Which 'scope? (1 Viewer)

Rob Smallwood · Oct 27, 2004

I am seriously thinking of "upgrading" my 'scope.

I am currently using a Kowa TSN 3 with 20/30 WA & 20-60 zoom eyepieces.

I suspect that I will be lucky to get about £450 for the lot - if that, and am looking at £1000+ to buy something "better".

My friend has a Leica APO77 and it knocks spots off the Kowa - although the Kowa is, in my opinion still pretty good. I have lusted after the Leica since he got it!

What do you think - will I get £600 worth of benefit from an upgrade and if so - what would you recommend? Weight isn't a particular problem.

pduxon · Oct 27, 2004

Take the Leica, Nikon, Zeiss and Swaro line 'em up and see what you think!!!

There are some good reviews on the alula website but at the end of the day its what you think that counts.

Denis J · Oct 27, 2004

save yourself a bob or two..try the kowa 823 with the new 32xw lens its as good as anything else in my opinion

scampo · Oct 27, 2004

My experiences:

Swaro 80HD + zoom: compact design, bright, edge-to-edge sharpness, contrasty, cool/bluish image in some light, medium to wide field of view.
Leica APO77 + zoom: long and rather heavy, bright, edge to edge sharpness, contrasty, warm image, medium to wide field of view.
Nikon ED82 + zoom: exceptionally compact for 82mm, bright, razor sharp edge to edge, very contrasty, perhaps the most faithful-to-nature image, medium field of view but increasingly wide as you zoom (up to a class beating 75x).
Zeiss 85FL + zoom: very compact and lightweight for 85mm, bright, extremely sharp apart from extreme edges of view, contrasty, warm image (yellowish hint in some lights if put next to Swaro or Nikon), exceptionally wide field of view (almost 50% more to see than Leica or Swaro).

It really is personal preference. The zoom on the Zeiss is, for me, an utter delight for birding as it lets you see more of what you're looking at and, as a consequence, makes locating distant birds that much easier; but the Swaro is ergonomically a real treat and the Nikon offers such a stunningly natural view; and you already know how good the Leica is.

pduxon · Oct 28, 2004

scampo said:
Zeiss 85FL + zoom: exceptionally wide field of view (almost 50% more to see than Leica or Swaro).

Steve

I'm not picking on you BUT you always say this and it isn't true!!! Yes the zoom has a wide fov but it's not 50% wider.

The FOV range on the
Zeiss 85 is 43-20
Swaro 80 is 36-20
Leica 77 is 34-20.
All figures from the websites, Nikon don't give the fov at the top end but list the fov at 25x and this is 28m at 1000. The fact that Nikon has a 25-75 zoom will always hamper it on the fov front

I think you'll agree that the 50% wider is incorrect against Swaro and Leica.

There's little between any of the fixed eyepieces on fov. Swaro and Nikon 42 @ 1000, Zeiss and Leica 40 @ 1000.

Whilst at doing the above ........

On the 60mm scopes the figures are
Zeiss 65 56-26
Swaro 65 36-20
Leica 62 44-24

Again Nikon don't give a range but the 20x figure is 35 @ 1000.

Given how everyone says how tube like the Nikon zoom is it compares well with the Swaro - all though the later is a wonderful scope.

Obviously Zeiss and Leica do well here because there zooms are lower power.

The fixed eyepieces are all very similar with Leica having the edge (because I used the figures for 26ww I guess).

Andy Bright · Oct 28, 2004

Hi Rob, I really do think you will appreciate the view from a new high end scope... I used to have the TSN4 and, although an excellent scope, the step-up to (Swarovski AT80HD at the time) was significant to my eyes (and for digiscoping).
Now things are even better because the newer scopes are considerably lighter in weight and more compact in size. If you are moving on from the TSN3 I'd suggest bypassing the Leica... it's a heavy old beast with a replacement not far off, although optically very good.
If you're parting with serious money, it would be odd to settle for an older generation scope.
Depends how much weight and size is important to you. Look through the choices, obviously, but also pick them up and carry them around a bit.
Regards,
Andy

iporali · Oct 28, 2004

pduxon said:
I'm not picking on you BUT you always say this and it isn't true!!! Yes the zoom has a wide fov but it's not 50% wider.

