The light transmission in older scopes, might differ depending on the lens coatings used at the time. Some manufacturers now have special coatings on the prism mirror surface in order to eliminate the amount of light lost through the prism. I agree that straight and angled models should have the same light transmission.
-
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.
SURVEY OF 50mm-66mm SCOPES (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Johnny1
- Start date
Did Birdwatching Magazine test the 60 mm Nikon Fieldscope III scopes?
A reason for asking is that the ED version of the Nikon is approximately $300 to $400 less expensive than the Leica 62 apo and the Swarovski 65 mm HD. At lease in the USA.
Alula tested the Nikon, Swarovski and Zeiss small scopes. The Nikon fared very well. After you follow the link below click on "optic" at the bottom of the main page .
http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm
Note: I'm probably biased as I have used Nikon Fieldscope 60 mm III ED for a number of years. It's major drawback is the 20 x 60 zoom is not eyeglass friendly.
I've also used Leica's zoom ( the one introduced about two years ago) on a Televue 85 asto scope and can only admire the zoom. Also have viewed a number of times thru the "older" Swarovski 80 mm HD and non HD scopes and they are excellent--to say the least.
Bob
A reason for asking is that the ED version of the Nikon is approximately $300 to $400 less expensive than the Leica 62 apo and the Swarovski 65 mm HD. At lease in the USA.
Alula tested the Nikon, Swarovski and Zeiss small scopes. The Nikon fared very well. After you follow the link below click on "optic" at the bottom of the main page .
http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm
Note: I'm probably biased as I have used Nikon Fieldscope 60 mm III ED for a number of years. It's major drawback is the 20 x 60 zoom is not eyeglass friendly.
I've also used Leica's zoom ( the one introduced about two years ago) on a Televue 85 asto scope and can only admire the zoom. Also have viewed a number of times thru the "older" Swarovski 80 mm HD and non HD scopes and they are excellent--to say the least.
Bob
Paul, that is a much appreciated offer. Yes it would be great.
Please send to:
[email protected]
Thanks
Please send to:
[email protected]
Thanks
Well Grousemore, the Leica and the Swaro are comparable to me in the sense that they are both very good optically, and I ought not to be disappointed if I buy either of them. But the Leica, by virtue of its bigger objective will have the edge in resolution and performance in poorer light. The Swaro is more portable but is still good optically in most light situations. Prices are much the same for the 77 Leica and the 65 Swaro if I buy online.
Grousemore
Senior Member
The Thread was about 50mm-66mm scopes and so the logical comparison would be between the Leica 62 and Swaro 65,which are both lightweight scopes.
The Leica is as good (at least) and slightly cheaper.
The Leica is as good (at least) and slightly cheaper.
Sandy Martin
Well-known member
CDK said:
Hi CDK,
Could this be Steve Dudley? Birdwatching's main optics reviewer who has worked for Leica and is still acts as a 'consultant' for them. He can be seen advertising Leica digiscoping equipment in Warehouse Express adverts although I am assured that he uses a Nikon camera outside when not appearing for Leica.
I concur with several other members in that the Swarovski 65 provided the best view when compared to the Leica 62.
From what I have heard from several sources, a milk bottle with a Leica badge on it would have come out on top against the other spotting scopes.
Sandy
Tannin
Common; sedentary.
Actually, I'd regard that (15-45X zoom rather than 20-60) as a good reason to chose the Leica! The reality is that in practical use, I find myself wanting to zoom out (less than 20) far, far more often than I want to zoom in (more than 60). Despite having an ATS80HD (and thus a little more light to use than with a 65 or even 77mm scope), anything much past about 40 or 45X is really pushing it.
This is particularly applicable to digiscoping, but also for general use. I've been pondering the purchase of a 20X wide-angle E/P for my Swaro. If they had, say, a 12-40 zoom E/P, I'd order one tommorow.
This is particularly applicable to digiscoping, but also for general use. I've been pondering the purchase of a 20X wide-angle E/P for my Swaro. If they had, say, a 12-40 zoom E/P, I'd order one tommorow.
Steve
I find image deteriorates above 40 x mag with Swarvo zoom. Same article had (I think) bit of science concerning optimum zoom in relation to size of objective lense. It made sense to me and probably explains why Leica has 16-48 zoom as objective smaller. Optimum probably around 30 -35 x zoom before image deteriorates.
You won't be missing North Wales today. The weathers appaling.
I find image deteriorates above 40 x mag with Swarvo zoom. Same article had (I think) bit of science concerning optimum zoom in relation to size of objective lense. It made sense to me and probably explains why Leica has 16-48 zoom as objective smaller. Optimum probably around 30 -35 x zoom before image deteriorates.
You won't be missing North Wales today. The weathers appaling.
scampo
Steve Campsall
Odd how we vary.
I was looking at a distant perched peregrine with my son yesterday evening just before sunset using both his Swarovski 65 20-60 and my TSN3 30x.
I found the 60x very useful indeed. It was very sharp and bright - we could easily discern beak and feather detail, for example, despite the extreme distance. The Kowa was marvellous for its bright, sharp and wide view, of course, but its 30x was a truly limiting issue, not for id but for detail.
Surely, then, a max of 45x would not have given as good a view? I'd choose the Swaro 65HD any day if funds permitted.
I was looking at a distant perched peregrine with my son yesterday evening just before sunset using both his Swarovski 65 20-60 and my TSN3 30x.
