Thread: Spotting Scope vs High Zoom Camera

Cameras are handy, but have several significant drawbacks over spotting scopes. The first is that they use batteries, and sometimes these are a proprietary size, so you need a few to sustain the camera for anything more than a day trip.
Camera zoom is often quoted as the maximum zoom possible, which may be 120 times (a DSLR equivalent of a massive 2400mm lens, double the focal length of Canon's biggest ever telephoto lens). However, at maximum zoom, most cameras are displaying a cropped portion of the frame, termed "digital zoom". Image quality rapidly deteriorates once optical zoom ends and cropping begins.
Spotters have optical / physical magnification throughout the range, use no batteries, and can be used with a cellphone or camera, should you wish to record the scene, or use some digital zoom.
Unfortunately, this is a game that comes down to image quality and features being tied very closely to dollars spent and the size and material used in the lenses, and tiny, sub-$1000 scopes (or cameras for that matter) are not going to give a satisfying experience, especially in testing conditions. This includes looking into shady spots, back-lit scenes, scenes where there is little contrast (game animals against grass or stones) and in low light situations such as twilight or heavy cloud. All of these are common in a hunting situation.

Quite a science and thanks for the last few posts providing some real detail to the logic. I think if it was polled it would be +90% in favour of a spotter based on the feedback.