Thoughts on Leupold compact spotters

[tribb]

I have a need for a compact sporting scope and have zero experience using one. I would use it for judging game animals and antlers out to a mile in some instances and turkey spurs out to 300 plus yards. To much for one unit to cover? unreasonable expectations? I don't know! My most powerful rifle scope is 24 power! I've looked at the Leupold, vortex, Pentax, Swarovski (ouch) and a few other spotters on line. I'm not interested in breaking the bank on this. All info and your input is welcome. Thanks Tribb

 

[dfanonymous]

Then don't get one.

Rifle scopes are not observation devices primarily. Its primary role is as a telescopic sight. A sight. There is or rather imo there should be a priority on mechanical accuracy, reticle accuracy and durability, and only after that, then consider glass quality.


A spotting scope on the other hand really only has one role. Observe things. See things. Spot things.
You absolutely, primarily, want to consider glass quality. That's its function.

As to the leupold. I've had personally as well a in the military had the mk4 spotter. This was for a reason that was exceptional to what I just said,as that spotter had a reticle in it for being an actual spotter. Like in a sniper team. I can tell you the 60mm you won't be counting tines at a mile with that.

My advice: Consider Kowa or something in that quality range and spend time saving for those distances.

 

[Tiny Tim]

Following.

 

[marksman1941]

I've gone the budget route and for detail work you need to spend the money. Plain and simple. A leupold compact spotter won't get you there, and a budget full size won't. I have a Athlon Argos 20-60x80, and it's good for finding bears in a berry patch at 800 yards. But you're not counting brow times at 1600 with it.

 

[Antique001]

I'd go with the Razor 56mm. Seems to get positive reviews for a little spotter at that price point, especially if you can find one discounted. I have the Kowa 554, but the little Razor is intriguing.... center clarity is comparable with a bit wider FOV.

 

[mongo4567]

I have one of the larger Leupold compact spotters 15-30×50. It is great for its size, but i don't see antler identification at a mile. It sounds like you need something much bigger and more expensive. I hunt on a managed property and we need to distinguish broken tines from culls. I would need a lot more than 30 power for anything over 600 yards.

 

[badseed]

For how you describe your use of the spotter and the distances I think that you could do well with an Athlon Ares 15-45x65 and not break the bank. They are compact and have good glass for the price. Obviously they are not on par with the kowa or swaros but people generally seem to rank them close to the razors. They used to be cheaper until people started realizing their actual value then the retail price seemed to climb but you can still find good used units in the classifieds. Here is a video from a years ago where a bunch of spotters where reviewed and compared. It really boils down to how much you want to spend.

 

[xsn10s]

I scan with binos, aim with my scope. For judging trophies I'd use a top tier spotting scope. I'm not really a trophy hunter anymore, but for that job you cannot beat a top tier spotting scope. My two cents from the peanut gallery.

 

[biednick]

You're not going to get what you want from a small, $600 scope. I definitely wouldn't go with the LCS. They're good, but not great. A Razor might be okay, but I think it'd be iffy and your success would be dependant on lighting based on my experience spotting to a mile at a shooting range. Some of the fancy European glass is probably the best option for what you want to do, but it's too rich for my blood so I can't offer a reccomendation there.

Spotting scopes are a place where you get what you pay for, and the more you want out of a scope the more you'll have to pay. Bigger scopes are generally better optically too. All else being equal a larger objective will give you a brighter scope and higher resolution.

 

[Mickp7]

Since you mentioned you have no experience with a spotting scope, I think I can explain what you will get with a budget based scope... it leaves you constantly wanting as you look through it. Wanting to get better clarity/ resolution, more zoom, etc.

Packable vs full-size spotting scopes require similar trade-offs.

I used a low-mid tier Leupold for a while, then upgraded to the Kowa TSN-99. We spend a lot of time behind it and, after learning my lessons from a lesser scope, I wanted the best I could find in clarity and resolution.

I prefer the angle eye piece as well for comfort.

 

[wyosteve]

Buy once, cry once-get the Swaro!

 

[BCC72]

I have a LW Leupold spotter and a larger Maven Spotter.
I use the Maven for scouting and then when I know what's in an area, take the LW Leupold in the pack.
It's great for what it is and how I use it. I tried some 15x Binos for a year and went back to the Small spotter. That's just personal choice. The 15x binos were great for looking for detail in heavy timber at closer ranges but the weight and size of them didn't justify carrying them.

 

[crashlanding]

Any decent spotter over $1000 will get you seeing things, but a Swarovski will get you examining things. Worth the money? Yes

 

[TontoDean]

I agree with Wyoming Steve. I also have the buy once/cry once philosophy.
I have the smallest Swaro and it easily fits in my pack. It has saved me more than
once when the guide's spotter either failed or was wanting for clarity.

Quality cost. So, save your nickels a while longer.