Mid-size vs. Full-size scope (1 Viewer)

[qwerty5]

I'll be buying my first scope in a few months, so I'm wondering, will a 65mm scope be adequate, or do I need to spend extra on a 80/85mm spotter? I'll be using the scope for long distance observation at lakes, mudflats, etc., and need to see enough details to identify shorebirds and waterfowl. I was originally planning to buy a 65mm because of the lower cost (usually $150-$200 less for the same model), and I've also heard that in lower-priced models, the quality is lower in the larger version (due to quality being harder to control?). My budget is $500-$750 for the scope alone. Anyway, I've also seen that lower mag scopes won't be adequate for normal scope birding. Weight is not an issue for me, so the only factors in consideration are quality, detail on birds, and price.

 

[Rotherbirder]

A few things to consider: If you are static birding, go for a large aperture scope, if not a 65mm may suit you better. A good smaller aperture scope is likely to be significantly better optically than a large aperture scope at the same price level. Consider the secondhand market; there are some good bargains around if you look for them and you might get a better scope than you expected for your money. Don't forget to factor in the cost - and weight - of a decent tripod, which will be essential.

RB

 

[kb57]

Agree 100% with Rotherbirder's comments. WRT the tripod, if the weight really isn't an issue, you don't need to go for carbon fibre - a heavier aluminium model will give you more performance per $. Tripod head is also important, but you can upgrade that later.

 

[qwerty5]

Thanks guys, I was thinking about taking my scope while hiking for closer looks at birds in grassland areas and forest canopy, but my primary use would be stationary at mudflats etc. Another thing, there's a good chance I'll upgrade or buy another scope in the next ten years or less, so perhaps a 65mm would be best as an all-purpose spotter for now (especially with a better price-performance ratio).

 

[KevinL]

Just my 2 cents, I find larger aperature scopes have better resolution, and more light gathering than smaller scopes. I recently compared the Vortex Razor 65 mm vs 85 mm scopes side by side. I found the 85 superior in most optical qualities. If weight and cost are not a consideration, and your priority is visuals on birds go with a larger scope. That is assuming you have good binoculars first. It amazes me how good my binoculars are on a tripod.

 

[Alexis Powell]

...My budget is $500-$750 for the scope alone. Anyway, I've also seen that lower mag scopes won't be adequate for normal scope birding. Weight is not an issue for me, so the only factors in consideration are quality, detail on birds, and price....

Buy a used scope. A Nikon 82ED would fit that budget, as will others.

--AP