Nkon Spotting Scope

[scampo]

I detect a smidgeon of Nikon prejudice in this country fro some reason - but their optics have remained the choice of professional photographers for decades. So... do try the Nikon 82ED with 30 or 38x on a murky late afternoon and you'll be solidly impressed and when you look at the new sale offer from In Focus...

[Geoff Brown]

i'm very happy with my RAII angled, it's a very nice little lightweight and good value scope. Looking thru some of the "posher" models I cannot really see any substantial increase in performance for the additional £600 + you would end up paying.

[Leif]

I detect a smidgeon of Nikon prejudice in this country fro some reason - but their optics have remained the choice of professional photographers for decades. So... do try the Nikon 82ED with 30 or 38x on a murky late afternoon and you'll be solidly impressed and when you look at the new sale offer from In Focus...

I saw the InFocus offer: very appealing! That scope is on the list.

[scampo]

It's an interesting scope, the Nikon. My son has the Swarovski 65ED and the Nikon is the same dimensions (except for its objective lens, which is wider, naturally). Odd really for an 82mm scope. The Swaro zoom gives a somewhat wider field of view but is certainly no brighter, sharper or clearer (but definitely worth a good look if zooms are your prime lens).

Do let me know how you get on. Make sure to test them on a late murky afternoon! And do give the Opticron ES80 a try, too - could save you a packet.

[pduxon]

Have Warehouseexpress got any of 78eds left?

[scampo]

If you have the patience for the long delay as their web page loads (-: you will find that they advertise both straight and angled with the 38x lens for a mere £599-00. If this is the same as the 38x I tried it is a magnificent wide angle.

[pduxon]

If you have the patience for the long delay as their web page loads (-: you will find that they advertise both straight and angled with the 38x lens for a mere £599-00. If this is the same as the 38x I tried it is a magnificent wide angle.

seemed a good buy for Leif. Never have a problem with their web page at work!!

[Tim Allwood]

Have Warehouseexpress got any of 78eds left?

Hiya Pete - yes they still have some

despite not being a fan of big scopes I couldn't believe it and got one from there for £389 (incredible!) They are currently £449 - with a 30x or 38x eyepiece that £599 tops - you can get sec. hand eyepieces too.

The price I paid for scope and eyepiece was less than the price for one sec. hand from in focus currently advertised.

They are short as well and not really that heavy.

Scampo - i think you're right about a Nikon bias in UK, maybe people just following the herd I don't know. Even when I never had Nikon I always recognised them as (for me anyway) the best glass/coatings, if not the most watertight gear.

[scampo]

As an ex-marketing man, I ought to understand it, but what with their undoubted ascendancy in the photo field, it is a little odd - especially as by any objective reckoning they are as good or better than the top competition; and they are good value, too. Perhaps it was their expensive and very heavy bino of a few years back that didn't help? I remember rave reviews but when I held a pair, phew (and ~£1200 a pair, if I recall)!

[Leif]

As an ex-marketing man, I ought to understand it, but what with their undoubted ascendancy in the photo field, it is a little odd - especially as by any objective reckoning they are as good or better than the top competition; and they are good value, too. Perhaps it was their expensive and very heavy bino of a few years back that didn't help? I remember rave reviews but when I held a pair, phew (and ~£1200 a pair, if I recall)!

Sadly I am only prepared to shell out that sort of money for something that I can examine in the flesh BEFORE I hand over the thick wad of wonga to the grinning salesperson. After all, it might have a feature I do not like, or the unit I am sent might be a lemon and yet within quality control limits. It's too big a risk.

You would think that because Nikon are a fairly big company, they would have more to invest in research into coatings and production techniques. And yet Leica and Swaro (and maybe Zeiss) still hold a strong grip on the top end of the market.

[scampo]

Surprising final comments, Leif - I have never seen any comment on Nikon's coatings, etc. that has suggested they are in any way lacking. At a photographic level they are the undisputed leaders and I'm sure that their technology is at the forefront.

If you compare the Leica Apo77 with the new Nikon ED82 you'll have a surprise in store if you expect to see the Leica running away with the honours.

Here are some recent quotations from reviews on Nikon binos and scopes in which Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski were all also tested:

"The testers were pleased by the optical performance, rating them as 'optically excellent' with a bright, clear image with a real '3D quality'. Very good field of view and depth of field, and good close-focus."

