# Arrrrgh to the spotter



## Mr.CheddarNut (Jan 16, 2013)

Ok I cant decide on which scope to get. Even after pages of reviews and opinions. Even after reading the numerous threads on this site! Vortex seems to be one of the better values, and I am looking at the Viper 15-45x60 vs. the Diamond back 20-60X60. Now I know which one is "better" and while I may be able to get either, what stumps me is the question of is the Viper model "worth" almost double the cost of the Diamond Back?? 
So I suppose I would like to hear from those with a good amount of experience with both or similar models of equal performance. So what do you think?? I should mention that I am a hunter and will be glassing deer and elk primarily.

Thanks in advance

Cheddar


----------



## nocturnalenemy (Jun 26, 2011)

There was a lightly used Viper on MM today for $500 if that interests you.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Save a little more and get a Razor... seriously, heres why:

See the mountain in the shadow there in the background? Thats 2.4 miles away. Notice the bump on the right edge where it decends off the peak and rises up a little?










Yea this, well what do we have here... low power:









Waited for cloud to move and sun to come out... I'm holding my crappy cell phone up to the eyepiece here, its even sharper with the naked eye. High power.









2.4 miles and able to seperate billys from nannys. THAT'S why its worth saving a little more and going for a razor, its just an amazing difference.

-DallanC


----------



## Mr.CheddarNut (Jan 16, 2013)

Dallan,
That is truly amazing and remarkable. With razors being in the 1600 dollar realm I wouldn't have one for a few years. Thats not to say I wont trade up down the line. I appreciate your post.

Cheddar


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

I don't have experience with the Diamondback, but I do have the Viper HD 15-45 and I think it's a pretty good scope for the money. It does get a little blurry towards the upper magnification though. So far, it works well for my needs, but I'll upgrade down the road to a nicer model someday.

The nice thing with either Vortex is the warranty - If it gets bashed up on a trip, it's totally covered.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Mr.CheddarNut said:


> Dallan,
> That is truly amazing and remarkable. With razors being in the 1600 dollar realm I wouldn't have one for a few years. Thats not to say I wont trade up down the line. I appreciate your post.
> 
> Cheddar


I didnt pay anywhere near that for my 80mm

-DallanC


----------



## Blackie6 (Jul 7, 2014)

I have viper hd, my brother has diamond back. We both find the same animals, but side by side the viper hd has a very noticeable difference.


----------



## Mr.CheddarNut (Jan 16, 2013)

Amazon has it for $1599.00
Camerland has a demo model for $1350.00

20-60X85 Vortex Razor HD Spotter

From what I hear an absolute phenomenal product but still quite a bit for me to spend at this time.

Cheddar


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

I would definitely go with the viper, for a couple of reasons. One being I think the magnification is paired a lot better with the viper. You wont be able to use the 60 power very effectively with that quality of glass and objective on the diamondback. I also like having a slightly lower magnification for when you are actually glassing vs sizing up an animal. The viper should stay pretty clear through the whole range of magnification. Are you looking for the HD viper?


----------



## Mr.CheddarNut (Jan 16, 2013)

Blackie6 said:


> I have viper hd, my brother has diamond back. We both find the same animals, but side by side the viper hd has a very noticeable difference.


I looked at the two side by side last night. Granted the target was several miles away, but at first I was having a hard time telling the difference between the two in clarity...........................but then when I really concentrated and buckled down I could see a clear difference in clarity between the two. The Viper is much easier to focus as well (esp. with the micro adjustment dial) and if memory serves (which is questionable) seems like the eyepiece was much nicer on the viper?

Cheddar


----------



## Mr.CheddarNut (Jan 16, 2013)

brendo said:


> I would definitely go with the viper, for a couple of reasons. One being I think the magnification is paired a lot better with the viper. You wont be able to use the 60 power very effectively with that quality of glass and objective on the diamondback. I also like having a slightly lower magnification for when you are actually glassing vs sizing up an animal. The viper should stay pretty clear through the whole range of magnification. Are you looking for the HD viper?


Yes. Seems like the standard price for a new unit pretty much everywhere is $649.00.
$399.00 for the diamond back

Cheddar


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

If you are patient and don't mind buying used. I've seen em pop up for 450-500 or around 6 with a good tripod. I bought my 65MM razor on ksl for 900 but it was brand new. My friend bought a used 85MM razor for 1100 with a nice tripod that he later sold for 200.00 but we were lucky to get that one. just keep your eye out. Try places like rokslide.com archerytalk.com and monster muleys.


----------



## Shunter (Jul 23, 2014)

A couple months ago I bought the exact same models you asked about to test them out side by side. I ended up with the diamondback. Looking at a hillside at about 2-3 miles away the clarity was noticeable but it as big of a difference as I expected. It was middle of the day and I'd expect the twilight hours to be a bigger difference but didn't test it. The diamondback is quite a bit smaller and lighter which I like since most of my hunting is out if a backpack. My thinking was if I wanted the viper I might as well go to an 80mm scope for not much more weight.


----------



## OldEphraim (Mar 6, 2011)

"2.4 miles and able to seperate billys from nannys. THAT'S why its worth saving a little more and going for a razor, its just an amazing difference."

