Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Putin, the new Ceasar. Veni,Vidi, Vici!
Joined
·
22,005 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anyone have some suggestions for a decent spotting scope for a decent price? Trying to stay under $150.

Been reading reviews, but I would rather hear some thoughts from shooters, not bird watchers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
884 Posts
For a 49 bux more, worth the stretch for one of these....
comparable to others at 2.5x it's price...
(just doesn't have "E glass")

Konus Spotting Scope 20-60x 80mm

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=466045

The tripod is cheap, and shows at 200yds +, but at 100 yds, easy to see .223 holes, and great for 30cal at 200-300 yds. And better served with a better tripod or mount.
It comes heavily recommended for the budget end by those shooting JCGarand matches.

I finally bought one, cause my old eyes aren't served well by the x45 power 25 year old (back then $75 spotting scope, now ~$125 quality scope) spotting scope..
And side by side, huge difference in clarity and brightness. As well as fine adjustment for focus and eye relief.

Mount wise... this is great, and use it with an adjustable quick squeeze clamp on the bench....
Nikon Window Mount Black #: 7070
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=356231

Next step up at 2.5X the price is the Kowa's.... again if you got the $$ recommended by the folks I know with the bux shooting the matches...
The CMP has a great deal on a Kowa at 280bux... other places have it at 440 bux, but too much of a stretch for me, stayed with the Konus with the sale price at MidwayUsa.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,908 Posts
If you can find a Celestron 52265 C90 Maksutov, I would grab one. It is now discontinued. I own one and it is a great scope. With interchangeable optics, you can spot .223 holes at greater distances than you can shoot on Long Island.

http://www.celestron.com/c3/product.php?ProdID=203
 

·
Uh-oh...
Joined
·
12,524 Posts
I would stay away from Celestron. I bought one in January, took it to Brookhaven once, and it would lose focus after every few shots.

Their customer service wouldn't warranty it, unless I paid a $40 or so processing fee. On something I had for about 100 days, and used once. Total scam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,107 Posts
I have a Celestron and have been very happy with it. I have had it for 2 - 3 years and absolutely no problems. It has very clear optics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,908 Posts
vmtcmt said:
I would stay away from Celestron. I bought one in January, took it to Brookhaven once, and it would lose focus after every few shots.

Their customer service wouldn't warranty it, unless I paid a $40 or so processing fee. On something I had for about 100 days, and used once. Total scam.
Not to hijack the thread here, but I am curious. What model scope was it? What distance were you using it for?
What was the temperature and weather conditions?
 

·
Uh-oh...
Joined
·
12,524 Posts
C65, 100 yards, perfect 70's sunny day. Focus adjustment was very sloppy, and would not hold. Scope was never dropped or abused in any way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts
Mad Russian said:
Anyone have some suggestions for a decent spotting scope for a decent price? Trying to stay under $150.

Been reading reviews, but I would rather hear some thoughts from shooters, not bird watchers.
What is the maximum distance you'll be using the scope for spotting?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,908 Posts
vmtcmt said:
C65, 100 yards, perfect 70's sunny day. Focus adjustment was very sloppy, and would not hold. Scope was never dropped or abused in any way.
I have to agree with you, the C65 was not one of there better ventures. I think the marketing on the product far outperformed the R&D. Therefore, the expectations of the consumers exceeded the ability of the scope.

I would not condem the entire Celestron line because of this product. Doing so would be the equivelt of refusing to drive a Corvette because of a bad experience with a Chevy Metro.
 

·
Uh-oh...
Joined
·
12,524 Posts
Johnc said:
I have to agree with you, the C65 was not one of there better ventures. I think the marketing on the product far outperformed the R&D. Therefore, the expectations of the consumers exceeded the ability of the scope.

I would not condem the entire Celestron line because of this product. Doing so would be the equivelt of refusing to drive a Corvette because of a bad experience with a Chevy Metro.
"Marketing... outperformed the R&D"? Sounds like deceptive practices. If the same thing happened with a firearm, or a car, I don't think that anyone would find that acceptable.

My problem with Celestron was mostly with their handling of the matter. I had the thing for less than 100 days, and they wanted almost as much as I paid for it for them to honor their "lifetime" warranty, plus I had to pay to ship it to them. Doesn't seem like the best customer service out there.

I don't know about you, but if I had a lemon Vette or a lemon Metro, I'd be pissed either way if I had to pay almost the value of the vehicle to have a manufacturers defect fixed under warranty before I had the first oil change. It just says a lot about the company.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top