My main question is for the money I’m gonna spend do I get a spotter or binoculars? I currently just purchased a vortex radian tripod and am looking to upgrade my glass from my current Vortex Diamondback 10x42. Main use will be PRS, heard a lot of talk about Binoculars being the new go to glass. Problem is I’m not gonna spend $1500, I wanna be around $750 if it’s worth it. I was thinking about buying the 15x56 Vortex Diamondbacks ($350). I don’t know how much better glass gets because I have only ever owned the diamondbacks. Let me know!
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Spotters Binoculars or spotter
- Thread starter Kaveman44
- Start date
If you're only going to get one, go with binos. You can find some 10x Leica's around $1,000.
Best for your money is to put it in a piggy bank and use other folks' glass spotting at a match. After some time behind good and bad binos, you can go put half down on a decent pair of 10x or 12x.
How good are the Bushnell Forge? They are $500-$600, i’m never going to spend $2500 , not that I can’t
You asked... are you listening?
Experienced shooters are are responding to your question telling you that 10x or 12x quality binos are better than budget 15x.
I agree with them. I just sold my 15x binos for high quality 10×50 Steiners. Definitely the way to go.
I've got a *lot* of time behind the Forge 15s. They were good enough at the first AG cup for me to clearly tell someone was shooting the Magnetospeed T1000 reflector on a target at 1060 yards and not the target itself, plus tens of thousands of other rounds I have watched go down range at PRS matches, training, shooting, etc. People like to shit on Bushnell, but I think you'd be very happy with the 15x Forge binos.
Binos 100%
Euro Optic demo is your friend. Picked up a pair a Zeiss Victory RF 10x42’s Binos for like $2k.
Leica Trinovid HD 10x42mm Full Size Like New Demo Binoculars 40319
Leica Trinovid HD 10x42mm Full Size Binoculars. 40319 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
Cameraland New York also does awesome demos. Got Leica 3000s for 2kBinos 100%
Euro Optic demo is your friend. Picked up a pair a Zeiss Victory RF 10x42’s Binos for like $2k.
Leica Trinovid HD 10x42mm Full Size Like New Demo Binoculars 40319
Leica Trinovid HD 10x42mm Full Size Binoculars. 40319 | Only at EuroOptic.com!www.eurooptic.com
Always our pleasure to assist and discuss options. Right now is a great time to call while we are running our Off to iCast - Call in for Great Sale Pricing
Thanks guys. Today is the last day of iCast. Flying home tonight and I’ll be in the store all day tomorrow. Call Neil or Joel today, 516-217-1000, and they will hook you up or give me a call tomorrow
Thanks for all the support we receive, it is greatly appreciated.
Thanks for all the support we receive, it is greatly appreciated.
You don't want 15x.
The whole reason behind the binos is the field of view and lack of mirage. A good pair of 10x42 will outdo a cheap 15x50 all day every day.
I run a 20-60x85 spotter and 10x42 Zulu 5 binos. The binos do a majority of the work. The spotter isn't used a whole lot, and when it is used I rarely take it above 30x. There is a reason the 12-40x gold ring is still so popular after all these years.
Bushnell Forge 15x is GTG. Much prefer them over my Razor HD spotter, power needs to go lower on the spotter. 15x Is enough at any PRS distance I have encountered, 20x and above on many spotters is too much, FOV is too small to watch multiple targets.
As some have said above I'd hunt sales and demo's for some European or Japanese glass. Brands that you normally wouldn't think of like Mavin, Meopta, and Kowa are worth looking at. Do your homework though as I believe these companies like a lot of others do the high (Japanese or European) low (Chinese) quality lines. You're in that middle ground where imo you're looking to spend more than I would on Chinese glass but not enough for Euro or Japanese.
Leica Trinovid BCA 10x are very very good for the $$.
Lightweight and priced well. Sitting on a game changer on a tripod small and light don't matter
Lightweight and priced well. Sitting on a game changer on a tripod small and light don't matter
Personally had good luck with my 8x42 Forges. I’ve spotted .22 splashes in tall grass at 500. Really nice spotting 22 PRS out to 250. Multiple targets in the field of view at one time is nice.
ETA. I’ve also been looking at the Bushnell Engage EDX 12x50. Looks to be the same glass as the Forge.
ETA. I’ve also been looking at the Bushnell Engage EDX 12x50. Looks to be the same glass as the Forge.
