OT: spotting scope

I'm pretty sure I could see .22 holes at 100 yards with my Burris Landmark 15 - 45X 60mm scope. I can certainly see small screwheads (drywall screws) at about 150 to 200 yards. They claim they can see bullet holes (of unspecified caliber) at 1000 yards with the 20 - 60X 80mm model under ideal conditions. These scopes are under $200, a bit more if you get it with (optional) hardcase and tripod. The case is OK, I think the tripod is marginal.

The Nikon is a very nice scope if you don't mind the price. I didn't look at a Celestron.

No scope can overcome mirage and atmospherics. If you have a lot of turbulence between you and the target, as with hot ground or over water, your resolution will be degraded with any scope.

According to Chuck Sherwood :

Hmm ... I don't know the particular Celestron you mention, but you should know that astronomical scopes (which is what Mine is -- perhaps about 127mm diameter optics -- not sure of the focal length) tend to provide inverted images -- unless you add some optics between the scope and the eyepiece (called an inverting prism) to invert the image. This could be rather confusing, as a hit at about 5:00 o'clock would look as though it had hit at about 11:00 o'clock.

Enjoy, DoN.

Hmm. Weren't you the one who discovered that you were atmospherics limited when spotting out over water at....

Oh, never mind.

Jim

Yup! That's why I said it. Oh! My experiments with the Burris were not limited to over water. I was spotting the screwheads on a yonder mailbox over land on a cool day with low humidity.

You wouldn't have a problem if you had listened to your mother and stopped doing that...you DID go blind!

Celestron also makes spotting scopes, which have an erect image. See

Since you are a Clestron owner, what is your opinion of celestron optics?

Get a copy of the Sept.,05 American Rifleman magazine and read the article on optical resolution and the methods of testing and calculation. It is the best article on the subject I have ever read. Once you understand what you need ( I think you will be surprised) go to

read the reviews of spotting scopes there. It is a bird watcher site, and bird watchers are absolute fanatics about quality optics, resolution being one of the major requirements. Finally, remember that good and cheap are mutually exclusive in optics

Randy

Interesting site. Thanks

so true...

I gave my wife a Celestron several years ago, mainly for her interest in bird watching. We have the image inverter and two or three eyepieces for different magnification. I think the optics are pretty darn good since we are invariably limited by atmospherics even when looking at Jupiter's moons.

Ted

Also check out

Ted

I did some reading on the birdwatchers web site. Celestron is mentioned but not very much. Looks like the birdwatchers like very high end stuff by the references to Nikon, zeiss and Tel vue. One of their prime considerations is size too and they don't care much for the big scopes. This has probably discouraged me from buying a 100mm scope because it probably is too heavy for most tripods.

cs

When I started looking I was convinced that I needed an 80mm 60x scope. I figured that an average 100mm scope was probably better than an above average 80mm or 60mm scope so I figured that 100m celestron spotting scope at $279 might be a good choice. Now I have doubts.

I did a little calculation based on 100 yard range. A 60x scope makes the target look like it 5 feet away (300ft/60)=5. A 45x scope makes the target look like it is 6.6 feet away. I was surprised to find that the higher power didn't really bring the target that much closer. So I wonder if a good 45x 60mm scope might do the job.

However I talked to a friend who tried out several scopes in the 300 dollar range and he returned them and eventually settled on an 82mm Kowa. He claims that most of the scopes he sees at the match shoots are Kowa and after reading the birdwatching article it seems they are well respected there too. One of the scopes he tried and returned was an 80mm winchester. Now I don't know if the winchester is an average scope or not, but based on its price, it average or below aveage. I guess the bottom line is that good optics are not cheap. I just don't have 1k in my budget for a Kowa.

chuck

I don't know how the Burris Landmark (

Lots of shooters with big bucks have traded in their older 77 mm Kowas to get the 82 mm models. There is a web site frequented by shooters that has good prices in general, and he used to occasionally have 77 mm Kowas for sale that had been traded in.

Also, look into the new Konus scopes he carries.

Doug White

If you are going to have to spend a couple of hundred bucks a wireless TV camera/monitor setup might be nice. Set the camera behind a suitable barrier at the impact area and the monitor at the firing line. I know of a thousand yard range (between two mountains) and they are very happy. Setups with hundred yard ranges are getting pretty cheap. Bury a coax and it might get a lot cheaper 8o).

I have a Celestron 8" - or a 2000 mm fl scope. I have taken many deep space picture - tracking and such. I have many lenses of various designs - the newer design concept are brighter. The Ortho (old design and dim IIRC) are usable in daylight, but limit itself in nebulae.

I have always liked the quality. I don't know the recent quality, but there is keen competition in that field and they work to be at or near the top.

Martin Martin Eastburn @ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net NRA LOH, NRA Life NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder

Ted Edwards wrote:

100 is to big for a tripod ?!?! - I have dual 80's in my binoculars. Those are mostly on a tripod. I naturally put my 2000 on a tripod.

It seems to me that you mean a telescope or spotting scope on a camera tripod.

My spotting scope has it's own tripod. Short and near the ground. (right Gunner !)

Martin Martin Eastburn @ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net NRA LOH, NRA Life NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder

Chuck Sherwood wrote:

High end scopes offer superior color correction. I doubt this is too important on the target range.

According to Chuck Sherwood :

O.K. So that eliminates my caveat.

Well ... I inherited it when a friend died who had owned it. And the seeing in the Washington DC vicinity is quite poor -- except on days too cold to want to be out there with it -- so I've not used it much as a scope. If I ever break down and move back to where I grew up -- in the dry part of South Texas, I expect to get a lot more use out of it.

But it came with an adaptor to the Nikon-F lens mount, and I got a few interesting photos with it mounted directly on the camera. The image quality seemed to be better than my 500mm f8 Nikon mirror lens. The major nuisance was that it took forever to get it into focus. (Of course, a Questar would take at least as long.

I really should hang it on my Nikon D70 and see what I can do with it now.

Enjoy, DoN.