• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Buy a scope or binoculars? (1 Viewer)

M

MrBitsy

Well-known member
I currently have a pair of Hawke Sapphire 8x43 binoculars. I have been happy with the quality, but want to have a look now at more expensive optics. I am going to Titchwell to compare higher end binoculours to see if the large increase in cost is worth the better view. However, I am wondering if I would be better off keeping the Hawkes and buying a scope - maybe the Swaroski ATX (or similiar as I will test others).

What would you experienced birders recommend?
 
Hi,

your blog entries state that you have had Conquest HDs in 8x42, so you know what the next step will be like - an alpha will be a little bit better than the Conquests for quite a bit more money - it's diminishing returns.

A scope on the other side is going to give you a much closer view of birds, when it can be used - if you want to save money and buy the best right away this time, I would have a look at the Kowa 880 series... still cheaper than ATX and at least as good.

Joachim
 
jring said:
Hi,

your blog entries state that you have had Conquest HDs in 8x42, so you know what the next step will be like - an alpha will be a little bit better than the Conquests for quite a bit more money - it's diminishing returns.

A scope on the other side is going to give you a much closer view of birds, when it can be used - if you want to save money and buy the best right away this time, I would have a look at the Kowa 880 series... still cheaper than ATX and at least as good.

Joachim
Click to expand...

Spot on!
Just remember that a scope is a system, the tripod, the head and the eyepieces all are as essential as the scope body to a great viewing experience. Consequently there are many more ways to spend serious cash on a scope than on a binocular. Spend some time looking at the gear in the field and talk to the owners. It will help you select the right kit for you.
 
Honestly, I don't use my scope even 5% as much as I use binoculars; however, your mileage may vary. If you consistently carry a scope then I could see one being worth it, but if you're like me and only use them for specialty situations, I'd probably just get the binoculars even if the improvement is fairly minor.
 
jremmons said:
Honestly, I don't use my scope even 5% as much as I use binoculars; however, your mileage may vary. If you consistently carry a scope then I could see one being worth it, but if you're like me and only use them for specialty situations, I'd probably just get the binoculars even if the improvement is fairly minor.
Click to expand...

Hi,

it really depends on the terrain and if you just need an ID or want to enjoy a nice view. The cases where you really have to have a scope for the ID are probably limited to specific terrain like coasts or mountains...

Joachim
 
Last edited:
A long reach camera is sometimes better for pure ID than a scope. The places where a scope might be irreplaceable are seawatch in rough weather when you only get glimpses of the birds between the waves and it is almost impossible to get the camera on, and searching through distant shorebirds with large numbers on a mudflat.

The argument for a camera could for example be a distant bird in a tree that was gotten with a hand-holdable camera but flew off before the scope was ready to use.

Niels
 
I think it all depends on what kind of bird watcher you are and what kind of bird watching you like to do.
I have a scope and I never use it. I bought it because I thought I should have a scope. Personally I like to travel light and I'm always on the move, so the thought of lugging around a scope doesn't appeal.
But since I'm a casual bird watcher then a pair of bins around the neck that can be quickly deployed when something is seen moving in the trees is far more efficient.
If you think you're likely to spend a good amount of time in a static position then it may prove useful to get a scope. A scope will also be useful if you need to see things at distance. But a scope is not so good at tracking moving birds/animals.
So ask yourself what you need a scope for and will it fit in with your style of bird watching.
 
Chosun Juan said:
Perhaps one of Canon's IS bins AND a 2x doubler for a stabilised scope!
Click to expand...

Good idea, maybe sth to try for sb who has access to a stabilised bin and a doubler.

I fear though, that the stabilization might not manage to keep the object in the much smaller true field (due to higher magnification and smaller afov of the doubler).

Joachim
 
I agree with the long-reach camera. I bring along a 40x bridge point and shoot whenever I do shorebird and spring waterfowl surveys. I have my scope in my vehicle but only bring it out about 5% of the time as it just takes too long to mess with most of the time.

Justin
 
Interesting points about the long reach camera. I have a Nikon P900 that has an 83x zoom lens. Surprisingly in good light & with the image stabilzation, I get very good pictures with feather detail even at full zoom. As many of you suggest, maybe get the best binoculars I can get for now and use the camera for id of long range birds?

Mostly I go for walks in the countryside & to local wildlife trust sites so binoculars mostly, but I know I will miss a scope on the occasions I go to places like titchwell!
 
jremmons said:
Honestly, I don't use my scope even 5% as much as I use binoculars; however, your mileage may vary. If you consistently carry a scope then I could see one being worth it, but if you're like me and only use them for specialty situations, I'd probably just get the binoculars even if the improvement is fairly minor.
Click to expand...

I will be testing the Swarovski ELs tomorrow. Spending £1300 over the Hawkes will only give a minor improvement? I have never looked through any A class binoculars, so I assumed I would be bowled over by the view! If it really is only a minor improvement, maybe I will come home with an ATX scope?

Look forward to testing the optics tomorrow!
 
Last edited:
Hi,

let us know how you see the difference - the ELs are going to show their trademark flat image and might be a tad brighter. If that is worth 1300 quid depends on the user...