Pete,
Steve talks about the geometrical image area, not the one-dimensional diameter of the fov - and I think he has a point here (my calculations: Zeiss 1452, Swaro 1018, Leica 908 m2). If you try to spot an object, it can enter the field from any direction and thus it is the image area that counts - and this is usually done at 20x power.

Of course there are other aspects that may be significant to other people. I for example enjoy the very easy aiming with my "old" Swaro AT80HD (+zoom) although it has even narrower field than the Leica. With my limited experience I also don't feel very comfortable with the distortion of the Zeiss zoom at 20x.

I have to disagree with Andy about bypassing the Leica. Yes, it is heavy and a new model may appear soon but if you like the image, the weight is IMHO secondary - unless you carry it a lot. Leica has a great 20x eyepiece, a marvellous 32xWW and they have very good eye-relief - for those who digiscope or wear glasses. The Leica and the Zeiss scopes are also the only true apochromats (for those, who are disturbed by chromatic aberration).
Regards,

Ilkka

pduxon · Oct 28, 2004

iporali said:
Pete,
Steve talks about the geometrical image area, not the one-dimensional diameter of the fov - and I think he has a point here (my calculations: Zeiss 1452, Swaro 1018, Leica 908 m2). If you try to spot an object, it can enter the field from any direction and thus it is the image area that counts - and this is usually done at 20x power.

ah thanks Ilkka

Andy Bright · Oct 28, 2004

iporali said:
I have to disagree with Andy about bypassing the Leica. Yes, it is heavy and a new model may appear soon but if you like the image, the weight is IMHO secondary - unless you carry it a lot. Leica has a great 20x eyepiece, a marvellous 32xWW and they have very good eye-relief - for those who digiscope or wear glasses. The Leica and the Zeiss scopes are also the only true apochromats (for those, who are disturbed by chromatic aberration).
Regards,

Ilkka

What I'm saying is that weight is a serious consideration for the active birder... how many times have you heard 'those binos are just too heavy' out in the field or even on these forums when describing other binos. It may not be an issue for Rob, but it is for many.

Optically, for most, the differences are very minor between all the high end optics... therefore issues such as weight become far more relevant.

Have to say the Leica does look good value at the moment, it's price has come right down.
regards,
Andy

Edward woodwood · Oct 28, 2004

Rob

how much of an 'upgrade' is that?

Kowa tsn3 has a fluorite lense and 77mm objective and with a 30 x wide can't be far off as good as anything available at the moment

You woudn't go far wrong with the £399 Nikon ED 78 (eyepiece around £120) many BF members have bought one - they were worth over a grand in mid 90s

Andy Bright · Oct 28, 2004

Tim Allwood said:
You woudn't go far wrong with the £399 Nikon ED 78 (eyepiece around £120) they were worth over a grand in mid 90s

Yeah but only because of an outrageously cynical overpricing ploy by Nikon.

Still, at £399 it's a good buy.

Edward woodwood · Oct 28, 2004

cheers Andy

the Nikon also takes the new MC eyepieces so probably won't be far off the 82 in terms of image quality - if there is a diffrerence it must be slight

Warehouse express have an offer on zeiss too at the moment i think

Cley Spy are good for second hand also

scampo · Oct 28, 2004

pduxon said:
Steve

I'm not picking on you BUT you always say this and it isn't true!!! Yes the zoom has a wide fov but it's not 50% wider...

What I have said isn't true? Dethpicable, Pete, dethpicable. You should know me better than that. You speak as if I have an axe to grind...

(-;

"Trust and integrity, trust and integrity" - gosh the number of times my old mum used to drill that into me as a kid, that and "Stand up straight, Steven, for goodness sake, and look the world in its eye!". So I grew up always trusting tall, straight people - like me. Daft. Anyway, here are my calculations, for what they are worth:

Zeiss zoom diameter fov = 43m @ 20x
Area viewable to the eye = 1452 sq. m.

Swarovski zoom diameter fov = 36m @ 20x
Area viewable to the eye = 1017 sq. m.

Leica zoom diameter fov = 34m @ 20x
Area viewable to the eye = 908 sq. m.

Zeiss vs. Swarovski:
1452 – 1017 = 435 sq.m.
435 / 1017 x 100 = +43% greater viewable area than the Swarovski zoom eyepiece.

Zeiss vs. Leica:
1452 – 908 = 544 sq.m.
544 / 908 x 100 = +59.9% greater viewable area than the Leica zoom eyepiece.