-DallanC[/QUOTE]

+1 on the razor. I initially bought the diamondback but returned it and purchased the razor after comparing the diamondback with my buddies razor in the field. A big difference that to me was well worth paying the extra money for the razor. If your willing to pay the higher price for the razor I would go that route.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Mr.CheddarNut said:


> From what I hear an absolute phenomenal product but still quite a bit for me to spend at this time.
> 
> Cheddar


I absolutely 100% understand this. I hunted for 20 years with a crappy Bushnell spotting scope before I finally upgraded. Had I really known the difference I would have done it sooner, but you can do alot with a lesser scope while you save up for a nice one.

-DallanC


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

I have the viper and it's been great. My only complaint is that it's a little bulky. Buying a scope in your budget now also doesn't preclude you from upgrading in the near future. I intend to sell my spotter and get a 85mm razor eventually, but for now it's one of the most important pieces of equipment I own. Also, Vortex's transferable warranty helps out resale value quite a bit when you do decide to upgrade.


----------



## swampfox (Dec 30, 2014)

I have the diamondback and it is ok. Anything past 40x is useless though, and even 40x is only really good in the middle of the day. I think its a good scope for the price, and I was able to tell spike elk from cows at distances just over a mile in the middle of the day. But dawn and dusk definitely leaves something to be desired. I don't have any experience with the viper, but if you have to means to do it, I would go with the nicer scope because I doubt you'll regret it in the long run. The diamondback is certainly passable and it works well for me 90% of the time, but I would prefer a little nicer scope.


----------



## nickpan (May 6, 2008)

I bought the Diamondback with the 60 mm objective lens and it was decent. Took it back and got the 80 mm objective lens and the difference was very noticeable. The larger lens helps compensate the lower quality glass. Is it a Viper or a Razor? No... But what you got for the extra cost wasn't worth it for me. The diamondback is a very nice scope for the money.


----------



## swampfox (Dec 30, 2014)

That's a good point, mine is the 60mm and 80mm would likely solve most of the shortcomings mine has. Also, the build quality is surprisingly good for the price.


----------



## chia6 (Jun 30, 2015)

I have the diamondback my brother has the viper hd. In low light the hd is definitely brighter. In full light the hd is a little clearer, but the diamondback is still really clear. The diamondback is lighter so if your planning on packing it while hiking that's something to think about. The focus dials on the hd are nicer, but iv never had any issues with the diamondback. You can zoom in closer to the animals with the 20x60x60, but it's not as clear as the full zoom on the hd. Both of them are good scopes, if your planning on backpacking id go with the diamondback for size, for everything else id go with the hd for the extra brightness inn low light.


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

I bought the Nomad a few years ago, before the Diamondback was around. It was a huge improvement over what I was using. I then saved until I could get the Razor. I now have both and they each have their purpose. The Razor doesn't ever leave the side of the truck and is nice for driving around and scouting long distance. The Nomad stays in my pack and gets hauled around while hunting etc. I really like both for each of their tasks. If I were to do it again I'd do it the same way, buy the cheaper one, which is still really nice, then save for the REALLY nice one, keeping both for their tasks as stated.


----------



## mtnrunner260 (Feb 15, 2010)

Marine. I've got the nomad and am really wanting to upgrade. Probably razor or better. 
I feel the nomad let's me down at last light in the evening. How much better is the razor and did you go 60 or 85?


----------



## Mr.CheddarNut (Jan 16, 2013)

I ended up going with the Viper HD 15-45x60. I haven't received it yet but I am super excited to get in the field with it. Thanks to all who gave input and generously offered up some demos and comparisons. I pretty much stretched myself to the max with the viper and that is the best I can afford at this time. I am sure it will due just fine. I still need to upgrade on the tripod. I have an old vanguard camera tripod that I am going to give a try and see how it does. Any suggestions??

Cheddar


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Mr.CheddarNut said:


> I ended up going with the Viper HD 15-45x60. I haven't received it yet but I am super excited to get in the field with it. Thanks to all who gave input and generously offered up some demos and comparisons. I pretty much stretched myself to the max with the viper and that is the best I can afford at this time. I am sure it will due just fine. I still need to upgrade on the tripod. I have an old vanguard camera tripod that I am going to give a try and see how it does. Any suggestions??
> 
> Cheddar


You'll like the Viper. I spent all last night looking through my viper binos and spotter. The vanguard camera tripod might work ok. I have a vanguard alta pan head tripod that has done the job just fine for all my hunting needs.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

You could just upgrade the head now and the legs later? A good head makes a world of difference. If your packing it in at all with you I would suggest the promaster 6160 my buddy has one it's really smooth and steady runs about 40 bucks and Allen's camera carrys them. The vanguard ph111v looks really good gets a little better reviews over the promaster and it's lighter weight I will be buying one for my self soon. As for legs I chose the slik sprint mini. For 3 reasons it's pretty inexpensive, it's good quality, and it's very compact and lightweight. The cons are it doesn't extend very tall so it's a sit only tripod. And it's not quite as steady as carbon fiber, but it's so much cheaper.


----------