": Like its 42mm big brother, this was rated 'excellent', being bright with good contrast, wide field of view and 'rich colours "

"As with other Nikon products I've tested, the optical performance of the ED82 A was faultless and it performed outstandingly in the gloomy conditions around dusk."

"In very poor light, the Nikon maintains its performance better than the Kowa and Swarovski..."

"Optically, near faultless "

"All in all, the new Nikon Venturer LX 8x32s clearly set a new standard in mid-sized roof-prism glasses, replacing the Leica 8x32s as the BVD Reference Standard in their class."

[Tim Allwood]

the venturers (US) are same as the hgs (UK) I think

[scampo]

That's right. I looked through a pair today. As good as they come.

[Tim Allwood]

true, i was amazed Scampo
seemed to beat the others hands down

I think people tend to buy what they see others with or what is very expensive (if possible) as there is the easy assumption to make that they are the best quality
I always remember trying some 8x30 Nikon porros that were about £200 and I couldn't believe how good they were.

[scampo]

I read that the guy who owns Ace Cameras uses Nikon porros and swears nothing but nothing can beat them optically. When I first became keen on this hobby Leica and Zeiss held sway with Nikon coming third overall in popularity. Recently Swarovzski have learned the tricks of the trade and amazingly pushed Zeiss away from the very top slot with Leica. But Nikon remain with a very faithful band of followers and in the US are considered the best with a very few others.

[Leif]

Surprising final comments, Leif - I have never seen any comment on Nikon's coatings, etc. that has suggested they are in any way lacking. At a photographic level they are the undisputed leaders and I'm sure that their technology is at the forefront.

If you compare the Leica Apo77 with the new Nikon ED82 you'll have a surprise in store if you expect to see the Leica running away with the honours.



My point about Nikon bins was that they have not sold as well as Leica/Swaro/Zeiss. The quality is there: to my eyes the Nikon 8x32 HG is much brighter than the Leica 8x32 BN, and I suspect this little bin is creating a reputation for Nikon among birders. The 8x42 HG is nice, but as you say it is a bit heavy. The Nikon 8x32 SE is outstanding.

I would disagree that Nikon are the undisputed leaders in photographic optics, but I'll stop there as such comments can start online fights!

BTW IIRC you bought your Nikon scope at InFocus who do not sell Leica, which leads me to ask if you compared it against the Leica APO 77 scope?

[scampo]

Over the years I have probably looked through more Leica scopes than any other, and, without doubt, the Apo77 was always going to be my first choice as it is such a brilliant scope. But an Apo62 at RSPB Minsmere had a sheered off locking pin locator and a s/h 77Apo at a local shop had a faulty clouded inner coating on its objective lens. Rightly or wrongly such things affected my view of Leica.

Also ergonomics count for me a good deal as I enjoy long walks, and the Nikon is an extraordinarily compact scope - the same length, would you believe, as the Swaro 65? Add to this a brighter objective lens, a wider zoom (25-75x) and equal optical excellence... and the fact that Nikon kit (the ED82 and 8x32HG) is used by a top Leicestershire birder whom I have always respected... and there you have it.

[Art Thorn]

This thread has gotten a bit off topic, but I figure I'll throw my two cents (pence?) worth in. I've been a poor birder for about 40 years - only recently have I had money to spend on cameras, bins and scopes, and I've done just that! After much buying and selling I've settled on a TeleVue 85 Scope with REALLY wide angle Televue eyepieces (brilliant equipment but heavy!), three pairs of Nikon binocs (10x32 HG, 8x32 SE, 10x42 SE), Canon 1N body with L optics and Kodak/Canon 560 Digital body. So, pretty obviously, no brand loyalty. And sometimes (in my opinion) a used piece of pro gear is better than a new piece of consumer gear. Hence the Kodak 560 Body, which is a tank, and originally listed for more than my car, but is pro through and through and takes superb pictures. I recently saw people out in 'Owl Woods' eyeing my 10x42 SE's with some smugness while their red trade marks were clearly in view. But I bought those optics last because they are absolutely the best I have looked through (and light for a 42), porros or not. So, we all have our biases and some go overboard on brand loyalty, but if we go out birding and spend more time looking at the badges on the gear, then we have the wrong hobby.

[scampo]

Now if you want to get a different kind of look from the red-spot or green-rubber brigade wear all three binos at the same time with your scopes slung around your back.


Actually you could make them jealous by asking them to look through the bins - especially the 8x32 Nikons!

