-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
a good scope for under 500$ (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mlaw
- Start date
You need to give more information about your needs/uses for the scope in order for anyone to give accurate advice to you. Two years ago, I had the same question in my mind. After some research and scope testing, I realised that the scopes in this price range did not provide the image quality I was looking for. I then decided to wait, follow threads in this forum to learn all I could about what others felt about various scopes and save my money. This also allowed me time to really think about what my needs for a scope were.
Factors you should consider are angled or straight design, 60, 65mm or 80, 85mm objective lens size, acceptable size & weight, focus mechanisms, ED/HD glass or not, possible future use for digiscoping, need and design of stay-on cases, tripod and head sizes, weights, styles. Do you want good image quality above 30X power? Good quality high powered images in 40X - 60X = expensive glass and scopes. Will you be using the scope in low light conditions? Do you wear glasses and need larger eye relief? Find a store and look through a $300 scope and then look through an $800 - $1,000+ scope. Then ask yourself if you will be satisfied with the image quality in the cheaper scope. If you bought the lesser quality scope, would you be inclined to upgrade to a better quality/more expensive scope in the future?
After personally going through this process, I ended up with a Nikon 82ED Fieldscope and couldn't be happier
. In the end, I ended up waiting and spending much more than I first thought I would for this scope that will keep me happy for a looooooong time!
As a shot at answering your question, I would suggest the Bushnell Spacemaster. Research this forum and you will find plenty of opinions about it.
Factors you should consider are angled or straight design, 60, 65mm or 80, 85mm objective lens size, acceptable size & weight, focus mechanisms, ED/HD glass or not, possible future use for digiscoping, need and design of stay-on cases, tripod and head sizes, weights, styles. Do you want good image quality above 30X power? Good quality high powered images in 40X - 60X = expensive glass and scopes. Will you be using the scope in low light conditions? Do you wear glasses and need larger eye relief? Find a store and look through a $300 scope and then look through an $800 - $1,000+ scope. Then ask yourself if you will be satisfied with the image quality in the cheaper scope. If you bought the lesser quality scope, would you be inclined to upgrade to a better quality/more expensive scope in the future?
After personally going through this process, I ended up with a Nikon 82ED Fieldscope and couldn't be happier
. In the end, I ended up waiting and spending much more than I first thought I would for this scope that will keep me happy for a looooooong time! As a shot at answering your question, I would suggest the Bushnell Spacemaster. Research this forum and you will find plenty of opinions about it.
Last edited:
Hello, I'm a bit in the same "choice area" as MLaw at the moment |=)| , and a complete newbie regarding all things scoping and digiscoping, but really interested in getting into it.
Regarding, the "angled vs straight" consideration, I'v seen the pro and cons on the infocus shop site :
"
Straight
Easier to use and find birds at first.
Easier to use with a shoulder-pod.
Best for hide use or viewing from a vehicle.
Angled
Easier to watch birds in trees, or viewing downwards, e.g. seabirds from cliffs
Useful if sketching or using a notebook.
Your tripod doesn't need to be so high, so it's more stable.
More comfortable for long term observation.
"
http://www.at-infocus.co.uk/choosing_scopes.html
Regarding this, I have the impression (maybe false) that most people go with the angle version, is it right ?
However, I guess I would also be interested at the straight version, my planned use being more to take pics during treks and walks, more than staying at a fixed position.
Do these pro and cons are meaningfull for "looking" only, or are they also meaningfull when a digital camera is hooked to the scope ?
What I mean is :
Is it conceivale to take pics with a shoulder pod or just holding the scope, or does it does not make sense anyway ?
If it is possible, considering that a lot of digital cameras now have orientable screens, does it matter ? (is it just as easy with the angled version ?)
Also, is an angled scope usable to aim directly but putting the angle "horizontally", or is it another stupid question ? |:S|
Sorry a real newbie here ....
Regarding, the "angled vs straight" consideration, I'v seen the pro and cons on the infocus shop site :
"
Straight
Easier to use and find birds at first.
Easier to use with a shoulder-pod.
Best for hide use or viewing from a vehicle.
Angled
Easier to watch birds in trees, or viewing downwards, e.g. seabirds from cliffs
Useful if sketching or using a notebook.
