• 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.

apo? (1 Viewer)

shropshirelad63

Well-known member
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?
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
Last edited:
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...
 
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.
 
'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:
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.
 
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:
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.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top