The figures are different for other magnifications but 20x is, I think, the most important as it is the one first used to scan and spot a bird.

I always wonder why Zeiss don't sing this stuff from the roof tops; after all, it's a very useful "usp", as their marketing folk might say.

pduxon · Oct 28, 2004

scampo said:
What I have said isn't true? Dethpicable, Pete, dethpicable. You should know me better than that. You speak as if I have an axe to grind...

:-C sorry Steve.

I think Tim is right, the differences between the top scopes optically isn't that much it certainly isn't amongst the 60-66m scopes.

Personally I prefer the light weight of a 60mm, if you're a digi-scoper in the UK then you have a different agenda. I'd be interested if someone like Andy would go for a 60mm if he lived in somewhere with wall to wall sun.

Again as Tim said the Zeiss 65 offer looks attractive.

Might be worth comparing your scope to some newer models.

scampo · Oct 28, 2004

pduxon said:
:-C sorry Steve.

...
Might be worth comparing your scope to some newer models.

Doh... you're forgiven, Peter. I think the Zeiss is the latest design on the market, isn't it? That or the Nikon ED82. I would love to look through a Zeiss 65 again, it must be a very decent scope.

Andy Bright · Oct 28, 2004

pduxon said:
Personally I prefer the light weight of a 60mm, if you're a digi-scoper in the UK then you have a different agenda. I'd be interested if someone like Andy would go for a 60mm if he lived in somewhere with wall to wall sun.

Probably not.... there's always shade and the faster the shutter-speed the better.
Anyway, I'm not sure we want digiscoping muddying the waters here

Rob made no mention of that and it's not a criteria for many.
cheers,
Andy

Andrew Whitehouse · Oct 28, 2004

I recently got a Nikon 82 with 30x and it's excellent and seems very good for digiscoping, which is the main reason why I wanted a big scope. I must admit though, if I was just going to by a scope just for birding I would look no further than the Zeiss 65 with a zoom lens. Just 600 quid from WE. Very compact and lightweight but with a big enough objective and excellent optics so it can deal with most magnifications. I also like the idea of a scope with a low and wide angle 15x lens - I think that would be terrific for seawatching and it's always easy to zoom up to 45 if you need to. If it's just a birding scope you're after, I would get the Zeiss and go on holiday somewhere (or maybe spend the money on a carbon fibre tripod) with the money I save.

Swissboy · Oct 28, 2004

Andy Bright said:
Have to say the Leica does look good value at the moment, it's price has come right down.
regards,
Andy

Yes, this usually forebodes a new model, but it may still be a year or so off, if previous patterns hold.

Robert

Edward woodwood · Oct 28, 2004

sounds good Andrew

£600 for a scope that good optically does seem the bees knees and that 15 x sounds pretty alluring too.

I'll try and get a look thru one soonish

Keith Reeder · Oct 28, 2004

scampo said:
I would love to look through a Zeiss 65 again, it must be a very decent scope.

More than just decent, Steve - as well you know!

Andrew, Tim, having used my Zeiss 65 + zoom enough over the last couple of weeks to form a solid opinion of it, I can honestly say I can't imagine how anyone could want for better.

The 15x + wiiiiiiiiide view is wonderful (it's actually brighter than the view through my Leica 8x32 BAs) and unless the edge fuzziness is a major issue with you, the brightness, clarity and sheer resolving power make higher magnification practically redundant (well not really, but you know what I mean).

[Added: Andrew, I also meant to say that you're right: at 15x, the zoom is brilliant for finding birds when seawatching, and the image is so bright and crisply detailed that you can usually identify the bird without much zooming].

And - although it surprised me to realise this - I appreciate the light weight more than I ever thought I would.

I've just come back from a day that started off almost black, walking around Lindisfarne, and except at very high magnification, I never lacked for light (and even then, the image was useful), and the overall image quality is stupid grin inducing every time I look through it.

Oh, and my first tentative dabbles into digiscoping with it (using a far from ideal camera - a Fuji s3000) are extremely encouraging indeed.

Which 'scope? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Quacked up Member

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Quacked up Member

Administrator

Well-known member

Quacked up Member

Administrator

Member

Administrator

Member

Steve Campsall

Quacked up Member

Steve Campsall

Administrator

Professor of Listening

Sempach, Switzerland

Member

Watch the birdie...

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread