Legend Ultra HD 20-60 x80 (45 Degree) Spotting Scope

I needed a scope for viewing 30 caliber bullet holes in targets at 100-500 yards and ended up getting two to compare; each with a zoom of 20x - 60x and with an objective lens of 80 mm:1) The Vortex Viper 20 - 60 x 802) The Bushnell HD Legend Ultra 20 - 60 x 80If you're only interested in the comments on the particular scope featured here, I've tried to separate the comments on each scope, although I think the comparisons may be of some value.In these spotting scopes, there are (at least) four main things to look for:1) Fully Multi-coated optics2) Waterproof/fog proof (nitrogen or argon purged and O-ring sealed)3) BaK-4 prisms (if porro prism design)4) ED glass (to eliminate/reduce chromatic aberrations - this appears to make a big difference)Here's the comparison of the above four things to look for:VORTEX: Fully multi-coated optics, waterproof/fog proof, (Prism type not specified), XD glass (not ED).BUSHNELL: Fully multi-coated optics, waterproof/fog proof, BaK-4 porro prisms, ED glass.VORTEX has two of the four mentioned above, BUSHNELL has four of the four.OBSERVATIONS OF VARIOUS OBJECTS UNDER DIFFERENT CONDITIONS AS SHOWN BELOW:VORTEX:Observations made at 200 yards on an actual target with 9 30 cal. bullet holes; 3 left (in the white), 3 right (in the white), 1 in the red & 2 in the black (near the red):20x - focused well on the round target circles; could barely make out the bullet holes.40x - focused okay; could make out the bullet holes, but not conclusively60x - focused less than okay; white target rings were either green or red, but could make out the (fuzzy) bullet holes in the white if I held my head the right way; couldn't really see them in the blackObservations at over 500 yards focusing on a white sign with red lettering: good at all magnificationsObservations at night at about 500 yards: Blue letters of a shopping mall neon sign were bright and clear and crisp with good background at all magnificationsObservations of neon sign with green border & red letters: either the border or letters were in focus, but not both at the same time.Observations at 175 yards on a sign with a white background, large red lettering and smaller black lettering with an even smaller "Realtor" logo in black.20x - focused almost okay; some fuzziness around the black letters/logo60x - focused poorly on the black letters/logo; logo was unreadableBUSHNELL:Observations made at 200 yards on an actual target with 9 30 cal. bullet holes; 3 left (in the white), 3 right (in the white), 1 in the red & 2 in the black (near the red):20x - focused on the round target circles seemed fuzzy with multiple circles; could barely make out the bullet holes.40x - focused okay; could make out the bullet holes, but not conclusively60x - focused well; white target rings were the color of the paper, and could easily make out the (sharply defined) bullet holes, even the indentations around the holes in the white; also could see the ones in the blackObservations at over 500 yards focusing on a white sign with red lettering: good at all magnificationsObservations at night at about 500 yards: Blue letters of a shopping mall neon sign were bright but seemed like multiple images and not as good background at all magnificationsObservations of neon sign with green border & red letters: both the border and letters were in focus at the same time.Observations at 175 yards on a sign with a white background, large red lettering and smaller black lettering with an even smaller "Realtor" logo in black.20x - focused okay; no fuzziness around the black letters/logo60x - focused well on the black letters/logo; logo was readableSignificant difference between the two; the BUSHNELL was the clear winner.GENERAL COMMENTS - VORTEX: The VORTEX looks nicer to me; it's slimmer, less bulky, has a picatinny rail and although I'd probably never use it, it looks cool. It has a dual focus - coarse and fine and they work great; it has a nice "notch" when you're in focus. Vortex has an eye-cup cover that attaches - less chance of getting lost. The objective lens cover is not attached, but has a tab with a hole in it so it can be. It has a fitted case like a wet suit that gives some protection and makes a small compact package for the field.The VORTEX seemed to produce a slightly brighter image and was better at the lower magnification but had significant chromatic aberrations particularly at the higher powers. However, the VORTEX produced clear images even at higher magnifications when chromatic aberration wasn't a factor (e.g., the blue mall sign). Unfortunately targets are generally black & white - worst case for chromatic aberrations and the VORTEX.GENERAL COMMENTS - BUSHNELL: The BUSHNELL is bigger, bulkier and heavier and, to me, doesn't look as "cool". It has a dual focus - coarse and fine and they work kind of mushy; it doesn't have a nice "notch" when it's in focus, rather it has kind of a "plateau" where you're out of focus, then in focus for another turn or so, and then out of focus again. The lens covers are not attached and there is no provision for attaching them. The BUSHNELL comes in a rectangular semi-hard case that also serves as a cushion during shipping. As such it is a bit "clunky" looking and not what I would consider a "field case" although it has a shoulder strap.The BUSHNELL seemed to produce a slightly darker image but was much better in terms of image quality and sharpness at the higher magnification where chromatic aberrations occurred. The BUSHNELL was a clear winner in this regard.GENERAL COMMENTS ON BOTH:The VORTEX is around $700 & the BUSHNELL is under $400. Both scopes rotate via a thumbscrew on the tripod mounting ring.CONCLUSIONIf I were choosing based on 20x (and sometimes using it at 60x) and not using it where chromatic aberrations were an issue, I'd probably choose the VORTEX despite the price penalty.If I were choosing based on 60x (and sometimes using it at 20x) and knowing I'd be using it for target shooting and other applications where chromatic aberrations are an issue and clear images at 60x are a requirement, I'd choose the BUSHNELL even if it was priced as high as the VORTEX.