[Dave B Smith]

I bought the Nikon 60 Fieldscope III ED last year and LOVE it. At the time, Nikon's large scope (78) did not appear as well designed and was NOT waterproof. With the release of the 82 Fieldscope ED, all of the 78's shortcomings have been fixed. If I was buying today, this would be my choice (although I am quite content to continue with the 60). I'll also throw in a plug for an angled model. If you share your views at all, this will help tremendously.

[scampo]

Odd that because another contributor (Pete or Tim?) has recently said he compared it with a Leica and didn't think it was up to scratch. How different we all are. The ED82 certainly compares favouirably with the Leica - and the EDIII has had so many rave reviews, too.

[pduxon]

Odd that because another contributor (Pete or Tim?) has recently said he compared it with a Leica and didn't think it was up to scratch. How different we all are. The ED82 certainly compares favouirably with the Leica - and the EDIII has had so many rave reviews, too.

I said I didn't think the Fieldscope EDIII seemed as good as the HR66/ES80.
I think what I said was that the Leica APO was a better scope then my ES80 optically. Whether it is worth the extra dunno.

Never looked through an ED82. I seem to remember a cetain person (Scampo) saying once that the ED82 wasn't much better than the ES80.......

[william j clive]

Interesting fact about the Leica 77 APO. Two of my birding friends have this scope, and very impressive it is, too. However one of them has twice had to return his two year old scope to have the objective lens coating replaced. The other friend has had the same problem and had the coating replaced once.

The problem is that the objective lens coating blisters or 'bubbles'. One of them has become somewhat paranoid about this and mentions it to every Leica user he meets. An inspection of the objective ensues and he has found some that have the same problem.

Apparently Leica have now signed an agreement with Pentax to use the Pentax super hard lens coating on Leica products. One can see why. Both my mates now have an expensive Leica (c£80) filter over the objective lens to try and prevent this happening again. The truth is that no matter how much you pay for your optics, not even Leica are bulletproof.

[scampo]

I said I didn't think the Fieldscope EDIII seemed as good as the HR66/ES80.
I think what I said was that the Leica APO was a better scope then my ES80 optically. Whether it is worth the extra dunno.

Never looked through an ED82. I seem to remember a cetain person (Scampo) saying once that the ED82 wasn't much better than the ES80.......Indeed - in the Rutland Water In Focus shop on a sunny late autumn afternoon that certainly seemed the case. And as I don't have an ES80 now they might well yet be the same. I have no reason to suspect that the Opticron scope isn't the bargain of the decade (if £550-00 can be so described - and assuming the eyepiece-bubbles problem is fixed!). But it wasn't you Pete, then, who said this as the comparison was definitely with an Apo77.

One thing I can say is that this afternoon the light was as fantastically clear as I've known it and the ED82, even at 75x, was bright, and utterly sharp across the whole view edge-to-edge. But all I had to look at was a crow...

[scampo]

That's interesting Clive because the s/h 77Apo I nearly bought from a shop in Leicester had a kind of cloudiness on its front objective element, but on the inside surface. None the less the scope sold within half a day!

I recall someone else commenting on Leica coatings coming off. Truly amazing really, if it is not an unusual incident, given the long history of this companies R&D!

[Jasonbirder]

I`m sure the Nikon scopes would be more popular if they were Waterproofed and Nitrogen purged as optically they are comparable with other top scopes.

I`ve never had an issue with heavy optics and would like the chance to try out the Opolyth TBS100HD as at the end of the day no amount of coating/tweaking can substitute for a bigger objective....

[scampo]

Now Jason you're absolutley not the sort to have your head in the sand but where have you been. Too busy involved in heated debates perhaps... (I've been reading your other thread reply).


((-:

Anyway - joking aside - many of Nikon's optics have been nitrogen purged and watertight for a fair old time now: scopes and binos. The ED78 wasn't (although it was "water resistant") , I know, but that is a discontinued model.

[pduxon]

Steve

I could well have said 77 if I said it then it was.

However your own recollection is incorrect. Sunny ??? Not what you said me old mate

"With a friend I was able to compare an ES80 with 20-60x zoom today in dull conditions at Rutland Water against the new Nikon Fieldscope 82 with equivalent zoom. The ES80 was very bright and sharp except at 60x when the image was a little disappointing; certainly - to our surprise, it compared well with the Nikon in every way.

But, we then had the chance to look through an Opticron HR66GAED and...

to the both of us, it proved the best of the three at all magnifications - bright, clear, sharp...

