Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Thursday 28th May 2015, 21:35   #1
shropshirelad63
Registered User
 
shropshirelad63's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Galway
Posts: 362
apo?

I was just wondering what made the old apo 77 a great scope as it doesnt have the ed glass? is it worth buying one 2nd hand or how does it compare with a modern but cheaper scope with ed?
shropshirelad63 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th May 2015, 21:44   #2
Gaz Shilton
Registered User
 
Gaz Shilton's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Castleford
Posts: 603
Love my APO Televid 77. Bought mine in 2003. 2nd hand nowadays they cost more from what I've seen (upwards of 1100 in some cases). Go for it. Hard to get lenses though I'm told. I've got a 32xW, 20-60 zoom and a 40x with mine. Would be difficult to replace these I think.
__________________
When I was born I was so surprised I didn't talk for a year and a half.
Equipment: Canon 1D MkIII, 300mm f/2.8, Panasonic fz200
Gaz Shilton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 29th May 2015, 04:48   #3
Sandy Leng
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 119
I also really like my Leica Televid APO 77. The apochromatic lenses in these scopes are top quality and more than a match for any so called ED glass in newer scopes.

I can honestly say that I have never looked through another scope (Swarovski included) and thought that it was better than mine.

I use the 32x wide EP, great for both viewing and digiscoping

Fantastic scope, get one while you can

Sandy
Sandy Leng is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 29th May 2015, 05:30   #4
fugl
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 13,290
I have had the 77 APO with the 32 mm & 20-60mm eyepieces for many years now & have always found it a superlative instrument producing bright contrasty images without a trace of CA. In the unlikely event that I should ever to replace it, it would only be for the extra reach afforded by a really big scope, 90-100mm or more.
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins

Last edited by fugl : Friday 29th May 2015 at 17:21.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 25th June 2015, 10:59   #5
Swissboy
Registered User
 
Swissboy's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sempach, Switzerland
Posts: 3,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
I have had the 77 APO with the 32 mm & 20-60mm eyepieces for many years now & have always found it a superlative instrument producing bright contrasty images without a trace of CA. In the unlikely event that I should ever to replace it, it would only be for the extra reach afforded by a really big scope, 90-100mm or more.
I fully agree that this is a great scope opticswise. Nevertheless, I sold mine a few years ago for two reasons.

First, it had become increasingly a bother for its weight. I keep getting older (I'll turn 73 in a few days), and lugging around so much weight became a problem on longer excursions. Leica's superb scope was the first top quality one and weight was not a major concern then.

The second problem I had, restricted to the zoom eyepiece, was its short eye relief. I need to keep my eyeglasses on when looking through scopes etc. And I never got the full view when using the higher magnifications.

So I switched to a 65mm Swarovsky which has at the same time solved the problem in that I no longer need a separate travel scope. Though I still have my 60mm Nikon Fieldscope EDIII. That one suffers from even worse eye-relief in the zoom eyepiece than the Leica, and it has thus not been a decent alternative as an every-day scope. It does have an excellent single magnification eyepiece though. And as I would not get much for this scope anyway, I keep it as a back-up.
__________________
Robert
--PS: That's a Sooty Falcon on the avatar, photo taken near Sharm el Sheik, Egypt. My highest priority raptor at the time.
What's your species on the avatar? I often have no clue
!

Last edited by Swissboy : Thursday 25th June 2015 at 11:03.
Swissboy is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 24th July 2015, 17:55   #6
Etiennef
Registered User
 
Etiennef's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 89
Perhaps a silly question; but is not "APO" just Leicas own designation for what other manufacturers call ED, HD, XD, etc..??

Basically It's just some sort of indication that the optics in question counteract color fringing / chromatic aberration. At least that's what I thought...
Etiennef is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 26th July 2015, 14:26   #7
Rotherbirder
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etiennef View Post
Perhaps a silly question; but is not "APO" just Leicas own designation for what other manufacturers call ED, HD, XD, etc..??