I use this scope for range spotting and it's great for that purpose. I can clearly see with my tired old eyes bullet holes at 200-300 yards without issue. I did have some trouble finding a suitable tripod. My existing camera tripod had a 1/4" mounting screw, and the scope requires I think a 3/8" screw. That was not mentioned in any review or spec that I read on this. I ended up purchasing a new table top scope for this without a head that had a 3/8" male screw that I think will work, but have not received it yet. I also purchased a few adapters between 1/4 and 3/8 to see if they would work. Will try and update this review once I get a chance to try it out. I wish a tripod came with and the specification indicated the mounting type. I may just be too new to the tripod game, but I didn't realize the differences between the mounts until after I purchased the scope - perhaps it's obvious to everyone else. The zoom focus is stiff - hoping that will loosen up with some use. One of my lens caps cracked after a few days, so I'm also looking for some decent flip up lens covers - but the optics and functionality of this scope are great and hard to beat at the price.Update: it turns out mount is actually 1/4", but it needs a fairly long screw. None of my camera mounts have a screw that is long enough to catch the threads. I found a 3/8 to 1/4 adapter with a longer screw and it now will mount and work. Frustrating, but happy now. It may just be a problem with the threads on mine. May contact manufacturer to see if they can improve this.

It's great that Amazon offers so many choices within almost any category of interest. I wanted a birding scope for field scanning and good magnification on target, understanding that this would require the use of a stable tripod. Scanning at 20X was great for distance (I estimate perhaps a quarter mile in this case) though not practicable within a close field. Full zoom to 60X magnifies atmospheric interference correspondingly and I could not get a really sharp image at such a distance even on a crisp September day.Specifically, a very patient bald eagle, perched on the chimney of an abandoned building (Manana Island, off Monhegan, midcoast Maine) was barely visible to the naked eye but easy to find at 20X. Zooming to 60X was difficult and disappointing: yes, the eagle stayed put and occupied more of the field of view but the zoom control grip was extremely stiff and the fine focus adjustment did not improve resolution.On the other hand, once you've got it stabilized and looking at stuff larger and slower than a bird, it's a great instrument.I have returned this scope because for my purposes it is too cumbersome for convenient use (16 inches and five pounds?). Coarse and fine focussing knobs are properly related but you'll have to teach your hand how to find them while manipulating your view and you'll also have to buy a wrench to shift the zoom grip.Amazon was prompt in accepting this return for full credit minus about $10 for customer dissatisfaction postage, a bargain for the experience.

After reading the reviews, this scope seemed like a good buy for the money. However, its actual performance was a big disappointment so I am returning it.I was not impressed that the scope was shipped in the flimsiest cardboard box I have seen for a while with no packing material at all. However, the scope was in a padded case so was undamaged. I attempted to get a clear focus at 200 yards so I could see and adjust my shots which were from a .223 rifle. The scope would not focus clearly and even at 60 power I could not see the bullet holes. Very poor optical quality. Even though it had two focus knobs, I was unable to get a crisp, clear image.