Spotting Scopes & Binos w Laser Range Finders

[308Mike]

Do any of you have experience with spotting scopes or binos with integrated laser range-finders? I've seen a few models online in both, binos and spotting scopes, but the spotting scopes with integrated laser range-finders tend to be quite expensive. However, I've seen binos for sale integrated with range-finders and they aren't too damned expensive, but not nearly as good of quality as the spotting scopes. I would think it would be easier and cheaper to put a laser range-finder into a spotting scope than it would be into a pair of binos.

Anyone's experiences and/or input regarding this topic would be greatly appreciated. If nothing else, getting an integrated spotting scope unit would negate carrying two pieces of gear when one will do. Integrated binos would be nice, but don't fit the bill the same as a spotting scope, especially when doing long-range shooting.

Comments and advice welcome.

[Yogimus]

Range finding binos are useless beyond 400 meters (MAYBE you get 600 meters in great conditions off of flat surfaces)

/edit: Been using em for a dozen years in the military, a plethora of types.
//edit 2: Wtf you plan on using it for?

[308Mike]

//edit 2: Wtf you plan on using it for?

Mostly for range finding for long-distance targets and/or game. I have a Bushnell laser range-finger, but am not particularly happy with it's performance, even though it's supposed to be accurate for golfing. An integrated spotting scope/laser range-finder on a tripod should give me much better accuracy than a simple spotting scope and separate hand-held range-finder, and be MUCH easier/quicker to pack.

[Yogimus]

Bushnell is garbage beyond 300 meters in natural environments. Trees and grass just don't reflect anything back consistently. I think this will be an issue with nearly any kind of device.

[308Mike]

Bushnell is garbage beyond 300 meters in natural environments. Trees and grass just don't reflect anything back consistently. I think this will be an issue with nearly any kind of device.

What about game above the grass-line, such as a deer, hog, or other animal near brush in the background? You don't think it's a specific enough target with all the clutter around (beyond 300 yards)? I would think with a spotting scope, you should be able to use a fairly narrow beam to determine the range - but since I've never used an integrated viewing/spotting & range-finding device, I have NO IDEA just how well they work or if they are even worth looking into at this stage in their development.

[Yogimus]

Bushnell is garbage beyond 300 meters in natural environments. Trees and grass just don't reflect anything back consistently. I think this will be an issue with nearly any kind of device.

What about game above the grass-line, such as a deer, hog, or other animal near brush in the background? You don't think it's a specific enough target with all the clutter around (beyond 300 yards)? I would think with a spotting scope, you should be able to use a fairly narrow beam to determine the range - but since I've never used an integrated viewing/spotting & range-finding device, I have NO IDEA just how well they work or if they are even worth looking into at this stage in their development.

"natural" features short of wet rock faces at a 90 degree angle to the device all refuse to register. When I use the damned things I aim for cars or signs.

[308Mike]

Bushnell is garbage beyond 300 meters in natural environments. Trees and grass just don't reflect anything back consistently. I think this will be an issue with nearly any kind of device.

What about game above the grass-line, such as a deer, hog, or other animal near brush in the background? You don't think it's a specific enough target with all the clutter around (beyond 300 yards)? I would think with a spotting scope, you should be able to use a fairly narrow beam to determine the range - but since I've never used an integrated viewing/spotting & range-finding device, I have NO IDEA just how well they work or if they are even worth looking into at this stage in their development.

"natural" features short of wet rock faces at a 90 degree angle to the device all refuse to register. When I use the damned things I aim for cars or signs.

If I get the chance to evaluate anything, I'll make sure I stay away from anything Bushnell (at minimum).

[Darrell]

Nikon makes a scope with integrated range finder.

[Denis]

I have used a friend's Leica Geovid rangefinding binoculars, and they are excellent, as you would expect from Leica. They are so simple to use, it's ridiculous - look at what you want to measure. Press the button to turn on the rangefinding reticle, press it again to measure the distance to whatever the reticle is on. Another plus is that, when hunting, you will always have binos around the neck anyway, so no need to carry another gadget or fumble it out of your pocket in a hurry.

My friend is a professional forester, and avid hunter, and he wouldn't be without them for his work or his hunting. He took them on our deerstalking trip to Scotland this year, where they worked as advertised in all kinds of weather, and even against very dull, monotonous backgrounds.

You won't like the price - Leica's are not budget binos - but I think they can't be beaten for general hunting purposes. If you are serious about buying rangefinding binos or a RF scope, give Doug at www.cameralandny.com a call and tell him Denis from the Gun Counter sent you.

A personal observation - for general hunting of the kind I do, I'm not convinced that a rangefinder is actually necessary, though it is nice to have, and may be useful as a psychological comforter. A really, really good set of binos is certainly much more important, and I would first spend money on those, before worrying about RF gear, unless I were in the situation that I had no good binos - then I'd seriously consider the Leicas with RF function. It's nice to know target distances, or to measure distances to landmarks around the shooting area or around a hide, but I would not normally take a hunting shot at such a range that I would be significantly outside the useful envelope of a .308 sighted in for POI = POA at 200 yards. If the beast is a long way off, I put the cross-hairs on its shoulders. If it's too far for that, I don't shoot it. Of course, I don't do long range varminting or such.

[308Mike]

It's nice to know target distances, or to measure distances to landmarks around the shooting area or around a hide, but I would not normally take a hunting shot at such a range that I would be significantly outside the useful envelope of a .308 sighted in for POI = POA at 200 yards. If the beast is a long way off, I put the cross-hairs on its shoulders. If it's too far for that, I don't shoot it. Of course, I don't do long range varminting or such.

Which is something I'm looking at. You know, varminting on some of the plains states who have people who want others to prairie-dog hunt on their lands, and kill some of those critters who are making burrows which injure their horses and cause problems with their tractors and the blade settings when working their fields.

Being able to dial-in the distance makes first-round hits much more possible when I can use the same equipment instead of having to dick around with several pieces of visual aides. Unfortunately, I don't have the time or experience to do the distances in my head.