Did the indicator go off and if so did that count as a hit?
at the last match I was at one of the stages was DQed cause the last squad had the indicator for off with the round clearly hitting feet away
That happens when people don't set the correct sensitivity
12x binos all day over budget 15x
But I will say. A quality spotter is nice too...on occasion. But a budget spotter like the Bushnell legend isn't more than a paper weight
Yes, it went off. No, it didn't count - I could clearly tell the hits were not on steel. Video replay backed it up, as did inspection of the reflector after the match. The other shooter that hit the reflector (and knocked it off) got the same treatment, as well.
Would the ones that say don’t get 15x , get 15x if they were Swarovski SLC 15x56?
I opted for SIG kilo 3000bdx's. A little more than a standard bino, but the range finder and kestrel connectivity mean there's one less thing I have to carry.
Bino's definitely.
How much you want to spend is up to you, but I have a pair of mid-priced 10x56 Kowa's, and besides those, at matches (since every body in a squad tends to share and look through whomever's rig you're closest to) I end up looking through everything from high-end Swaro's to low-end Athlon's and so far still feel perfectly fine about my Kowa's.
Unless you plan on always using your tripod, for handheld binos I wouldn't go higher than 10x, unless you think it'll be fun to make yourself motion sick hahaha.
That being said, if I were going to bring and use tripod every time, always, I'd go straight to 15x binos and wouldn't even fuck around with 10x/12x no matter how nice a pair you get. At 10x I can find targets and watch for impacts/splash as well as gather some wind info, but it's not really similar to looking downrange at targets like you would through your scope when on the gun... However, 15x binos on a steady tripod is a different deal entirely, reminds me a lot of looking through my scope like I'm on the gun, and looks more similar/familiar/valuable to me. I tend to feel like that "picture" you get is more valuable, because when another guy from your squad is up, you're seeing nearly the same thing he is, and I think it's an advantage because once it's your turn to shoot, it won't be the first time you see the targets in the same scale as they appear at a magnification similar to what most of us actually run when engaging them.
FWIW, I spent a good amount of time looking through a pair of 15x Bushnell Forge's that belonged to someone in my squad at K&M a couple weeks back, and they were fine IMO, I never felt like I was missing out on anything I needed to see due to their glass letting me down. I'm going to have to disagree with the guys who said better glass and lower mag > okish glass at 15x. I say get the best ones you can afford, but it's not as important as one's scope or as some make it out to be.
IDK any guys complaining about not finishing higher up the list at matches due to them running "shitty" Forge's or whatever vs fancy $$$ binos. I DO know quite a few guys who kinda suck at shooting and need to put in some real work, rather than just feeling like they're better than other guys just because their gear cost a lot of money.
How much you want to spend is up to you, but I have a pair of mid-priced 10x56 Kowa's, and besides those, at matches (since every body in a squad tends to share and look through whomever's rig you're closest to) I end up looking through everything from high-end Swaro's to low-end Athlon's and so far still feel perfectly fine about my Kowa's.
Unless you plan on always using your tripod, for handheld binos I wouldn't go higher than 10x, unless you think it'll be fun to make yourself motion sick hahaha.
That being said, if I were going to bring and use tripod every time, always, I'd go straight to 15x binos and wouldn't even fuck around with 10x/12x no matter how nice a pair you get. At 10x I can find targets and watch for impacts/splash as well as gather some wind info, but it's not really similar to looking downrange at targets like you would through your scope when on the gun... However, 15x binos on a steady tripod is a different deal entirely, reminds me a lot of looking through my scope like I'm on the gun, and looks more similar/familiar/valuable to me. I tend to feel like that "picture" you get is more valuable, because when another guy from your squad is up, you're seeing nearly the same thing he is, and I think it's an advantage because once it's your turn to shoot, it won't be the first time you see the targets in the same scale as they appear at a magnification similar to what most of us actually run when engaging them.
FWIW, I spent a good amount of time looking through a pair of 15x Bushnell Forge's that belonged to someone in my squad at K&M a couple weeks back, and they were fine IMO, I never felt like I was missing out on anything I needed to see due to their glass letting me down. I'm going to have to disagree with the guys who said better glass and lower mag > okish glass at 15x. I say get the best ones you can afford, but it's not as important as one's scope or as some make it out to be.
IDK any guys complaining about not finishing higher up the list at matches due to them running "shitty" Forge's or whatever vs fancy $$$ binos. I DO know quite a few guys who kinda suck at shooting and need to put in some real work, rather than just feeling like they're better than other guys just because their gear cost a lot of money.
