Larger Pentax spotting scope choice? PF-100 or PF-85? (1 Viewer)

[sidpost]

I have two small Athlon spotting scopes so, a PF-65 would be redundant for me and closer range needs. I wear glasses so, reasonable eye relief is needed as well. I realize the eyepiece is a critical part of the "system" so, I am not overlooking this system element!

I need visibility in overcast skies and dawn and dusk. I am not looking for crazy high magnifications but I need something that will run at 300~500 yards well for wildlife larger than songbirds. I also want to be able to spot ships off the coast at a mile or more from the shoreline or higher up on a dock if available.

The PF-85 weighs ~3lbs versus PF-100 at ~6lbs and the PF-85 is ~4" shorter. Both are $1200~$1500 depending on where you find a new body for sale.

Now, assuming you have the same, or similar eyepieces for each, how will they compare to each other in the field in terms of optical performance in addition to general transportation issues (weight and size assuming both will use the same tripod).

What eyepiece is suggested for this type of application? I am assuming fixed but, can be swayed towards a variable but, tend to think a fixed eyepiece will have a better Field of View and a more consistent eye relief.

Or, do I need to step up to a ~$3K spotting scope from one of the European manufacturers? I would rather save up longer to buy the right scope as opposed to buying "twice" to get what I really need versus being tempted by a PF-85 and a couple of eyepieces.

TIA,
Sid

 

[DRodrigues]

Can't comment the 85 model but I have experience with 2 PF100 - see test of 100mm scopes
The PF100 is a nice scope but need the right eps to deliver all its potential. XWs are nice eps but the Pentax zoom eps aren't the best.
Within some weeks I can tell if a new astro wide zoom will reach focus and work well.
For the same mags, the 100 will have much more light than the 85.
I can't comment the weight issue since is not important for me... The PF100 has a nice stay-in case that makes it easy to transport.
A not so good detail of the PF100 is that is not a very robust scope and both models I have are presently with the prisms needing "collimation" - probably due to bad treatment from students...

 

[Montereyman]

No readily apparent but the 100mm objective provides 38% more surface area than a 85mm objective and so a significant increase in light transmission.

The Celestron 100mm ED scope weighs 4.6 lbs and has excellent reviews.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/917620-REG/celestron_52306_regal_m2_100ed_spotting.html/reviews

"Went birding today and was able to do a back to back comparison between the Celestron and an 80mm Swarovski. Now that's not a fair comparison coz the Celestron in a bigger heavier scope but on the other hand the Swarovski does cost more than twice as much. So visually which was better? Smaller high end or bigger mid range quality? Well it was not even close! Celestron for the win. Day and night brighter and just as crisp. (both scopes were focused on two bald eagles in a tree at 400 yds) The build quality on the Celestron is nice but not as nice as the Swarovski"

 

[DRodrigues]

Celestron and other Chinese made scopes seem to suffer from smaller prisms that vignette when using wider FOV eps. The PF100 has prism larger than the 1.25" FOV - there is a gain using 2" eps with this scope - search at Pentax posts here at BF.

 

[PlayFreeBird]

You are looking at the new model. I paid much less when I bought the PF-80ED some years ago. Really can't offer anything on the optical comparisons, but remember atmospheric effects are going to affect mile long views over water. That said it performed splendidly for me at that distance looking at the Steller's Sea Eagle.
Remember too that you will need a very solid tripod when you calculate weight.