-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
scopes-does size matter? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter edwincjones
- Start date
Hi,
did I get that right, you have seen three Kowa 883 bodies crack after a fall? I wouldn't be astonished with some of the older models with fiberglass bodies but the magnesium 883 - wow...
Joachim
It's got 20mm more objective, has a brighter view, and is better able to resolve smaller details. In other words, it's not a half bad scope for astronomy with its 85mm objective and ease of use.
Last edited:
Hi - yup, afraid so. I wondered why Swarovski stopped making the ATM (magnesium) in favour of the ATS, and wondered if the fragility was the reason. It's something you have to bear in mind with the Kowa. Then again, if you dropped a DSLR, you'd be in trouble too - birders do tend to get a bit casual sometimes, forgetting these are very expensive, delicate precision instruments!
Having seen a number of binoculars and scopes that have suffered various accidents, my non-scientific impression is that magnesium is more durable than aluminum or fiberglass composites, but when it gives it cracks. Aluminum, in turn, will dent, bend or deform rather than crack. Therefore, unless the optics get badly out of alignment, one can keep using a fallen aluminum-bodied scope, but with magnesium it either survives with barely a scratch or it cracks and becomes unusable.
Older Kowa 823s with their composite bodies also were reasonably durable but would fail catastrophically once their limit was reached. The material thicknesses in these is very thin indeed. It is a balancing act between lightest possible weight and reasonable durability.
Since scope optics require very high precision alignment in order to perform at their best, it is generally a very good idea to not let them fall or get bumped anyway, even if and when their bodies seem to take the abuse well. You can never know what kind of an impact will compromise the image.
Kimmo
Older Kowa 823s with their composite bodies also were reasonably durable but would fail catastrophically once their limit was reached. The material thicknesses in these is very thin indeed. It is a balancing act between lightest possible weight and reasonable durability.
Since scope optics require very high precision alignment in order to perform at their best, it is generally a very good idea to not let them fall or get bumped anyway, even if and when their bodies seem to take the abuse well. You can never know what kind of an impact will compromise the image.
Kimmo
With Vinten F95 camera bodies made of aluminium, these corrode in their harsh operating environment.
I was very impressed that the makers can somehow weld aluminium to repair them.
I had a well worn 30 year old camera and said it wouldn't work.
They said yes it will. They plugged it into the 28v supply and it worked perfectly.
Around 8 frames a second medium format. The later ones did 12 fps.
They wanted it for their museum.
I also had a large magnesium bodied mirror lens and was afraid it could ignite. But I don't think they can, although magnesium bodied rally cars can burn ferociously.
I was very impressed that the makers can somehow weld aluminium to repair them.
I had a well worn 30 year old camera and said it wouldn't work.
They said yes it will. They plugged it into the 28v supply and it worked perfectly.
Around 8 frames a second medium format. The later ones did 12 fps.
They wanted it for their museum.
I also had a large magnesium bodied mirror lens and was afraid it could ignite. But I don't think they can, although magnesium bodied rally cars can burn ferociously.
The classic case of toppling scopes is walking away from a fully extended tripod, which is something i'm trying to get out of the habit of, particularly with the Kowa. The common factor seems to have been falling backwards with an angled scope - a crack across the neck being the result. I heard a report on BF where someone said his had been over several times with no problem - i didn't ask at the time whether this had been a sideways fall. Definitely been three cases amongst birders i personally know in the last two years though, and all fairly consistent in what happened.
Just be careful out there, folks - it's an unstable world!
Just be careful out there, folks - it's an unstable world!
Hi,
ouch, these are horror stories for optics nuts... luckily my tripod spreads quite wide in the narrowest setting... and also the scopac with stuff inside helps to get the center of gravity deeper...
On the other hand my old TSN-3 has an aluminum body, so hopefully not that brittle.
Joachim
ouch, these are horror stories for optics nuts... luckily my tripod spreads quite wide in the narrowest setting... and also the scopac with stuff inside helps to get the center of gravity deeper...
On the other hand my old TSN-3 has an aluminum body, so hopefully not that brittle.
Joachim
Indeed - deeply upsetting for those concerned. The 883 is a big scope but very light for its size. However, i've been trying to train myself to see scopes as a container for a set of precisely-aligned pieces of very expensive glass, rather than a piece of piping which can just be thrown into the boot of cars etc.
I've even taken to laying it down gently on the tripod before walking away from it in windy conditions if there's any risk. Better i do it myself slowly, than the wind doing it quickly!
I've even taken to laying it down gently on the tripod before walking away from it in windy conditions if there's any risk. Better i do it myself slowly, than the wind doing it quickly!
Similar threads