I found the 60x very useful indeed. It was very sharp and bright - we could easily discern beak and feather detail, for example, despite the extreme distance. The Kowa was marvellous for its bright, sharp and wide view, of course, but its 30x was a truly limiting issue, not for id but for detail.
Surely, then, a max of 45x would not have given as good a view? I'd choose the Swaro 65HD any day if funds permitted.
Tannin
Common; sedentary.
The 60X zoom is indeed a wonderful thing, Steve. I still marvel at the ability of the big Swarovski to bring detail in from a long, long way away. But I could live without that - would happily live without that - in exchange for being able to get better pictures of a reasonably close-to bird in marginal light conditions. And there are times when the situation constrains me to be where I am and the bird is just too close for the shot I want - such as the Powerful Owl I took pictures of the other day. (Oh happy day!) I wanted to back off but copuldn't do that without losing sight of the bird. The end result was good pictures (albeit at a horriblly slow shutter speed that left me terrified they wouldn't come out) but rather cramped. They look as though I over-cropped them but they are not cropped at all. And if a lower zoom meant a faster shutter speed .....
But perhaps that view of mine is conditioned by two factors: (a) digiscoping rather than just looking (though I do both, of course). (b) It's winter here and bad light is my perennial enemy. Come the long, bright days of summer and the perfect light of a clear summer morning, maybe I'll change my tune and want an 80X zoom!
In a perfect world, I'd buy a digital SLR, a 500mm zoom lens, and some top-knotch 10X50 bins to add to my existing scope and Coolpix. That would deal with the situation nicely and leave me well-equipped to cope with all contingincies. Anyone got AU$20,000 going spare?
But perhaps that view of mine is conditioned by two factors: (a) digiscoping rather than just looking (though I do both, of course). (b) It's winter here and bad light is my perennial enemy. Come the long, bright days of summer and the perfect light of a clear summer morning, maybe I'll change my tune and want an 80X zoom!
In a perfect world, I'd buy a digital SLR, a 500mm zoom lens, and some top-knotch 10X50 bins to add to my existing scope and Coolpix. That would deal with the situation nicely and leave me well-equipped to cope with all contingincies. Anyone got AU$20,000 going spare?
scampo
Steve Campsall
Hmm, I see your point - I haven't entered the world of digiscoping yet, even though I have been a keen photographer since I was a young teenager (I can remember my first attempt at developing and printing in my mate's garden shed - oh the memories!!).
BTW have you seen the new Canon digital SLR which is on sale in the UK for a mere (!) £850-00? Seems a snip for such an advanced piece of kit.
...The long, bright days of an Australian summer - aah! Lucky, lucky you. Mind you, we've had an amazingly dry and sunny summer over here but in landlocked Leicestershire, the birds are few and far between.
BTW have you seen the new Canon digital SLR which is on sale in the UK for a mere (!) £850-00? Seems a snip for such an advanced piece of kit.
...The long, bright days of an Australian summer - aah! Lucky, lucky you. Mind you, we've had an amazingly dry and sunny summer over here but in landlocked Leicestershire, the birds are few and far between.
Tannin
Common; sedentary.
Yes, Steve. Or at least I've heard about the new Canon. A friend of mine nearly bought one the other day, but (wisely in my view) noticed that the existing (metal body) Canon was only a few hundred dollars more. (I think his was ex-demo or shopsoiled or some such, but it still has full factory warranty.)
I have not looked at it yet, but he and I plan to find a spare day sometime soon so that he can learn about my scope & CP4500 while I learn about his DSLR and lens - a 400mm, I think it is. Genuine Canon, as I recall.
But not this year: between scope, tripod, head, camera, and various accessories, I've spent quite enough already this year! Besides, they (digital SLRs) will only get better and cheaper.
All of which reminds me: I haven't posted my Powerful Owl in the gallery yet.
I heard about your summer. Rather too much of a good thing, I gather. We had the same last year: hottest summer on record, and massive bushfires. Anyone who still doesn't believe in the reality of global climate change needs to look out the window now and then. Or possibly a brain reformat.
I have not looked at it yet, but he and I plan to find a spare day sometime soon so that he can learn about my scope & CP4500 while I learn about his DSLR and lens - a 400mm, I think it is. Genuine Canon, as I recall.
But not this year: between scope, tripod, head, camera, and various accessories, I've spent quite enough already this year! Besides, they (digital SLRs) will only get better and cheaper.
All of which reminds me: I haven't posted my Powerful Owl in the gallery yet.
I heard about your summer. Rather too much of a good thing, I gather. We had the same last year: hottest summer on record, and massive bushfires. Anyone who still doesn't believe in the reality of global climate change needs to look out the window now and then. Or possibly a brain reformat.
Paul Rule
Well-known member
I have the 20-60 on a the Swaro 65, and a fine lens it is too, but in practice I very rarely go above 40X, You may get a bit bigger image but that is off set by the fact that the image will be darker and hence resolution is reduced and and shake will be amplified.
I think the top end of these zooms only really come into there own on the 77/80mm scopes.
I think I am correct in saying that in the case of the Lieca the same zoom is used on the 62 & 77mm scopes and that the zoom range is reduced due to the design of the scope body.
Paul
I think the top end of these zooms only really come into there own on the 77/80mm scopes.
I think I am correct in saying that in the case of the Lieca the same zoom is used on the 62 & 77mm scopes and that the zoom range is reduced due to the design of the scope body.
Paul