Last edited:
Easy then: buy the best 15x binos you can afford that still leaves enough left over for an Eberlestock (IMO that's one area where you really have to go a little Gucci, but you'll appreciate it, your tripod and other shit doesn't carry itself from stage to stage
).I just got the R3 UpRanger, and haven't used it at a match yet, but I can already tell that it's going to be awesome, and a huge upgrade over the pack I was using (Oakley Link MilTac 2.0, too small, too flimsy, cool pack though).
Since I'd never bought Eberlestock anything (and they're not exactly cheap), last match I asked a few guys with Eberlestock packs what they thought of theirs, and/or what I should get?, and 2 of the guys were running other models which looked pretty cool but both said if they had a "do over" they'd get the UpRanger, one of them had an UpRanger and said he loved it and would buy the same thing again if he had to. So even though I didn't really get to check his out, I ordered one, and it seems like it'll be pretty bad-ass as a match pack... everything having it's own spot and not having to dig for shit will be so much better.
I bought their "Sidewinder" rifle case too which works with the pack, but haven't tried it out yet so IDK about that yet, looks good though.
Dude in this video gives you a a good idea:
FYI/FWIW If you're ex mil/LEO you can sign into GovX and then Eberlestock will generate a code for 10% off (there are other codes floating around out there too) to soften the blow.
Last edited:
Eberlestock is so far from gucci if you're talking packs.
There are so many better options if you have to carry your gear even the slightest distance
If you're going from truck to range. Fine. But beyond that they aren't worth their weight(which is a lot)
There are so many better options if you have to carry your gear even the slightest distance
If you're going from truck to range. Fine. But beyond that they aren't worth their weight(which is a lot)
Hahaha I'm not talking something for climbing Everest here...
I'm not rich or poor either, but $300-400+ just for something capable of getting my shit from stage to stage is plenty Gucci to me, and about as expensive as I'm willing to go when there are literally thousands of packs out there that are about 90% there for 1/10th the cost or less.
Weight he says hahaha... the rifle is about ~23lbs and I usually carry a Shmedium Gamechanger, Wiebad Mini Range Cube, and TAB rear bag, so that's another ~20lbs, then there's 100-200rds, tools, skittles, misc... so there is zero danger of a PRS match rig being confused with any rig meant for any sort of even semi-serious ruck.
House>truck>range>stage>stage>stage>stage>stage>truck again>house again without taking a dump or otherwise falling apart is fine.
I'm not rich or poor either, but $300-400+ just for something capable of getting my shit from stage to stage is plenty Gucci to me, and about as expensive as I'm willing to go when there are literally thousands of packs out there that are about 90% there for 1/10th the cost or less.
Weight he says hahaha... the rifle is about ~23lbs and I usually carry a Shmedium Gamechanger, Wiebad Mini Range Cube, and TAB rear bag, so that's another ~20lbs, then there's 100-200rds, tools, skittles, misc... so there is zero danger of a PRS match rig being confused with any rig meant for any sort of even semi-serious ruck.
House>truck>range>stage>stage>stage>stage>stage>truck again>house again without taking a dump or otherwise falling apart is fine.
Last edited:
Kuiu
Kifaru
Mystery Ranch
Stone Glacier
And its not just about total weight (a few pounds less pack weight certainly helps) but about how a pack fits and carries
I've used my fair share of eberlestock. I wouldn't go back.
Even if I'm not always rucking at matches from stage to stage (it does happen from time to time) id rather be 5x more comfortable for not much more money and a whole lot more utility for things besides PRS matches (keep the frame and suspension and switch the pack for hunting or backpacking)
I volunteered as a RO, and used a pair of Santiam 15x56 by Leupold for 2 straight days. I really enjoyed using them, felt they were more than sufficient for scanning the field to locate targets, plus spotting impacts on those tiny 6mm bullets. Plus, I have seen deals on them in the EE for below a grand.
I do feel that the image in a pair of Meopta 15x56 was a hair better, it that’s another $500. If I was on a budget, I’d get a pair of Santiams pretty quick.
I do feel that the image in a pair of Meopta 15x56 was a hair better, it that’s another $500. If I was on a budget, I’d get a pair of Santiams pretty quick.
On both topics, I have a pair of Bushnell Forge 15x. They are fine. Big enough field of view that I don’t get lost in them. Enough magnification for match spotting. I’d only want a higher powered spotter if I was spotting a single target, way out there, trying to call individual impacts in a training environment, for example…in which case I’d want something with a reticle, too.
