Hey Sako, I was not going to suggest you do one thing or the other. But now that you have stated your preference, I can safely say that I happen to agree with you. Not only are those scopes heavy, impossible to waterproof, but most of them also suffer from a very low eye relief. One may think that is no great deal with a spotting scope, after all there is no problem with recoil unlike in a rifle scope... BUT, you'll find that once you work with a spotting scope with almost zero eye relief in the field, this is a LOT more tiring compared to a scope where it is not so critical that your eye is right up against the ocular. That is one reason I have always found the Leupold 12-40x60 such a great scope. It may not have the best optics in the world, but it is a very sensible compromise between weight and ease of use in the field. Good luck with finding yourself a good spotting scope.
- mike

no for the cost, i could get something modern that is fully multicoated.

here it is on ebay for anyone interested

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3636&item=6111407156&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW

Gents,

I've been following this thread as I have an Optolynth draw scope which I think is a 30x75mm...

i bought it after debating whether I need a spotting scope and this came up very cheap second hand at place that specialises in bird watching optics.

It seems that for the reasons mentioned above, draw scopes are no longer fashionable with twichers, so I was able to get it for a song.

I don't think any draw scope can be waterproof but I have never had any problems with it fogging.

My scope is too heavy to be convenient to carry around and I would agree with the assesment about eye relief too.

Having said all that, I wonder why tradional 3 draw telescopes are still virtually the only type of scope carried by professional Highland stalkers?

They don't tend to use the heavy European ones like we are talking about here but favour tradional ones like Grays.

These have very lightweight alluminium bodies and superb coated lens which I think are German. They are not waterproof but are designed to be easily stripped so they can be cleaned and dried or even repaired ..

With practice, there long length when deployed means they can be used without a tripod and I think they are something like a 24x60mm. They retail for around �800 which to me is not cheap for something not waterproof, but as I say, they are virtually universal in use up on the Scottish hill.

The majority of these same professionals will be using bino's and 'scopes by S&B, Swarovski and Zeiss ect so they obviously appriciate and need good glass..

Any thoughts?


regards,

Pete

Yes, I have often wondered about those long spotting scopes as well. The only reason I can see, is that the long tubes may be easier to stabilize when you don't use a tripod. My favourite Leupold 12-40x60 will work without a tripod, but then you need to rest it on something, a pack or the roof of a car for instance. It is simply too short to stabilize otherwise. Those long Scottish tubes, on the other hand, can apparently be stabilized when the stalker lies on the ground and is able to rest the scope on either his leg, his walking staff or both.
- mike

Mike,

I know a couple of guys who went from cheap drawscopes, to decent spotting scope and then to decent drawscopes like the S&B, Swarovski or Optolynth as they just did not find a spotting scope practical on the Hill.

I think both would have considered a Grays, but the cost was simply too high and you rarely see them secondhand.

A friend of mine has a Grays and it really does ooze quality, but I still think its a lot of cash for something that can fog up relatively easy..

http://www.graytelescope.com

Regards,

Pete