Basically It's just some sort of indication that the optics in question counteract color fringing / chromatic aberration. At least that's what I thought...
'APO' is short for apochromat (as opposed to achromat). This is because an apochromatic objective is used in the four scope models with the 'APO' designation. As far as I'm aware - and according to the Leica brochure of the time - 'ED'/fluorite glass was also used in the APO62/77 objectives as it is in the newer 65/82models. I have an 'old' APO62 which absolutely amazes me for its effective control of chromatic aberration; it still punches way above its weight against more recent models from other big brands.
Rotherbirder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 30th July 2015, 18:51   #8
Etiennef
Registered User
 
Etiennef's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotherbirder View Post
'APO' is short for apochromat (as opposed to achromat). This is because an apochromatic objective is used in the four scope models with the 'APO' designation. As far as I'm aware - and according to the Leica brochure of the time - 'ED'/fluorite glass was also used in the APO62/77 objectives as it is in the newer 65/82models. I have an 'old' APO62 which absolutely amazes me for its effective control of chromatic aberration; it still punches way above its weight against more recent models from other big brands.
Yeah, but that's as far as I know It's the same thing: APO/Apochromat = ED/Extra low Dispersion optics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat

This page seems to support it as well: http://www.overgaard.dk/leica_definitions.html
As well as this: http://www.company7.com/leica/telescopes/digiscopy.html

Last edited by Etiennef : Thursday 30th July 2015 at 20:58. Reason: Added links...
Etiennef is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 30th July 2015, 21:03   #9
Rotherbirder
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etiennef View Post
Yeah, but that's as far as I know It's the same thing: APO/Apochromat = ED/Extra low Dispersion optics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat

This page seems to support it as well: http://www.overgaard.dk/leica_definitions.html
Etienne, forgive my pedantry but, as I read them, neither of these sources supports your statement that these terms have the same meaning. 'ED', 'HD' etc refers to the composition of the glass from which the lenses are made. Apochromat describes the construction of the lens itself. The Leica scopes used cemented triplets in the objectives as I recall. This means that the lens is actually a composite of three separate lenses cemented together, one or more of which is made from flourite (ie 'ED'/'HD") glass. This serves to bring the so-called 'secondary spectrum' to a common focus resulting in a sharper, more accurate image with reduced chromatic aberration.
Rotherbirder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 30th July 2015, 21:08   #10
Etiennef
Registered User
 
Etiennef's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotherbirder View Post
Etienne, forgive my pedantry but, as I read them, neither of these sources supports your statement that these terms have the same meaning. 'ED', 'HD' etc refers to the composition of the glass from which the lenses are made. Apochromat describes the construction of the lens itself. The Leica scopes used cemented triplets in the objectives as I recall. This means that the lens is actually a composite of three separate lenses cemented together, one or more of which is made from flourite (ie 'ED'/'HD") glass. This serves to bring the so-called 'secondary spectrum' to a common focus resulting in a sharper, more accurate image with reduced chromatic aberration.
According to the Wikipedia article posted earlier:
An apochromat, or apochromatic lens (apo), is a photographic or other lens that has better correction of chromatic and spherical aberration than the much more common achromat lenses.

Is this not exactly what you are saying ED optics does? I would assume that "ED" would refer to the resulting effect (low dispersion)?
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-dispersion_glass, where different variants are presented, in fact with APO as an example.

Exactly how it's done I would assume has nothing to do with the ED designation?

-

Regardless how we interpret and categorize the above I assume we can agree the the desired effect in both cases is the same; to reduce color fringing?


Update:
I just realized that perhaps I was a bit sloppy with my previous statement. It should be presented as "one way". Would you say it's more correct like this:

APO/Apochromat -> ED/Extra low Dispersion optics.

In other words; APO is a form of ED optics. But there are other types ED optics as well, so ED optics are not necessarily APO's.

Last edited by Etiennef : Thursday 30th July 2015 at 22:03.
Etiennef is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 30th July 2015, 22:04   #11
Stewart J.
Registered User
 
Stewart J.'s Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Southwest Northumberland UK
Posts: 4,398
Technicalities aside I have both the 77 and the 77APO comparing both side by side there is very little difference to my eyes, the apo has slightly punchier colours but both are the same for sharpness when both fitted with 20 - 60 zoom eyepieces. Speaking of eyepieces I prefer the older model the newer lockable zoom is much stiffer to operate. Have viewed newer scopes from Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica and cannot justify the cost of changing for a very marginal improvement in image quality.
__________________
Stewart

Last edited by Stewart J. : Thursday 30th July 2015 at 22:07.
Stewart J. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2007 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.19170499 seconds with 21 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:22.