I also use an Eberlestock LoDrag 2. When I bought it I really wanted the scabbard. Now that Ive used it for a bit, I’m not sure the scabbard makes any sense. So it adds a lot of weight and bulk to the pack for really no reason. In that regard, I actually think the model that doesn’t have the scabbard would be about the right size…the HighSpeed. The pack fits and carries well. I took the waist belt off for my general range/match use but with it on, the pack would carry a bunch of weight as well as any comparably sized pack. My only complaint is the lack of internal pockets/dividers. I’d like to have a bit more internal organization and the straps are all super long…if you have a 60 inch chest you will still have adjustment length in the shoulder straps.
I also use an Eberlestock LoDrag 2. When I bought it I really wanted the scabbard. Now that Ive used it for a bit, I’m not sure the scabbard makes any sense. So it adds a lot of weight and bulk to the pack for really no reason. In that regard, I actually think the model that doesn’t have the scabbard would be about the right size…the HighSpeed. The pack fits and carries well. I took the waist belt off for my general range/match use but with it on, the pack would carry a bunch of weight as well as any comparably sized pack. My only complaint is the lack of internal pockets/dividers. I’d like to have a bit more internal organization and the straps are all super long…if you have a 60 inch chest you will still have adjustment length in the shoulder straps.
Don't want to hijack the thread, but, ^^^this is something I've been wondering about lately...
Does anyone know why we don't see more guys running an actual rifle scope for spotting? Is there some specific reason I've missed? I would think with some of the ball-heads out there now, and with all of the ARCA/pic rail/scope mount options that are out there these days, a scope wouldn't be that ridiculous to get in a position to see something (or am I wrong)?
I don't even own a tripod (yet), I don't hunt and am not interested, and while I've shot off of a buddy's enough times to learn it's not as easy as it seems, I don't really have a need for one and haven't really had the urge to buy one.
That said, I've been thinking of going to higher mag binos, but not sure it's worth the hassle of the inevitable tripod the goes with that for me, but... a scope with a reticle, the same reticle as I run, actually sounds pretty cool...
In fact, since I run a Razor HDG2 and EBR-7C reticle (like a zillion other guys), it wouldn't be super expensive to try out because I could even run Vortex's new Viper that's ~$450 to see if it's worth running an exact copy Razor or not...
I've seen this Bushnell out there a couple times now, and it's practically a scope: https://www.bushnell.com/spotting-s...2-elite-tactical---spotting-scope/P00138.html
Thoughts?
Why run something with the additional complexity of windage and elevation turrets as a spotter.
Now, I'd say the real argument is to get manufacturers to start offering more spotting scopes with the same reticles as their rifle scopes.
Two eyes open is really nice after a day on glass
I get that, but I don't know if that applies to me as much as some others (I shoot both eyes open)...
I'm honestly intrigued now... is there just something wonky about using a rifle scope as a spotter that I don't know (and everybody else does)..?
The main reason I'm a little apprehensive about going through the trouble of trying it is: I tend to think if it was such a great idea, wouldn't at least a few cats already be doing it..?
Turrets seem like unnecessary and expensive overkill for a spotter. Spotters also lack the form factor requirements, so they can have higher magnification and wider field of view.
Nope, still not following...
IMHO spotters are probably the worst tool for the job, bulky and just all wrong, we don't need the high magnification levels they offer for PRS going stage to stage to stage, we're not looking for bullet holes in paper at 700 yards, we're looking for which direction a 1-2moa plate swung. The only reason I'd be willing to put up with any of the shit the comes with carrying one of them would be to have a reticle...
...which leads me to wanting to just try another rifle scope.
I don't really think eye fatigue would be a real factor, shooting ten 90 second stages in a day isn't a lot of time behind the scope, and most of us don't spend a huge part of the day glassing (unless one is maybe a designated spotter at a bigger match or something, which is a completely different thing). If most guys are anything like me, there's plenty of time at matches when we're looking for shit in our pack, loading mags, messing with our dope calculator, watching another squad across the way who're on the weird car stage or whatever... I don't watch every single guy in the squad shoot every round. I'd be surprised if I'm behind glass the whole 90 seconds for even 3-4 other shooters on an average stage.
Part of the reason I've dragged my feet on getting a tripod yet is because, for me at least, handheld 10x binos allow me see ~90% of what one sees through 15x binos on a tripod anyways, and if I want to see what a target looks like at 15x and perfectly steady for a minute or so, there are usually like 2-3 unused rigs right next to me that no cares if I look through for a minute. Either way, neither is really like looking through a scope though.
