Which Swarovski?

trophyboy · #1 01-19-2012, 11:21 AM

I have always wanted a Swarovski Spotting Scope. I have borrowed my brothers on occasion and have a couple cheaper ones of my own that work OK but they don't compare to a Swarovski and my eyes aren't getting any younger. I'm not interested in any other brands, it is Swaro all the way for me. I have narrowed my choices to the following: 65 Straight HD or 80 Straight HD. I do both truck window scouting and alot of hiking.

Which Swarovski should I buy?

Thanks!

#2 01-19-2012, 11:23 AM

65mm straight if you do a lot of hiking with it I'd say.

bdub · #3 01-19-2012, 11:26 AM

I would go with the straight as well. I've looked thru both and find the straight much easier to get lined up on what you are looking at.

BrownBear416 · #4 01-19-2012, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sheephunter

65mm straight if you do a lot of hiking with it I'd say.

x2

80mm for a truck scope..

ishootbambi · #5 01-19-2012, 11:33 AM

the way you hunt K, 65 straight is gonna work best i think. just much more compact to fit in a pack. which one does G have? youve carried it so should have a good idea already.

Drop_Tine · #6 01-19-2012, 12:28 PM

Fan of the 80 , dad has one and low light conditions its awesome, it is only 15mm bigger ! 80 has my vote !!!!

heretohunt · #7 01-19-2012, 12:35 PM

When you go to high end glass like that does the 80mm offer any real advantage? It has to be marginal doesn't it.
I can tell you for sure that the 65mm fits in the pack a lot better.

elkhunter11 · #8 01-19-2012, 12:52 PM

Quote:

When you go to high end glass like that does the 80mm offer any real advantage? It has to be marginal doesn't it.

The 80mm scope is brighter in low light conditions. My Kowa 88mm is brighter still, but it is more bulky.

heretohunt · #9 01-19-2012, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The 80mm scope is brighter in low light conditions. My Kowa 88mm is brighter still, but it is more bulky.

I haven't had the opportunity to put my 65mm swaro against the 80mm swaro in low light. I have heard from some that have tested the theory though and found that it is a marginal difference with high end glass. Is this true?

eric2381 · #10 01-19-2012, 03:25 PM

I agree with everybody about the 65mm for carrying, 80mm for outta the truck.

I love my STS 80 HD. Really nice to look through. If you're using it outta the truck window get the Swarovski window mount as well. It's a great piece.

bdub · #11 01-19-2012, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdub

I would go with the straight as well. I've looked thru both and find the straight much easier to get lined up on what you are looking at.

Sorry I read the post wrong. Thought you were asking angled eyepiece or straight. For packing lighter is definitely better.

elkhunter11 · #12 01-19-2012, 04:17 PM

Quote:

I haven't had the opportunity to put my 65mm swaro against the 80mm swaro in low light. I have heard from some that have tested the theory though and found that it is a marginal difference with high end glass. Is this true?

When the light fades, and you are using the higher magnifications, the difference is noticeable. However, whether the difference is worth the extra cost and bulk for your uses, is up to you. I chose my 88mm scope, because for my uses, it is worth the money. I have used both the 65mm, and 80mm Swarovski, and if I had to purchase a Swarovski, it would be the 80mm HD.

As far as eyepieces, I found that it took a bit of time to adapt to the angled eyepiece, but now I prefer it for most uses.

packhuntr · #13 01-19-2012, 05:56 PM

Kelly, what ever you go with make sure to stop over and have a look at my Manfrotto mounts. Multiple systems and cannot be beat. The spotting scope lock's are a MUST. No matter the scenario, good glass is only as good as its supported and ran.

harv3589 · #14 01-19-2012, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packhuntr

Kelly, what ever you go with make sure to stop over and have a look at my Manfrotto mounts. Multiple systems and cannot be beat. The spotting scope lock's are a MUST. No matter the scenario, good glass is only as good as its supported and ran.

There is better, its called Really Right Stuff....far superior mounts being that they area an Acra-style mounting system. Same for their ball heads, you want a really light super tough ball head look at their BH-25. I have one of these on my Gitzo Mountaineer tripod and its a great package.

