Nikon Fieldscope new v old eyepieces?

[tallgrass]

Hi

In another thread I mentioned that I recently bought a new Fieldscope III. I am extremely happy with it thus far. Small, light, compact, very well made and optics that are superb. I am presently using a 20x eyepiece and a 30x, both bought second hand and of the older style with fold down eyecups. While I am more than happy with the performance of these eyepieces, I am wondering how good the new style fully muticoated ones are. At a cost of around five times the price of my secondhand 'bargains' are they really that much better? I assume they will be slightly brighter and give a little better eye relief, but five times worth of improvement? The cost of a new 30x W equates to about 67% of the cost of a new Fieldscope III angled model! Are Nikon taking the P***! or what?
Comments please.

[Hermann]

I am presently using a 20x eyepiece and a 30x, both bought second hand and of the older style with fold down eyecups. While I am more than happy with the performance of these eyepieces, I am wondering how good the new style fully muticoated ones are. At a cost of around five times the price of my secondhand 'bargains' are they really that much better?

We've got both versions of the 20-45x zoom and the 30x WA in the family, so I've had plenty of opportunity to compare them in the field. It's just like you said - the new versions are slightly better, they've got slightly better contrast, the image looks a bit cleaner and the colours more vibrant. This seems me to be most obvious in the 20-45x zoom at high magnifications. But even with the zoom the difference isn't that great.

I personally wouldn't buy the new versions of the 20x and the 30x. The prices for the new style eyepieces are simply too high and the differences too small to justify the expense. However, if you ever decide to get a zoom I'd go for one of the multicoated zooms.

Hermann

[Graham Osborne]

Hi Tallgrass

I have an old style 30x eyepiece on my EDIIIA. I have been very happy with it, but I decided to have a look at the new style eyepieces (30x + the zoom model) at the In Focus tent at the Rutland Birdfair. Whilst I did not think to take my own eyepiece along for a direct comparison, my impression was that there was probably not a great deal of difference in the 'view' between the two 30x eyepieces, at least not enough for me to consider 'trading up'. I found the field of view of the zoom too restricted for my own taste, and I very quickly decided that I do not need to make an investment in this particular area for the forseeable future. I hope this unscientific assessment is of some use.

Graham

[Ivan]

Hi Tallgrass
I still use an old EDII scope with the zoom lens. I thought of trading up to a newer model when I started digiscoping. I then tried to get an adaptor to fit my 'scope/camera but did not want the Eagleeye type setup. I went to a well known optical dealer on the North Norfolk coast and was told I would have to buy a new eyepiece to enable the connection. This was going to cost around £400. I asked if I could try the new zoom on my scope, which they were only too happy to allow. I fitted the new one and focused on some pines some way in the distance. A very bright picture and a wide field of view at the lower end and a hazier but dimmer view at the top end. Overall I was quite impressed. I then put my old zoom on and repeated the test. I was hard pushed to see much difference! It is easy to be led into thinking it's new so it must be better. Considering the cost I stuck to my old one. However I have had to buy a new 24x to fit the Nikon adaptor to and find this a lot brighter and a wider angle than the old zoom.

Ivan

[kabsetz]

Having used and tested most of the old and new Fieldscope eyepieces, I pretty much second everything Herman said above. If you want more, spend your money on the 20-60 MC II zoom. It will give you many more options and the slight improvements in contrast and light transmission (yes, even though it is a zoom, it has slightly better light transmission than the wide-angles) that the newer versions of the WA's would. Also, eye-relief in the new WA's is the same, for all practical purposes, than in the rubber-eyecupped older models. The zoom, however, does not have very good eye-relief, so if you wear glasses, check this out.

Kimmo

[tallgrass]

Thank you all for your comments. I am now convinced the best route for me is to save myself a lot of money and look around for an older style 40x to compliment the 20X & 30X eyepieces I already have. As stated earlier I am very pleased with the performance of these two eyepieces.

I spent the best part of a day trying them out both in my garden and later in the field. I was a little disappointed at first with the 30X (just received that morning) and then realised the problem was the atmospheric conditions and time of day not the eyepiece(s). Clean air with little turbulence will have the greatest positive effect on image quality.

After my crude evaluation I came to the conclusion that the Fieldscope III with it's 60mm objective was not far from its usable limit at 30X and could go as high as 40X on a bright and contrasty day, but not much further. At 30X I noticed the slightest degree of softness just creeping in while chromatic aberration was still very well controlled. I can see why Nikon recommend zoom eyepieces with maximum magnifications of 45X for the Fieldscope. That evening when it was dark I did the street lamp test and found the Fieldscope to be superbly baffled and flare was virtually none existent.
This is an exquisite little scope.

[scampo]

Hi

In another thread I mentioned that I recently bought a new Fieldscope III. I am extremely happy with it thus far. Small, light, compact, very well made and optics that are superb. I am presently using a 20x eyepiece and a 30x, both bought second hand and of the older style with fold down eyecups. While I am more than happy with the performance of these eyepieces, I am wondering how good the new style fully muticoated ones are. At a cost of around five times the price of my secondhand 'bargains' are they really that much better? I assume they will be slightly brighter and give a little better eye relief, but five times worth of improvement? The cost of a new 30x W equates to about 67% of the cost of a new Fieldscope III angled model! Are Nikon taking the P***! or what?
Comments please.
If you are near to Loughborough, or visit Rutland Water... you can borrow ours to try! I don't think you'd notice much difference from what other comments I've read in BF. Both eyepieces you have are, in my view, excellent. You can hardly compare a s/h price with new, though - and the new FSIIIED is a lot more expensive. The Nikon eyepieces are in line, price wise, with other top makes.

[tallgrass]

If you are near to Loughborough, or visit Rutland Water... you can borrow ours to try! I don't think you'd notice much difference from what other comments I've read in BF. Both eyepieces you have are, in my view, excellent. You can hardly compare a s/h price with new, though - and the new FSIIIED is a lot more expensive. The Nikon eyepieces are in line, price wise, with other top makes.

I concede that you have a valid point regarding s/h prices v new. But I still maintain that new eyepiece prices are much more than they should be. When the price of one new Nikon (or any other make) eyepiece equals that of a fine pair of binoculars, (two objectives, two sets of prisms, two eyepieces, one of which independently adjustable, fully multicoated, rubber armoured and possibly waterproof, complete with case, lanyard, silica gel and a cleaning oh and 30 year warranty to boot!) then something must be a wee bit amiss! That's why I think Nikon and all the others are taking the p***!

[scampo]

... are taking the p***!
It's called capitalism, eh?