Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 4/13/2006 3:43:08 PM EDT
I saw an ad somewhere for a wireless camera and monitor that could be used to replace a spotting scope. What you do is put the camera down range somewhere (safe) in front of the target, and it sends the monitor an image of the target so you can see your hits.

I've seen wireless cameras like this, but I found this idea of using it in this situation to be a great. It might be a little expensive, but not any more than a good spotting scope. No more having to move position and take the time to look thru the scope. Just glance at the monitor from any position, everyone else can see too.

So does anyone use this method? I don't remember the name of the system so I couldn't look into the specs. I'm not sure how long the batteries would last.
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 3:44:30 PM EDT
Better yet, I think it was in Cabela's catalog a few years back, there was a high end spotting scope that had a 4" LCD monitor you could hook up to it. The whole rig was well over $1k, but it looks pretty dang nifty.
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 3:45:43 PM EDT
sounds like a gross violation of KISS
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 3:46:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Matthew_Q:
Better yet, I think it was in Cabela's catalog a few years back, there was a high end spotting scope that had a 4" LCD monitor you could hook up to it. The whole rig was well over $1k, but it looks pretty dang nifty.

I was thinking about something like that a while ago. The problem is the expense (since you still need a spotting scope) and all the other downfalls to using a spotting scope (shake, glare, blurriness, etc.).

With the "camera up by the target" idea, you don't need any type of magnification, and even a black and white camera from the 80's can show bullet holes rather well.
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 3:47:24 PM EDT
one of those baby monitor things would probably work
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 3:50:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/13/2006 3:52:17 PM EDT by NoSoupForYou]
I took a look at Cabelas and realized that's where I saw it: www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/product/standard-item.jsp?_DARGS=/cabelas/en/common/catalog/item-link.jsp_A&_DAV=MainCatcat20712&id=0037494227913a&navCount=3&podId=0037494&parentId=cat420016&navAction=push&catalogCode=IG&rid=&parentType=index&indexId=cat420016&hasJS=true

So I assume no one has ever used it? That model seems cheap, only 100 yard range, I wouldn't mind spending $3-400 since that would still be half the cost of a good spotter.
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 3:50:41 PM EDT
I'd go with the spotting scope, it's simpler, I'm guessing more robust, and what if you want to look at something else downrange other than the target the camera is focused on?
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 3:57:01 PM EDT
Great... you get it all set up and then some fucktard in another lane shoots your fucking camera.

No thanks.

I concur with the K.I.S.S. comment.

Link Posted: 4/13/2006 4:01:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GonzoAR15-1:
Great... you get it all set up and then some fucktard in another lane shoots your fucking camera.

No thanks.

I concur with the K.I.S.S. comment.


There are plenty of hills and land masses to hide the camera behind at my range, or I can put it in the top shelf of the bunker.

As far as KISS< I would think throwing a camera on the ground and turning a monitor on would be just as simple if not simpler than using and readjusting a spotting scope.
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 4:05:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/13/2006 4:05:54 PM EDT by GonzoAR15-1]
EDITED TO DELETE: WTF -- super delayed double post

Link Posted: 4/13/2006 4:08:00 PM EDT
Don't forget the camera needs power.

And the downside I see is the range of the wireless signal.
If your only shooting 100 yards, fine but after that your gonna have problems.
Ever priced 100 yards worth of 110 extension cord?

Or am I missing something?
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 4:09:47 PM EDT
okay, how about a small black and white camera that can send a signal 500 yards to a cheap portable battery powered tv.

linky

now its also small enough to hide it behind a brick or a piece of a 6x6, not perfect armor but it might save the camera, also the 500 yard range is with a good receiving ant, most likely you would get more like 200 yards
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 4:11:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rock7:
Don't forget the camera needs power.

And the downside I see is the range of the wireless signal.
If your only shooting 100 yards, fine but after that your gonna have problems.
Ever priced 100 yards worth of 110 extension cord?

Or am I missing something?

The camera I linked to is battery powered. The range is short and the battery probably doesn't last long, which is why I was wondering if anyone ever saw a better quality model.

BTW, what is 110 extension cord? I am an electrician, I have special contacts (Home Depot) where I can get 50' extension cords for $15 each. But I wouldn't be using extension cords anyway.
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 4:13:26 PM EDT
how about digital camcorder? Yes its off the wall but a coworker and I used the 200 digital zoom since I left the scope at home and he had that in the truck. Was kind of cool since you could keep an eye one the shooter if you were spotting. Sorry not wireless but just a slight hijack.
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 4:16:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tz99:
how about digital camcorder? Yes its off the wall but a coworker and I used the 200 digital zoom since I left the scope at home and he had that in the truck. Was kind of cool since you could keep an eye one the shooter if you were spotting. Sorry not wireless but just a slight hijack.

You were able to see bullet holes with digital zoom? What distance?
Top Top