Now this is thoroughly confusing - I thought the Nikon would wipe the floor with the Opticrons. Absolutely it didn't and the 66mm seemed to be a gem - and, as I say, viewing conditions were trying. Sadly I hadn't got my son's Swarovski 65ED with me but, you know, I have a sneaky feeling that the Opticron 66 would have stood up well."

[Jasonbirder]

Didn`t realise that....was thinking of the ED78 model thought that was still the current "Big-bore" Nikon!

[Leif]

Apparently Leica have now signed an agreement with Pentax to use the Pentax super hard lens coating on Leica products. One can see why. Both my mates now have an expensive Leica (c£80) filter over the objective lens to try and prevent this happening again. The truth is that no matter how much you pay for your optics, not even Leica are bulletproof.

Years ago Leica would put a hard MgFl coating on all optical surfaces of the 8x32 binocular - and maybe others too. Presumably they stopped this prefering instead to multi-coat them as per the other surfaces.

I wonder if those people who found the external surface of their Leica objectives blistering - and I assume it is the external one - tended to use them near the sea? I have heard that salts in sea air can damage coatings, and that they should be given a careful cleaning after a day at the seaside.

[scampo]

Seems like we both suffer with slight slips of memory (but I still think it was someone else - it was in an RSPB shop recently)

(-:

I should have checked my post as you did - but my opinion on those two excellent Opticron scopes hasn't changed except for the issue regarding quality control. I think the HR66ED is overpriced to be honest compared to the ES80, but it is a very solid scope so that might be the reason.

A point about the Nikon is that it is as compact as the HR66 in length and brighter than the 80 - amazing really.

[pduxon]

Seems like we both suffer with slight slips of memory (-: I should have checked my post as you did - but my opinion on those two excellent Opticron scopes hasn't changed except for the issue regarding quality control. I think the HR66ED is overpriced to be honest compared to the ES80, but it is a very solid scope so that might be the reason.

We're both getting old.

[scampo]

Now I could say I wish I was born in '64! A vintage year for music, for sure (although I was a little too young to appreciate it then). Coming up to the b-i-g 4-0 I see then?

And we are both happy to admit our ages publicly - honesty rules, okay!

[scampo]

If this formats correctly, you might appreciate this poem, Pete:

40 – LOVE

middle - aged

couple - playing

ten - nis

when - the

game - ends

and - they

go - home

the - net

will - still

be - be

tween - them

[pduxon]

Yep 40 next July. I'll be on a family holiday in Norfolk. No birding but I might suggest a walk down to Holkham beach or along the front at Hunstanton and ..... the bins will be with me

[scampo]

Yep 40 next July. I'll be on a family holiday in Norfolk. No birding but I might suggest a walk down to Holkham beach or along the front at Hunstanton and ..... the bins will be with meGreat place to be at forty! Hope the sun shines on that wonderful beach.

The poem didn't format, sadly - there is supposed to be a wide gap between each pair of words per line, like the two sides of a tennis court. It's by Roger McGough.

[Leif]

I recall someone else commenting on Leica coatings coming off. Truly amazing really, if it is not an unusual incident, given the long history of this companies R&D!

Some years ago I heard a couple of reports that Leica were refusing to honour the warranty on several pairs of bins that had leaked. (Presumably they warranty them to a certain depth, and believed that the user had taken them deeper.) I later heard that the leaks were caused by a supplier providing Leica with the wrong kind of grease.

However, one source of this story was a salesman at a well known optics store (you know the ones) which did not (and still do not) stock Leica due (as I later found out) to too small a profit margin. So the story might be false, and have been spread by someone with something to gain.

[scampo]

These things have a habit of developing way ahead of the truth in a weird way. I would, myself, absolutely trust Leica (there 60mm Apo scope is a delight) - but I have heard from two suppliers (both of whom stock Leica products) that they find Swarovski and Nikon very quick to deal with on replacing and repairing, whereas Leica - they say - can be very slow. I have also seen more faulty Leica scopes than any other except Opticron - but that's still only two!

[Tim Allwood]

anyone ever hear of a big nikon scope that leaked?

as I've said before my mates had three diff. pairs of Swarovs in Peru and they've all let water in!

[Swissboy]

.. and the fact that Nikon kit (the ED82 and 8x32HG) is used by a top Leicestershire birder whom I have always respected... and there you have it.


