Vortex Razor HD 27-60x85 Spotting Scope @ max zoom quality

L

luckey

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Hi, anyone has the Vortex Razor HD 27-60x85 Spotting Scope (Angled-Viewing)? wonder if you could kindly post a picture with it set @ max zoom?

I am comparing it with the nightforce TS-82 which is twice the cost. Just wonder how much real world difference there is to justify the price difference. Thanks!
 
I had both, both angled.

Nightforce was a bit nicer overall. Here and there, small things. A bit better glass. Focus ring, objective cap, overall plastic just a tiny notch better. But Vortex was just fine.

If you notice the price difference and it matters to you - buy Vortex, you won't go wrong. It is 95% of what Nightforce is. If I had to buy one of the two again - I would buy Vortex, I probably would not buy Nightforce again. If I had to choose one for free - Nightforce is nicer no argument.

PS
If you care so much about the glass, Nightforce TS-82 is in fact Meopta MeoStar S2 82, just a different body style. Meopta actually makes these nightforces, internally they are same. But last time I've checked MeoStars are cheaper than Nightforces. Just a note.
 
Thanks Owlowl. What was the longest distance you used your vortex? I will use it mainly for watching bullet holes on paper at 300 meters now, but may try up to 1000 yard once I am good enough for that.
 
You won't see holes at 1000 with ANY optic. Mirage gets too strong. If it was possible to reliably resolve hits on paper at 1000 with any optical setup, F-class would not have spotting disks and moving target frames.

I never used both over 300, but with a high visibility target I bet you can do 400-500 meters. There is also a difference between "ok I can kinda see the hole if I really try" and "oh easy I see it right away". I think there is no situation where Vortex could not resolve, but Nighforce could. This is not that big a difference in performance between the two, weather and air condition are way bigger factors.

The best "hits on paper" thing for the long range would be target camera actually. Yet it's completely different topic.
 
There were plenty of times I could not see bullet holes at 400m and at 500m at our range in Southern AB using a $4000+ Leica 82 Televid. I now use a bullseye target camera, and sold the Leica.
 
I have made out bullet holes at 500m - in perfect light - with my Pentax 80ED but usually most optics will find it heavy sledding out past 300m or so. I've recently gone to the Bullseye camera system and it is very nice !
 
great. thanks guys! I think I will try the vortex first as I am still @ 300 max. for the bullseye camera, technically it's great. on the back of my head though, I am always thinking about the possibility somebody could put a bullet, or more in it, like the traditional chrono. lol... that's why I got a labradar.
 
Thanks. This is exactly what I am thinking right now. just bought a razor hd on optics planet. didn't know they could haggle over the chat. knock some dollars off, got free phone skope accessories and free standard shipping. can't beat that! lol...

Crashman said:
I use the Vortex Razor out to 4-500 yards, depending on caliber, then switch to a Bullseye camera system after that.
Click to expand...
 
Tomochan said:
I have made out bullet holes at 500m - in perfect light - with my Pentax 80ED but usually most optics will find it heavy sledding out past 300m or so. I've recently gone to the Bullseye camera system and it is very nice !
Click to expand...

Does the Pentax have magnesium body? My Trijicon is fairly lightweight.
 
owlowl said:
You won't see holes at 1000 with ANY optic. Mirage gets too strong. If it was possible to reliably resolve hits on paper at 1000 with any optical setup, F-class would not have spotting disks and moving target frames.

I never used both over 300, but with a high visibility target I bet you can do 400-500 meters. There is also a difference between "ok I can kinda see the hole if I really try" and "oh easy I see it right away". I think there is no situation where Vortex could not resolve, but Nighforce could. This is not that big a difference in performance between the two, weather and air condition are way bigger factors.

The best "hits on paper" thing for the long range would be target camera actually. Yet it's completely different topic.
Click to expand...

you see ,people are buying bullseye camera system , not knowing that you developed a better camera system with high resolution camera and state of the art software.
so hurry up ,our fellow sportsmen need a well build camera system made in Canada !
Hurry UP !
 
I have not had much issue seeing 6.5mm holes in paper at 600m with my swarovzki 80HD. I bought it used for $2400 from a fellow sheep hunter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom