreakers.
I spent the afternoon working with this one, and I'm keeping it, although I will be using a different tripod.
I'm sure that the sniper/tac guys will laugh at this thing, and it's probably not designed to be dropped out of an aircraft, but it's a decent piece of kit for an afternoon at the range. For those shooting on the cheap, or for an occasional user, get one.
Like Super7, I set it up side-by-side with a medium-grade Bushnell (60's vintage) spotter. I found the optical quality quite decent for spotting .22 hits at 200 yards. The scope was brighter than the Bushnell, and is about double the power of the one I've been using. The focus knob seems to be in kind of an odd location, but it works fine. The zoom works well and is repeatable. The rotary mounting of the barrel is quite clever. The attached flip-up cover seems sturdy, and the overall fit/finish of the scope seems quite decent.
The best thing you can say about the tripod is that it does, in fact, have three legs. The soft case is not padded, but for $50 I was surprised that it had any kind of case at all. These two downchecks are not dealbreakers.
I spent the afternoon working with this one, and I'm keeping it, although I will be using a different tripod.
I'm sure that the sniper/tac guys will laugh at this thing, and it's probably not designed to be dropped out of an aircraft, but it's a decent piece of kit for an afternoon at the range. For those shooting on the cheap, or for an occasional user, get one.
Which CTC (location) did you go to?
punkrockboy
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Eastern Bantario!
I bought one of these a few weeks ago, my brother and I were using it for long-range gopher shooting in Alberta (long by my standards), it worked just fine for spotting shots out past 350 yards on gophers!!!
Get the raincheque, then!
- Location
- British Canuckistan
well, I bought one for the gits and shiggles of it. taking the bugger back. the mini-tripod had the altitude knob broken upon removal and then very quickly after, the internals of the slow-mo knob busted up. on top of that, not surprisingly the tripod was a piece of garbage.
the FOV the scope had is extremely tight and the only time the image was any good was when the magnification was at it's minimum. the image darkened so much to be intolerable and useless when you zoomed up to it's maximum. it's going back...
that said, the bag the package came into is very nice and would have been useful, had the equipment that accompanied it been worthwhile keeping.
on average, what would you say the weight of your spotting scope be? I'm curious to know, because there are several 80-100mm achromatic and ED telescopes that offer very good value (being I know their quality) for their price. I'm just not sure how well what hunters/outdoorsmen use would stack up against an astronomical device, or visa versa.
the FOV the scope had is extremely tight and the only time the image was any good was when the magnification was at it's minimum. the image darkened so much to be intolerable and useless when you zoomed up to it's maximum. it's going back...
that said, the bag the package came into is very nice and would have been useful, had the equipment that accompanied it been worthwhile keeping.
on average, what would you say the weight of your spotting scope be? I'm curious to know, because there are several 80-100mm achromatic and ED telescopes that offer very good value (being I know their quality) for their price. I'm just not sure how well what hunters/outdoorsmen use would stack up against an astronomical device, or visa versa.