OK, Steve, there you have it: following the crowd! ;)

But, seriously now, Leica's Trinovid 77 has been around much longer, and there may not have been such a push for lighter equipment at the time. In fact, after I had bought the lightweight Nikon ED III I wrote Leica suggesting they come up with something similar. From their reply it did not look as if they had realized the potential for such a scope then. In the end, that may be why they were the last ones to come out with the smaller model.

[Swissboy]

I'll also throw in a plug for an angled model. If you share your views at all, this will help tremendously.

I am afraid, I can't agree with you on this point. My brother, who is also an avid birder is quite a bit taller than I am. We love to do some joint birding if time permits. Now, he recently switched to an angled model, which allows him to use a lighter weight tripod without sacrificing stability. Occasionally, when one of us has spotted something we look through the other scope for faster location of the object. But since he has his angled scope I have more problems to even get the full picture. And most of the time now, I don't even see what I am supposed to see. I find stretching myself plus angling my head is much more uncomfortable. Thus, the argument of a more universal use is only valid if the tall guys use their scope at a less than optimal height. It may be different for those who do not need glasses. In my case, the view I finally get is one through the close-focussing part of my glasses.

But, aside from this , I still think that angled lenses are themselves somewhat of a fashion thing. (Again, following the crowd, so to speak.) They are undoubtedly better for looking up into the sky. But they are a strain on my neck for all other purposes. In addition, as one looks into the lens, the other eye is directed towards the ground (in most cases). Whereas in straight models both eyes look into the same direction and the unaided one may detect something flying by or some other activity at the same time that the other one is scanning.

[scampo]

Well Robert, all was impressively logical until "... a fashion thing". Now, if you were a biggie and had neck problems (as many of us tall ones do), then you would know that angled scopes are a godsend. As for not finding the birds - well, you get used to it, as is the case with many things that are used regularly.

If I am with other birders who are shorter (and most are), then I do drop the scope down in case they want to look - and it is still comfortable. The very worst for me is the poorly designed hides (presumably designed by a shortie) where the viewing slot is so low as to be silly. I end up with a tension headache and all the other associated problems that brings.

As for "following the crowd" - with a Nikon? Only the few of us that are blessed with the gifts of perspicacity and discernment buy those. Surely you knew that already as a Nikon owner?

[pduxon]

Well Robert, all was impressively logical until "... a fashion thing". Now, if you were a biggie and had neck problems (as many of us tall ones do), then you would know that angled scopes are a godsend. As for not finding the birds - well, you get used to it, as is the case with many things that are used regularly.

If I am with other birders who are shorter (and most are), then I do drop the scope down in case they want to look - and it is still comfortable. The very worst for me is the poorly designed hides (presumably designed by a shortie) where the viewing slot is so low as to be silly. I end up with a tension headache and all the other associated problems that brings.

As for "following the crowd" - with a Nikon? Only the few of us that are blessed with the gifts of perspicacity and discernment buy those. Surely you knew that already as a Nikon owner?

I got used to an angled scope fairly quickly, very handy for those of us over 6ft

[Swissboy]

Interesting fact about the Leica 77 APO. Two of my birding friends have this scope, and very impressive it is, too. However one of them has twice had to return his two year old scope to have the objective lens coating replaced. The other friend has had the same problem and had the coating replaced once.

The problem is that the objective lens coating blisters or 'bubbles'. One of them has become somewhat paranoid about this and mentions it to every Leica user he meets. An inspection of the objective ensues and he has found some that have the same problem.

Apparently Leica have now signed an agreement with Pentax to use the Pentax super hard lens coating on Leica products. One can see why. Both my mates now have an expensive Leica (c£80) filter over the objective lens to try and prevent this happening again. The truth is that no matter how much you pay for your optics, not even Leica are bulletproof.

Looks like I have had more luck, so far. I have owned the Trinovid Apo 77 ever since it came out. Never had any problems. The only time something went wrong was when a heavy gust up at Masada in Israel threw my tripod over and the scope banged full force on the rock it was standing on. Apparently it hit the ground a bit sideways judging from a few scratches on the lens shade. The only thing that broke was the tripod attachment, but the optics did not need any repair whatsoever. I felt - and I still do - that this was a very good proof of quality for that model. But it is clear that I also had some luck, as my brother's angled Trinovid once fell onto its prism housing, and the whole component had to be replaced. It too fell full force on a rock.

[scampo]

I got used to an angled scope fairly quickly, very handy for those of us over 6ftAnd they don't make a straight through ES80, Pete, so I guess the guy at Opticron is one of us, too!

I'm 6'4" all but. Used to hate it when I was a teenager but wouldn't change it now - it means I can be 15 stones and have people still say I'm slim!

[scampo]

I reckon there as good as they come, really - what else from Leica? A bit too heavy and long if that matters, that's all. Super zoom lens.

[Swissboy]

I got used to an angled scope fairly quickly, very handy for those of us over 6ft

I was not talking about pointing the scope at the object. My brother also got accustomed quickly to that after he had switched to an angled scope. I was refering to the fact that I don't get to see the already focused bird because I have to stretch and angle at the same time. And then I get it only through the close-focus part of my glasses.

[pduxon]

And they don't make a straight through ES80, Pete, so I guess the guy at Opticron is one of us, too!

I'm 6'4" all but. Used to hate it when I was a teenager but wouldn't change it now - it means I can be 15 stones and have people still say I'm slim!

Don't understand why they don't, they do with the HR and its cheaper.

You beat me for height but not for weight :C

[Swissboy]

". Now, if you were a biggie and had neck problems (as many of us tall ones do), then you would know that angled scopes are a godsend.


Steve, I can assure you that shorter people can also have neck problems. And in my case, it turns out that I do best if I can hold my head more or less horizontally.

My neck problems are also the reason that light-weight binoculars are high on my preferences-list, making it difficult to decide for a pair that would do better in dim light.

[Dave B Smith]

Swissboy,
Trying to stretch up to look down into an angle scope doesn't seem logical at all. The scope height should be set for the shorter viewer and then ole stretch can just lean over when he wants to look or alternatively do like I often do:
I set my scope on tripod for my height, then when others that might be considerably shorter (I'm just 5'8)want a look, I just loosen the housing lock and rotate the whole thing and then the eyepiece rolls way down. Takes just a second. Not sure if all models have this roll feature but the Nikon Fieldscope III does and it is handy.

And then for those times you're looking for a bird in the top of a high, close tree --- can't imagine this with a straight scope.

Anyway, these are personal decisions and one should always get what works best for him. For me and my wife, that's an angled scope.

[scampo]

I can only agree with Dave regarding personal choice. For myself, having owned a straight through scope for much of my birding life, I can now say that without the angled scope I wouldn't be using one hardly at all. It must depend upon the nature of the neck problem but, for me, looking downwards is easily the most comfortable. My brother still has my old straight-through and seems to get on well with it.

When standing upright (i.e. not in a hide) a correctly raised straight is also fine for me but this does seem less user friendly when others need to share the scope.

[Art Thorn]

I've run into situations where a straight through has been the only usable scope. A good deal of my shorebirding is done in a protected area, over a high buffer of grasses. Angled scopes, unless you can somehow turn them upside down (try that one on your neck) just don't get you the height required. That said, I've switched to a 90 degree scope, so can't see in those situations at all. But stability is way up, as my tripod is a good foot lower. If I really find I'm going to miss too much good viewing, I can buy 60 degree or even straight through prisms/mirrors for my Televue. Another bonus for a terrific product.

[Dave B Smith]

Art,
The Nikon can be rolled in its housing 90 deg. so that the eyepiece is on the same horizontal plane as the scope. This will take care of those instances you mention for shorebirding.

[Art Thorn]

That's a great feature. Is that the 82 only, or do the others allow that as well? Another challenge to waterproofing!

[Dave B Smith]

Mine is the Fieldscope III 60. I believe the 82 is modeled after this one.

[Swissboy]

Swissboy,
I just loosen the housing lock and rotate the whole thing and then the eyepiece rolls way down. Takes just a second.
And then for those times you're looking for a bird in the top of a high, close tree --- can't imagine this with a straight scope.

Yes Dave, that tree situation is a problem with a straight scope, but I am not that much of a forest birder. The idea of rolling the scope is good, I think most angled scopes have that feature, so I'll try it next time I am out with my brother.

[Swissboy]

That's a great feature. Is that the 82 only, or do the others allow that as well? Another challenge to waterproofing!

The rotation feature does not affect the optical system. It goes around the scope barrel, and therefore, there is no extra problem keeping such a scope waterproof.

[Adey Baker]

Some stay-on cases can prevent the rotation feature so this is a point worth checking before you buy

[scampo]

My son's Swarovski 65 in its Skua case is just like that - and to focus you have to virtually remove the centre portion of the sleeve. Good old Nikon - on the ED82, the case easily allows adjustment of scope rotation and focusing.