Your tripod doesn't need to be so high, so it's more stable.
More comfortable for long term observation.
"
http://www.at-infocus.co.uk/choosing_scopes.html
Regarding this, I have the impression (maybe false) that most people go with the angle version, is it right ?
However, I guess I would also be interested at the straight version, my planned use being more to take pics during treks and walks, more than staying at a fixed position.
Do these pro and cons are meaningfull for "looking" only, or are they also meaningfull when a digital camera is hooked to the scope ?
What I mean is :
Is it conceivale to take pics with a shoulder pod or just holding the scope, or does it does not make sense anyway ?
If it is possible, considering that a lot of digital cameras now have orientable screens, does it matter ? (is it just as easy with the angled version ?)
Also, is an angled scope usable to aim directly but putting the angle "horizontally", or is it another stupid question ? |:S|
Sorry a real newbie here ....
Last edited:
Jaeger01
Well-known member
Mlaw said:
There is a model by Eagle Optics called the Raven, comes in an angled or straight version, the straight is $30 less than the angled. Here's the link: http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?dept=1&type=4&purch=1&pid=3190
Keep in mind that for an extra $10, you get the Eagle Advantage, see: The Eagle Optics Raven Spotting Scope is covered under a lifetime warranty and also the Eagle advantage. Click: http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?dept=2&type=12&pid=3018
to learn more about The Eagle Advantage!
My wife has one and for the money, it's a very decent scope, no Swarovski but a hell of a lot less money.
Jaeger near Chicago
You've asked a good question which most scope reviews don't really deal with. Unfortunately, unlike binoculars there is not a great deal of competition of moderate price scopes.
Here's my impression of inexpensive scopes.
I'd take a serious look at Nikon optics. I have been favorably impressed with 80mm Nikon Sky & Earth Series Scopes. The value is excellent for the money especially the 80mm which sells with zoom eyepeice for around $500. I'd also take a look at the non-ED version of the Fieldscope III. Sells for about $600-700 but quality is very good.
Pentax PF-80 ED and PF-65 ED are both outstanding values for the money with optics that measure up well with the most expensive European competitors. I sold my old PF-80 ED a year ago on ebay for a bit more than $500.
The Bushnell Spacemaster is very rugged and with a wide angle eyepeice is at least serviceable. Cost is probably $200. Bushnell also makes and ED-65 for ~$350 and ED 80 for $700. I haven't seen the 65mm scope but the 80mm scope is a clear step up from the traditional spacemaster although not in the leaque with Pentax 80 ED.
Finally, if you don't need a scope immediately I'd look for a used Kowa TSN series or Nikon Fielscope II. Both purchased at a good price could be a good bargain. I've seen the old Kowa TSN-4 sell for $500 on ebay.
Brendan
Here's my impression of inexpensive scopes.
I'd take a serious look at Nikon optics. I have been favorably impressed with 80mm Nikon Sky & Earth Series Scopes. The value is excellent for the money especially the 80mm which sells with zoom eyepeice for around $500. I'd also take a look at the non-ED version of the Fieldscope III. Sells for about $600-700 but quality is very good.
Pentax PF-80 ED and PF-65 ED are both outstanding values for the money with optics that measure up well with the most expensive European competitors. I sold my old PF-80 ED a year ago on ebay for a bit more than $500.
The Bushnell Spacemaster is very rugged and with a wide angle eyepeice is at least serviceable. Cost is probably $200. Bushnell also makes and ED-65 for ~$350 and ED 80 for $700. I haven't seen the 65mm scope but the 80mm scope is a clear step up from the traditional spacemaster although not in the leaque with Pentax 80 ED.
Finally, if you don't need a scope immediately I'd look for a used Kowa TSN series or Nikon Fielscope II. Both purchased at a good price could be a good bargain. I've seen the old Kowa TSN-4 sell for $500 on ebay.
Brendan
medinabrit
Well-known member
i have both the non ed 60 nikon fieldscope ,& the pentax 65 ed angled .both are very good but i prefer the pentax because you can use any 1.25 eyepiece .which can save much money over dedicated ep,s.if you can afford it spend the extra $300 & get the pentax 80 pf .i dont think that you will regret it.its as good as the euros for half the price .
brian.
brian.
Similar threads