I've begun to come up with a hypothesis/theory here about why no one is really running a rifle scope on a tripod setup, and I think it has everything to do with how fancy photography tripods ended up at the rifle party:
As I understand it, in the beginning everyone used spotting scopes because that's just what one used, and the fact that they all had integral/built-in stands/tripods that made them great for the job since there wasn't an established universally-adopted industry-standard attachment for attaching shit to tripods in the rifle scene like there is now (ARCA, co-opted from our photography friends).
Later, some hunter dudes figured out that using a tripod to bring a stable position along with them (besides prone) when out in the field, was pretty bad-ass.
Next, some of those same dudes and some other dudes started using them for different stuff at PRS matches, to shoot off, as support, or just for putting there spotting scope on. Up until some other dude showed up with binos (again, probably because he already owned a decent pair for hunting) and many guys went that route, realizing they really didn't need magnification beyond ~10-15x at PRS distances, then it became more binos than spotting scopes, maybe 50-50, but either/both are commonly used now.
So that's where we are now. Lots of spotting scopes and binos on tripods.
We all know trying to look through a riflescope while holding it in your hands is dogshit. But, so is looking through a handheld spotting scope or a 15x pair of binos.
I'm not going to throw away my handheld binos or anything, but I'm starting to think that it's less about spotting scopes and/or binos, and more about the tripod... IMHO the best tool I can think of to put on top of a tripod, and what would help me the most, is a scope just like what I've got on my rifle.
So far, at least for now, no one's got a good reason why it won't work. It's starting to look like I'm going to have to try it out if I want to know what I want to know.
Part of the reason nobody really knows, or hasn't tried it already, is probably because I almost have to fabricate my own mount to try it.
There's like a zillion ways to mount a pair of binos or a spotting scope to a tripod...and while my google-fu is better than most, as far as finding an adapter out there for a stretch of pic rail you could attach a scope to that works with ARCA, I can barely find 3, so far seems the best thing to do is to buy a length of picatinny rail (like for a shotgun or something) and drill and tap it for a 1/4-20 so I can stick it on an ARCA plate, and then on the ball head...
Last edited:
Sounds like you've got it all figured out.
I'll leave it at this: shooting 1,000yds with my 4-16x, neither I nor my buddy spotting me through his AMG were able to call my misses. When he got on a 60x spotter it was easy and he had me on steel in a few shots.
Maybe that's not your use-case, but it is an instance where a top of the line rifle scope couldn't do what a spotter did with ease.
IDK, I shoot out to 1000 yards all the time and can almost always spot most of, if not all of my impacts/splash no problem with my scope at 14-16x.
OK, but none of those are deal breakers, a riflescope won't do anywhere near the kind of FOV a 65-80mm spotter objective will, but I don't really need it to either.
Check this out, just found this (maybe I'm not crazy): https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Spotting-base-2.pdf
I really like this thread. Lot's of good advice here and a few things that really should be explained in detail.
I think I am going to do my next livecast on these:
-binoculars for shooters,
-binocular magnification,
-binoculars vs spotters,
-why you can use a riflescope as a spotter in a pinch, but it is not ideal.
I am down with some crazy virus again, so my throat hurts as hell. When it is better, this will be the next discussion topic.
In a nutshell:
-for observation, two eyes are much better than one.
-for observation, you do not want too much air between your eye and the eyepiece
-we are shooters, not birders, a reticle is a useful thing to have in a binocular
-just about any binocular, 8x or above, will work much better when mounted on a tripod. It works fine handheld, but you will see better off of a tripod.
-if you are looking for 15x on a budget and you predominantly plan to use it on a tripod, Steiner HX 15x56 and Vortex Kaibab 18x56 should be on your list. Meopta 15x56 and Razor UHD 18x56 are better, but that's a serious step up in price. I wish any of these came with reticles.
ILya
I think I am going to do my next livecast on these:
-binoculars for shooters,
-binocular magnification,
-binoculars vs spotters,
-why you can use a riflescope as a spotter in a pinch, but it is not ideal.
I am down with some crazy virus again, so my throat hurts as hell. When it is better, this will be the next discussion topic.
In a nutshell:
-for observation, two eyes are much better than one.
-for observation, you do not want too much air between your eye and the eyepiece
-we are shooters, not birders, a reticle is a useful thing to have in a binocular
-just about any binocular, 8x or above, will work much better when mounted on a tripod. It works fine handheld, but you will see better off of a tripod.
-if you are looking for 15x on a budget and you predominantly plan to use it on a tripod, Steiner HX 15x56 and Vortex Kaibab 18x56 should be on your list. Meopta 15x56 and Razor UHD 18x56 are better, but that's a serious step up in price. I wish any of these came with reticles.
ILya