You are certainly going to see more differences in the view between an el cheapo pair for 50-100 quid and a well chosen middle class bin than between the middle class bin and an alpha.

Joachim
 
MrBitsy said:
I will be testing the Swarovski ELs tomorrow. Spending £1300 over the Hawkes will only give a minor improvement? I have never looked through any A class binoculars, so I assumed I would be bowled over by the view! If it really is only a minor improvement, maybe I will come home with an ATX scope?

Look forward to testing the optics tomorrow!
Click to expand...

I've not owned the Hawkes, so I don't really know. But I have owned Zen-Ray ED3, Zen-Ray ED4, Vortex Viper HD, Leupold Mojave BX-3, and Leupold McKinley HD BX-4, all of which I believe are similar in price and quality to the Hawkes. I have also owned mid-range models such as the Nikon EII, Vortex Razor HD, Kowa Genesis, Meopta Meopro HD, and others. And I have owned true alphas such as the (original) Swaro EL, Zeiss Victory T*FL (7x42 and 8x32), and a Leica Ultravid BR.

You may certainly see a difference; 5% was an arbitrary number but for the most part a lot of those $400 wonder-bins, such as the Hawkes and Zen-Ray, produce some really bright, color neutral images with minimal CA and good sharpness.

The alphas will produce a better image - there's very little doubt about this, but the improvement will likely not be huge. I've never, personally, been 'wowed' by an alpha, as at the price you pay you're expecting them to be the best - and they are, but they are not (in my mind) 2-10x better than the competition. The binos that have truly 'wowed' me are those mid-range models, such as the Kowa Genesis, due to their alpha-like quality at half the price (or less, if you find good deals).

As I said, I find little reason to use a scope 90-95% of the time; I walk several miles on my surveys and the bits and pieces I do from the vehicle are often close enough that I can at least get an ID from my camera, if not my 10x bins.

Only you can decide whether you'd have the 'best of the best' bins or a good quality scope, but I know if I could do it over I'd not have purchased the scope I've got now and would've probably gotten a better bridge camera (my 8x32 T*FLs are already as good as the best, to my eyes).

Justin
 
If you have the binos and the bridge camera,maybe a small ,quality scope is the niche you need to fill for now..The nikon ED50 or the opticron MM3 are great scopes,and you wont need a large tripod to use them .A light quality set up ,stable enough to pull detail at medium magnifiction ..easy to carry on the shoulder or inside your bag,if you dont need to use it ..If a large scope finally proves to be a must,they will always stay useful tool in your arsenal,and the complete setup,new or used,wont break your bank either
 
I second Mayoayo's post I have the Nikon 50ED and love it. I also have one of the long reach cameras and recommend that as well. Best in good light though.
 
Well, a great day today at Titchwell Marsh. I spent a considerable time testing the Swarosvki 8.5x42 EL against my Hawkes. My first reaction to looking through the Swarosvski was, 'oh, not much difference'! However, I spent a good while comparing them.

I spent a few minutes with the Swarovski, then switched to the Hawkes to look at the same view - strangley I found I had trouble focussing the Hawkes! Nothing wrong with the Hawkes of course, but my eyes had adjusted to the smoother focussing and resolution of the Swarovski! The Hawkes need precise focussing where the Swarosvski had a wider sweet spot when focussing. I found the Swarovski to have slightly deeper colours and contrast. Definately extra detail too. The rolling ball effect was there for me, but only when panning quite fast - didn't bother me at all.

Another pleasant surprise was the diopter adjustment. I never seem to find a good adjustment, even with the Zeis Conquest I had. I was always confused because I wear glasses so surely I would just need to set zero on the scale. I guess previous diopter scales weren't accurate because they were all set to different figures after adjustment. The Swarovski are spot on! Set to zero I had a lovely balanced view! I completely forgot to test the flat field, but after 90 minutes I realised, the difference to the Hawkes was huge!

Yes, I purchased the Swarovski and spent a superb day at Titchwell using them. Really noticed how much quicker birds were to see when rasining the bins to the eyes. The flat field, extra colour & resolution meant no searching was required. Bird deep in the branches - no problem, much easier to spot and follow.

Each of the small improvements added up means it is worthwhile spending the money. I agree it is not an amazing difference you will see from a cheap to mid range binocular, but good enough!
 
...congratulations....8.5x should be put in a different category and i totally understand why you felt an improvement in resolution...The extra .5x magnification really gives an edge to the classic 8x configuration...For many years the Swift 820 and then the 820 ED were my main binos,and I always felt the "power" of the configuration when compared with 8x binos..You probably experienced a wider apparent field of view as well,making a bit easier to find objects..the extreme sharpness of the swaros ,boosted with that extra magnification did the trick for your visual palate ,and you fell in love..well..you got that sorted..now you still gonna need the scope,..but I think You already knew that,...didn'y you¿
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

J
Upgrade binoculars or buy a scope?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Owene
O
M
New Spotting Scope
Replies
17
Views
2K
Martin Devine
M
L
Recommendation please
Replies
6
Views
961
Linda1LovesBirds
L
K
straight vs angled scope ?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
paddyluke
paddyluke
S
Quick positive review of Athlon Cronus G2 20-60x86 Spotting Scope
Replies
0
Views
643
sully6982
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top