Spotting scope

slightly off topic, but is the spotting scope absolutely necessary for starting off in f-class?. From the little I have gleaned from the internet, the spotting scope is used for scoring, but does everyone need one on the line.?
 
jasonburnsdundee said:
slightly off topic, but is the spotting scope absolutely necessary for starting off in f-class?. From the little I have gleaned from the internet, the spotting scope is used for scoring, but does everyone need one on the line.?
Click to expand...
I guess you could, but this would mean fewer persons, doing all the scoring.
A heated scoring dispute could arise over this very issue. Not good, and even worse, say at the Nationals at Connaught, or otherwise.
Not possible when everyone on the berm has to shoot and leaves room for error.
And to add, the extra eyestrain on fewer people, versus everyone in turn.
Not practical in my meager experience.

Now if you said some kind of electronic scoring system, like the Europeans have for 300 meter ISSF?
Well, that is something else now isn't it?? ;)
 
Could someone break the tie. I have one saying yes a spotting scope is pretty much a necessity and another saying that it is a nice to have. Could someone help a nutz out.
 
F Class.... spend your dollars for optics FIRST on the best rifle scope you can afford.
You don't need a spotter to start out. Some use spotting scope pointed and focused at flags to watch conditions while ON the line and to watch match when OFF the line.
Once you have a rifle scope that will do the job,then you might consider a spotter.
Gord
 
I shot F-Class for years without a spotting scope. A good quality rifle scope like a Leupold or Nightforce has plenty of power and resolving power for everything you need.

I do use a spotting scope now because I focus it half way to the target to get a better idea of what mirage is doing down range.

Need to have? Definitely not.
 
GT, you have an interesting problem.

To SEE with clarity that far out, you need/want great glass and that costs money. The Pentax 80ED with a good eyepiece (Pentax makes some of the best) is pretty much your best bang for the buck in a new scope. The eyepiece will cost more then your budget alone.

However, there is no spotting scope that is going to see bullets holes that far out. See horns on an animal, sure. Holes as small as/smaller then a fly with any degree of mirage - not going to happen.

To see MIRAGE, you actually want mediocre glass with basic coatings. I am going to be testing a Celestron for this purpose.

New gen scopes like the Sightron SIII's see through mirage amazingly well. The glass/coatings are less affected by the mirage distortion - don't ask the science behind it cause I don't know.

NF also shares some of these traits and it is not uncommon to hear some shooters say they can't see the mirage at all. That has also been my experience.

These coatings make AIMING so much easier cause the target is much clearer and not bouncing around as much.

Now I am not saying you can't see mirage with these scopes, you can but not as well as other scopes. But with these, you have more issues AIMING

This is where your spotting scope comes in (talking from a perspective of F class to also answer the question above). Set up to see CONDITIONS not the target ( the scope has that covered). Gives you another view of the world to help you dope the winds.

You may not even be looking at the target. NOTE: this is the first year that I will be competing with a spotting scope.

FLAGS LIE. Mirage usually gives a better indication of what is going on until wind gets too fast.

So $300 can or cannot be enough budget.

Jerry
 
May I suggest that Gords's advice be taken, as he is the Canadian F(O) champ and is known on and off the range for knowledgeable advise. Charlie Bayne, a great rifle shot, told me to pay attention to the winners. I have, but guess I have to pay more attention!

Regards,

Peter
 
You F Class dudes certainly know your stuff. :D

Now I'm putting on my Precision Rifle 'Hat' and remembering what a spotter's role is for his/her sniper partner. ;)

This is my current baby: http://www.burrisoptics.com/xts2575spot.html

For the price of under $ 300 (give or take), it fits really well inside my rucksack (my self esteem cannot handle the soldiers ridiculing my golf cart and rucksack, so I try to travel light). I can see the mirage really well and spot the flight (trace) of my partner's bullet really well. The rubber coating is sweet and handy. The rubber caps are easy to work with in a hurry (Your prep time begins now...) ! :D

I know it ain't no KOWA or Swarovski or Zeiss, but it works for me and my sniper partner!;)


Yes, I would love to buy a Kowa but that will never happen when I've got a mortgage and kids in post secondary! So for now, the Falcon Menace will sit on top of my sniper rig and this Burris XTS 2575 will remain in my ruck! The price point certainly works for me!

Even the colour is somewhat helpful to the LCV (look cool value) and matches my CADPAT 64' pattern ruck bag from Wheeler in NB, out east. My self esteem is intact now. ;) ha ha ha

GT: Buy what works for you and your budget!

:cheers:

Barney
 
To see mirage, you want a scope with excellent resolution, minimal chromatic aberration and WIDE field. I tried the Celestron thing when I just wanted a scope for score keeping, and crappy narrow grainy images dont render mirage anything close to what a high-quality scope will do.

I spent too many years in the the field and the darkroom with Schneider, Leitz and Nikkor lenses. I am an optical snob.
 
I have a 65mm Pentax 45 degree with a wide angle 20x eyepiece. I can see 13 targets wide at 900m. It is about 12" long and easily fits in my bag with my stand. It can see holes that most 60x scopes can't just because of the excellent optics. The eyepiece is also used on their celestial scopes and is an impressive piece of glass. I looked at a lot of more expensive scopes but one look through this one convinced me.
 
Agreed. I have a PF80ED and a 14mm eyepiece (37X magnification) and we did a side-by-side comparison last year at the Frosty Farky. It was superior to the Kowa in contrast and fringe resolution, it was as good as a Swarovsky (I thought the contrast was better) , it was superior to the Leica APO 77.

It is hard to do a line pair test on a spotting scope, but I do have critical eye and the Pentax is a superlaitive piece of kit.
 
If you use eyeglasses, be very careful about the eyepiece you buy. MANY have zippo for eye relief and you will be driving your glasses into the eyepiece and still not see much.

Pentax fixed, and Leica had lots of eye relief. Kowa had some that was easy to use, others not so much. Nikon, Swarovski, and smaller Pentax variable suck.

Personally, I found the Leica spotter to be the best for my eyes. Swaro was really nice but with no eye relief, not useable for me. Pentax was the best of the affordable spotters and why I have recommended it for several years.

That is why it is so important to check optics out yourself. At this level of good, it is you that will decide the subtleties that make you warm and fuzzy.

There are also a number of spotters in the $700 that really are way over priced cause their optics and mechanicals don't work. Test as many for yourself as possible.

Rating for spotting scopes are constantly changing so the rankings will also change from model year to model year. The one thing that is happening is the steady drop in price of very useable optics.

some is currency, mostly it is the outsourcing of glass and chassis/assembly. The newest factories are all in locations we usually don't connect with top level gear.

The best will continue to cost alot of money but for many people, they can get 90% performance for a fraction of this cost.

Jerry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom