Okay, okay, you are the ones who started it...

[bcurrie]

I have read all the posts about scopes, and am looking for practical advise. I am not looking to spend much money, but want the scope to be worth what I spend (under $400 US). The big "L" or "S" will have to come after children are not at home. In the meantime, I am missing some birds for lack of POWER. I am not interested in digiscoping with this, just viewing birds. There is a place selling the Bushnell Spacemaster for $180 (US) [20-60 power, 60mm objective], with the multi-position eyepiece. I have read about the Raven, and reviewed the posted link to critiques of the scopes. I don't want to shell out $400 for the Raven if the Spacemaster is more than adequate (i.e., the Raven may be superior, but it would have to be 100% superior to justify the doubling of price). Unfortunately, here in boondock land, there is no place to compare the scopes. I can find someone who has the Swaroski and Nikon (don't remember the latter's model #), but no one who has the Bushnell in stock. So for you who have taken a look through the Spacemaster and have looked through other scopes (and I am not talking about the high priced ones), how are the optics? At full power do you ever find things just a little bit off, or a little too much color distortion? I know everybody has their preferences, and this is largely an opinion (so I won't hunt you down!). I have an extremely old Bushnell 30X scope (not to mention it is broke), and I can focus anything. No bells and whistles needed, I am most concerned about the optics.

P.S. UPDATE, I have found it for $160 (US). Worth it compared to a true $400 scope?

[Ashley beolens]

I would advise looking for a second hand bigger scope, I started out with a Nikon spotting scope, that was good but when you compare it to an 80mm scope you really see the difference, #I got the Optlyth I use now off a friend (he had a choice part ex or sell it to me for what he would have got part ex), so it was cheap.

[mcdowella]

I have a Bushnell Spacemaster II (straight) which came cheap with a slightly damaged 15-45 zoom, which I replaced with a 22X WA. I need spectacles for extreme short sight, so my eyes are not typical. I found the 15-45 zoom a pain in the neck. The apparent field of view is narrow, especially at low zooms, and at high zooms the view is dark. Asking more experienced birders, I find most of those with zooms are using them a lot closer to 20X than 60X. With the 22X WA on the Spacemaster is a lot better to use. Eye relief isn't that great unless you take the rubber end off the eyepiece, in which case the metal can scratch your glasses. I have now covered it with a lens cleaning cloth. Looking at a few other scopes I can see that the Zeiss 85 with 20-60 zoom gives an obviously better view. An elderly Opticron HR66 + HDF 28X WA seems about the same as the Bushnell. A Nikon 60mm scope seems very little different. Here are some things to think about:

1/The variable eyepiece sounds like one more way to lose optical quality and one more thing to have to adjust in the field.

2/The Bushell is light, compact, and seems robust, but not waterproof or gas-filled. At 22X with only focus to adjust it is practical with a monopod, which is a lot more convenient than a tripod to carry and set up - also cheaper unless you already have a tripod.

3/$160, or $400-$160, will buy a LOT of non-optical birding kit - books, tapes, outdoor gear.

[digi-birder]

We had an old Bushnell Spacemaster 60mm objective lens. It served us well for some years. Then at the beginning of last year we did some sea-watching - not something we'd ever done with any great purpose before - and really noticed the lack of clarity. We could hardly even see the bird that everyone was pointing out.

We happened to be close to an InFocus shop, so I went in and bought an Opticron Imagic 65. Next day we were on the beach again and the view was, I have to say, only a little better.

A few days later, when we were back home, InFocus had a demonstation day at a local nature reserve. My husband decided to trade in the Bushnell for the Opticron ES80. Off we went round the reserve to try out his new toy. Having looked through this new scope and the one I'd bought the week before, there was no contest. InFocus offer a two-week exchange policy, so back we went the demo hide and I handed in the Imagic 65 for the ES80.

I think the difference in quality is in the HD glass, which inevitably will make the scope more expensive. (I had to pay an extra £200 to upgrade) But the difference is well worth it. Trying them out is the only way to decide what is right for your eyes. But if you go for the cheaper models, be prepared to regret it later on. I'm just glad I found out my mistake in time.

[Johnny1]

My first ever scope was a Spacemaster and served me well for several years, in fact my wife still uses it. As others have said the upper magnifications on the zoom aren't worth bothering with. I only upgraded to an 80mm scope for the occasions when I do go sea watching and for digi-scoping. I think at $180 you can't go wrong, even if you have to buy a better eyepiece, I tried my Opticron zoom lens on the Spacemaster and it works really well even on the higher settings. I also wear glasses and unlike A.G. I don't have a problem with the rubber covering, maybe his was the old fold down type? The final decision is yours but if I ahd limited cash resources I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Spacemaster.

[Bob D]

FYI--Eagle Optics is offering a $100 rebate on the Raven Spotting scope. I have no association with E.O. other than using them almost exclusively for optics purchases.

There are comparative reviews of the less expensive scopes. A couple of years ago the British (?) publication of Birdwatching magazine did a review of the 50 and 60 mm objective scopes. Perhaps an update is available. Birdwatchers Digest (BWD) published the recent review which lists some of the cheaper scopes.

I bird primarily with a Nikon Fieldscope III ED 60 mm and sometimes with a TeleVue Ranger when my wife birds with me.

There are few times when one needs magnification above 40X and/or can use it because of atmospheric conditions. A perspective-- a USA birder went on his second one year quest to log as many birds in the American Birding Association Area. He accounted for over 800 birds. And probably still holds the record. He used a high quality spotting scope. However his eyepiece was 30 or 32 power. He did on several occasions borrow a look thru a scope at higher power.

This brings me back to the quetion posed--the less expensive scopes. Several years ago I went on a search for a spotting scope for my daughter as her old Bushnell Sentry was stolen. It seemed then that the usual advice (not always) was that don't waste your money on the cheap scopes. Much of the advice was offered by birders with the top end scopes. Or, perhaps people are reluctant of offer advice on the cheaper scopes as we just don't look thru them enough.

I've looked thru several of the under $300 60 mm objective spotting scopes and at 20-30X they give a very usable image. Even at 40 or so power the image could improve bird I.D. Sure the color and contrast may not be first rate but the image was sharp enough. At 60X--the image just did not provide any improvement in identification and was not good.

I wish that BWD and the other scope reviews would consistently test scopes at 30 and 40 power which is very usable in the field. Tests at 60X are seldom indicative of how the scope will be used by the average birder, but mislead as to realistic usable quality for the average birder.

At 20X some of the relatively inexpensive scopes are very close to the top guns. For example the Eagle Optics Denali according to BWD. I would assume that the Bushnell Spacemaster would be similar and probably others.

It was not so many years ago that except for Swarovski, Leica there were not really good zooms that gave a quality image at 60X. It is hard to believe that the new cheaper scopes, even coupled with new computer lens design can offer a really useful zoom picture at 60X. However, I've not looked thru the Raven at 60X or some of the other "lesser" scopes. So I stand on quicksand.

It comes down to looking thru the scopes and compare the image yourself, and check eye relief focusing etc. Some dealers will allow you to purchase several scopes and return them for a minimal or perhaps no restocking fee. Costs some shipping fees, but if you are not close to an optics dealer it is an option.

Bob D

[Cindy M]

hi Brian- I personally use a kowa scope, but since I often get together with groups of birding friends, I've looked through and compared most of the more popular scopes. The recent issue of Bird Watchers Digest has one of the most comprehensive comparison charts on scopes that I have yet to see. You can read the results online if you're unable to find the magazine- this is a great way to break down the features/cost/quality of a scope.


Bird Watchers Digest 2003 Scope-roundup (http://www.birdwatchersdigest.com/optics/scopes03.html)

hope this helps, and have fun :)

[bcurrie]

Ashley, thanks for that review. I have thought about a second hand as well, but I am leary about those things.

A.G., hopefully this does not scare you too much, but we think alike. Thanks.

Diane, I certainly agree with you, but that HD glass is just too pricey for me at this moment. Unfortunately, no field tests of scopes are had around here. I won't be doing any sea watching for some time, so luckily I do not have to consider that part.

Johnny, I too wonder how can I go wrong with $160? Though not the best, Bushnell does have a solid reputation. If it were a little known company, I would be avoiding them like the plague.

Thanks Bob for the heads up on that $100 rebate, only makes it harder. I am not close to an optics dealer.

Cindy, thanks for the link. I had looked on it before, looked at it again, and after eliminating the top scopes which are just not for me at this time, I think it just plays around with my decesion making all the more.

Thanks for each of your answers. I am still confused. Looking through scopes here is so vastly limited. I hate to buy something with the real possibility of just returning it later. I know for many retail sales that is standard operating procedure, but I still have problems with that unless something is flawed about the product. When I decide, I will let you all know. Until then, anybody elses input would still be greatly appreciated.

[bcurrie]

What about the Kowa TS612?

[IanF]

Hi Brian,

I had the Angled version, the Kowa 611 with 30xWA eyepiece, before upgrading to the 823. I thought it was an excellent scope with great optics. The only reason I sold it was because I couldn't combine it with digiscoping, though some people have with superb results.

I agree that the Spacemaster has been around a very long time with many experienced birders having started off with one. I just find it strange that very few admit to using it nowadays.

Personally I think that if you do stick to one of the bigger names then you won't go far wrong. My only regret now is not having gone for the larger diameter scope in the first place.

[bcurrie]

Hello folks. Just thought I would report back. On Friday I purchased via Internet the Bushnell Spacemaster 20-60X/60mm. I did this after much deliberation and research. I looked through a similar Spacemaster, was told they all have the same optics, and was quite pleased with it. The one I was looking through only had a 45mm lens objective, so I will probably be even happier with this one. I was looking through it at dusk. It also has the new multiposition eye piece, which had favorable anecedotal reviews. To Bob and KC, you don't know how close I came to getting a Raven. That was second runner up, was first for a while.

My rationale? I got it for $160 (US), total of $180 with S&H and insurance. I looked through a Swarovski at the same shop, and I did not see $1,000 worth of improvement. Also, I am not using this for digiscoping, so it has fine optics with good clarity. It is supposed to be delivered by March 14.

[cspratt]

I have both the Eagle Optics Raven and the Kowa 823M (Flourite) scopes.

At anything above 40x the image in the Raven starts to "fall apart". Thus, the useable range is really 20-40x. They did offer a "wide angle" 30x eyepiece when the scope first came out and I managed to get one. It isn't too bad but came with dust inside which I can't clean. So of distracting so I don't use it much.

The new (last week) Kowa performs very well at 60x even across water (ocean) on a warm sunny day.

For visual work the Raven is okay but for digiscoping or using high power the Kowa wins hands down.

I also have small Orion (U.S. brand) short focal length refractor (F/5). Anything above 40x and the image "falls apart" just like the Raven. As both scopes are non-achromatic they are only suitable for visual use from 20-40x. You need a really good ED scope for anything above that. (A Questar birder would be great also!)

My two cents anyway. As I've owned lots of telescopes (a couple of dozen or so) over the years, I feel that I have some experience. (Been an amateur astronomer for 40+ years). I've also lokked through some mighty large instruments (one being 74" in aperature). But that was an exception.
Not that good for birding anyway!
Chris. Spratt