This is the ball head with a lever clamp or you can get it with a screw clamp...as seen here its 7.2oz

And their plates to go into the lever clamp on the ball head above...this is 2oz

creeky · #15 01-19-2012, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harv3589

There is better, its called Really Right Stuff....far superior mounts being that they area an Acra-style mounting system. Same for their ball heads, you want a really light super tough ball head look at their BH-25. I have one of these on my Gitzo Mountaineer tripod and its a great package.

This is the ball head with a lever clamp or you can get it with a screw clamp...as seen here its 7.2oz

And their plates to go into the lever clamp on the ball head above...this is 2oz

All what Harv said, got their ballheads, plates, nodal pano kit & use em on my spot scope & cameras. RRS owner is a precision quality design freak!

Mulestalker · #16 01-19-2012, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heretohunt

When you go to high end glass like that does the 80mm offer any real advantage? It has to be marginal doesn't it.
I can tell you for sure that the 65mm fits in the pack a lot better.

Totally agree, I've been using the 65mm for several years now, have packed that thing hundreds of miles and to be honest would not want anything bigger or heavier,mind you my pack always contains my frotto,video and still camera...
I had the 65 and 80 side by side and really don't think its worth the extra $$, guess it comes down to your budget.

I have the Badlands 2200 pack and my 65 fits snug in my side bat wing pouch,otherside my Frotto...

J.B. · #17 01-19-2012, 10:42 PM

so whats the actual weight difference between the 65 and 80? im legally blind so my eyes need all the help they can get but love backpacking...its gotta be a matter of ounces no?

heretohunt · #18 01-20-2012, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mulestalker

Totally agree, I've been using the 65mm for several years now, have packed that thing hundreds of miles and to be honest would not want anything bigger or heavier,mind you my pack always contains my frotto,video and still camera...
I had the 65 and 80 side by side and really don't think its worth the extra $$, guess it comes down to your budget.

I have the Badlands 2200 pack and my 65 fits snug in my side bat wing pouch,otherside my Frotto...

It wasn't a budget issue, it was a space and weight issue in the pack. I also have the badlands 2200 pack as my day or short trip pack. I am currently looking for a quality light weight tripod, plus of course it must be compact.

bowtech3006 · #19 01-21-2012, 09:26 AM

Hey I see your lookin towards hd. A friend I guided with guided a rep from Swarovski & the rep told him ' hd only improves picture quality through the scope, your human eye can't see the diffrence' I own a 65 mm angled head, Imo angled is superior for two reasons....
When it's cold & you breath looking through a straight your breath rises & condenses right onto the lens. No issue with the angled head.
If you go sheep/mountain hunting deep & your cutting weight wherever possible you can sit an angled head on a bag of rice/peas on a rock or your pack and still comfortably look down into it. Every oz counts & cutting a tripod is not a huge issue when u sport angled. As for going 80 mm I think it's overrated IMO because anything you spot in twilight that's in a range for you to make a play on, your gonna see w the 65. Yeah u might see a ram on another mountain right before dark/after twilight.... but it's just gonna be a ram, through a 65 or 80(I've looked through both at twighlight, not guessing here). All your doin is locating in those hours. Real assessment takes better light to be sure or getting closer. I'd rather close w less weight so when I kill I'm as light as possible to pack out. Of course all IMO. & totally irrelevant if your truck hunting.

trophyboy · #20 01-21-2012, 10:03 PM

Thanks for all the help guys as it helped alot in making my decision. Looks like the it's going to be the 65. Come to think of it my brother's 80 was a bit on the heavy/bulky side in my pack.

209x50 · #21 01-22-2012, 07:12 AM

65 straight no question for me. I've had both and there was never a time where the larger scope made the difference.

Mountain Guy · #22 01-22-2012, 08:43 AM

This is simple.
Get both

Mountain Guy · #23 01-22-2012, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heretohunt

It wasn't a budget issue, it was a space and weight issue in the pack. I also have the badlands 2200 pack as my day or short trip pack. I am currently looking for a quality light weight tripod, plus of course it must be compact.

You use walking sticks?
I use 2 mono pods for sticks, then mount my spotter on one stick and use the other as a support.
Haven't tried it yet, but got a bogpod bi and gonna try the same thing but with this senario it would work more like a tripod and be more stable and free standing. Probably need a dry run to see how the bipod would work as a walking stick. Might feel like a lead rod after 6 hrs or so.