Bino's Vs telescope

[Dave-G]

My eyes are getting worse and looking through binos frequently gives me a nedache. I've been considering trying a telescope instead.

 

Main uses would be to spot charlie/bunny up to 4~500 yards then get closer for the shot, and see 17rem bullet holes in a white target at 100 and 200 yards if possible with a budget ish one. I've always fancied a draw scope but would anticipate fogging issues if used in the winter so it might be wiser to get a one piece jobbie.

 

Opinions and advice appreciated from those who have actually used both, and it's not much point steering me toward Swaro's or whatever 'cos they are very much out of my budget,(shamefully) of £50 max really and I'm watching some on ebay from china for well under that amount.

[Hornet 6]

It's the £50 max bit that is screwing with your eyes, not binoculars rather than a telescope.

Probably easier to find decent binos at that price than a spotting scope.

 

Neil.

[Dave-G]

Sorry - I should have explained things a bit better, dyslexic see. Looking for a portable field/pocket telescope.

 

I've used my brothers £200+ bino's and my £100+ ones both give me the headaches, presumeably while trying to focus or match both images to my eyes.

 

I read somewhere about telescopes being less fussy, and as there are fewer lenses and moving parts a larger similar image quality can be seen for less money and there is of course only one eye to cater for?

Edited November 18, 2010 by Dave-G

[Hornet 6]

 

 

I read somewhere about telescopes being less fussy,

 

Try using just the right barrel of your binos, see if that eases the problem.

Many years ago I had a monocular, it was the right barrel from a pair of Barr & Stoud navy issue binoculars, worked very well.

Recently I have been looking at either a 8x32 or 10x36 monocular, qiete a few examples on e-bay, Opticron and Vortex seem worth a look.

Vortex http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120605266430&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

Opticron http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120645717507&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

From what I can see, the Opticron is coming out on top at the moment, particularly if you wear glasses.

 

Neil.

[seeker]

I have binos and a scope ... each has its role. Scopes are better at a distance, but a bit unwieldy and benefit from a rest, the compact (non-extending) scopes are quite manageable. The higher the mag = shorter depth of field but also larger objective.

Have a search around the Birdwatching sites ... review and prices etc

Some good names include Bushnell, Pentax, Kowa, Opticron

but I don't know prices - do not overlook 2nd hand: it seems some birders change kit faster than HMR owners!!.

[Dave-G]

Cheers chaps. I'm thinking I'd probably need 20x to see the .172" bullet hole in a white target?

[seeker]

sounds about right .... I find it helps to have someting dark coloured a short way behind the white target

and a 5x group of 172s is still a smal hole

might be woth checking optics warehouse site (dorset area one)

good luck

[malkiserow]

If it is for zeroing, have you tried those stick on targets which change colour when hit?

[Dave-G]

Good point about the stick on targets that flake off larger than the bullet hole size - but that wont help with spotting long range bunnies and fox.

 

Good point about Optics Warehouse, though I'm not up to one hole groups of any size lol. A couple here also have tripod mounts, which I have for a camcorder:

http://www.opticswarehouse.co.uk/products.asp?cat=Yukon+Spotting+Scopes.

 

And figuring anything from china costs about 10~20% of what it costs in the west - this one from Ebay china might be worth a punt as it's cheap enough to chuck if it don't do the job. One piece too so no damp to suck in when drawing out a tube:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=180585146033&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

 

In my experience of higher mag scopes - they seem ok till you try for more than 20 ish mag.

[Dunkield]

Cheers chaps. I'm thinking I'd probably need 20x to see the .172" bullet hole in a white target?

The quality is more important than the mag.

I have told this story on here before but I was at 200yards at Bisley and the guy next to me couldn't see his bullet holes with a dedicated spotting scope (high mag average quality) but he could see them OK through my rifle scope, which is 'only' 16x

[Dave-G]

The quality is more important than the mag.

I have told this story on here before but I was at 200yards at Bisley and the guy next to me couldn't see his bullet holes with a dedicated spotting scope (high mag average quality) but he could see them OK through my rifle scope, which is 'only' 16x

 

Cheers - what calibre bullets please?