Need Advise on Scope (1 Viewer)

Hi Everybody,
I'm a beginner, and will be buying my first scope (over 8x) very soon. Can someone help me? I have been looking around, and have set my sights on two of these scopes.

Kowa TSN 823M Millenium Fluorite AN with 20-60x eyepiece

or

Swarovski AT-80 HD with 20-60x eyepiece.

Eagle Optics has a fabulous deal for the Swarovski at only US$1299 with case, eyepiece included.

I use a Nikon Coolpix 4300.

Can someone give me some advice? Thanks!

Swarovski are excellent.

But have a look at the Zeiss, its a touch brighter.

Paul.

I have the Kowa 823 and 20-60x eyepiece, which I like very much. Having said that, I've had a look though a few Swarovski scopes too and to be honest I much prefer the Swarovski. If I had the budget then that's what I'd choose.

Like most things though, it's best to have a look at both and see which you prefer.

Like most things it is a personal choice. Each to their own. I have the privelage of technical data from laboratory testings on most top end optics, the human eye would not pick up on these figures, and if I gave the information of this data, then a lot of people might not have bought what they perceive to be "The Best". The best scope for you, is the one that suits your needs. Try a number of units and buy the one that YOU get on with.

Hi guys,
Thanks for your replies. See, The Swarovski scope is at a really good deal, even cheaper than the Kowa scope.

Budget IS a big deal to me at this point.

I think if I were to make achoice based on budget alone, I'd buy the Swarovski AT-80 HD. Is this scope any different from the newer ATS-80? Also, does anyone know how I can mate my coolpix 4300 (which is similar in lens diametre as the coolpix 990) to the Swarovski AT-80?

Paul

Hi Paul

The way to couple your camera to your scope,is to get an adapter from Nikon I think it`s called a UR-E4 this will give you a 28mm thread which you can then screw a digiscoping adapter on to
Regards Stevo.

Hi Stevo,
Thanks for your reply. I have the UR-E4, but not sure what I need to get on the scope end to be able to couple it with the UR-E4. Any advise? Thanks!

Paul

Hi Paul, I too have recently started digiscoping and am using a Swaro' ATS 80HD. The camera (CP4500) is mounted to the scope using Swarovski's wonderful DCA http://www.swarovskioptik.at/english/produkt/index.asp?cat=Products&type=Telescopes&model=43

you could check out the results on our web site.
see www.iombirding.co.uk.

CJW, uses the Swaroski + coolpix 4500,
Pete, uses Leica APO + coolpix 4500,
Ian, uses Kowa TSN823 + coolpix 4500,
and I use the Leica APO + Leica digilux 1.

Dear Paul,

Before you take the plunge consider the-----------
Pentax -100ED or the smaller Pentax - 80ED.
They both use Pentax astronomical eye pieces which give excellent results.
If you would like to know more about these superb telescopes let me know.

In haste.
Gordon Boreham-Styffe

Hi Gordon,
Thanks for your input. Yes, I would like to know a little more about the pentax scopes. Do you have any info?

Paul

Dear Paul,

Like motor cars optical equipment can arouse passions in a man, consequently birdwatchers opinions are not always subjective or dispassionate.

The first question you need to ask your self is – ‘What type of bird watcher am I?’

If you walk miles and miles in tough country or are a quick glance tick-it-off bird watcher go for light weight. Remember a mighty telescope requires a strong tripod and head adding considerably to the weight.

If you are an aesthetic bird watcher who stands or sits for hours scrutinizing every detail of your chosen subject, or weight is not a problem because you enjoy rude health, consider a big one.

The other thing not to forget is that the top of the range telescopes are all good - you are in the BMW/Lexus/Mercedes bracket so there is not much chance of disappointment.

Now to Pentax.
For many years I have deferred buying a telescope because none delivered the quality I demanded and I considered that bird watching telescopes were let down by inferior eyepieces.
Pentax have been producing eyepieces for astronomers for a long time, and these achieved a reputation as the ones to use if you were at all serious about the hobby. They are WATERTIGHT-unusual in astronomy, if not unique.
Because they are designed for astronomy they have a 1 ¼ inch (31.7mm) fitting - the projecting tube that slides into the telescope - thus taking advantage of every last vestige of light the objective lens is delivering.
So there you have it – class-leading eyepieces with nothing watertight to put them in.

Eventually Pentax took the logical step of producing a Nitrogen purged tube with the necessary correction lenses - astronomers live in an inverted world with fewer lenses, hence more light admission. But they kept it secret. I wrote to them - no reply, none of the UK dealers I asked had heard of it. Finally after many months I tracked one down.

Now I am using a PF- 100ED.
Verdict - EXCELLENT.

I have three eyepieces:
22 1/2 x
45x
26-78x zoom.

22 ½ x is my favored one for all round watching. The light admission is wonderful, superb color definition, sharp, bright. A walk-into image with a good field of view and depth of field.
This eyepiece can be used without the tripod. I can rest the shoe on the aperture in a hide – another plus point as there is often no room to stand the tripod.
Don’t let the 22 1/2x deceive you. When other watchers have used it and asked what magnification it is I invite then to guess the answers range from 32x to 45x, the majority being mid to high 30s.

45x comes next in order of preference. Inevitably the field of view suffers as the price of the higher magnification but the rest of the attributes are all there.

The technique that has evolved for me – the 22 1/2x stays on the telescope permanently then when I find something that needs closer scrutiny I change to 45x. It is so easy, it takes but a moment.

The zoom. Measured against the straight eyepieces, optically it is disappointing. It just does not deliver the image quality of the other two. Add the fact that the field of view at 26x is the same as the straight 45x it is only used for an extremely long reach and not always then, as often the power is negated by poor air quality.
I suspect Pentax have built it to a price rather than a standard knowing that bird watchers wouldn’t/couldn’t pay the price of the quality/cost of production/limited market equation (astronomers would never use a zoom).
However other birdwatchers who have used the zoom say it is good and don’t share the same degree of disappointment.

Since obtaining the Pentax another route has come onto the market which might go some way to mitigate the optical quality verses weight problem.
Swarovski are now producing an adapter which enables astronomical 1 ¼ in eyepieces to be married to their new generation of bodies.
In the hopes of testing one I have contacted a few dealers but they didn’t know what I was talking about.
That could be a subject for the forum “Dealers and their lack of product knowledge.”

If you are still reading here are a few even more tedious facts:

Telescope:
100mm Objective lens.
Length 20-22ins (510-520mm) depending on eyepeice
Weight 92 ozs 2600g

22 ½x eyepiece:
Field of view at 1000m 42m. 1000yds 126ft.
Exit pupil diameter 4.4mm.
Eye relief infinitely adjustable to 20mm.
Weight 12 ozs 340g.

45x eyepiece:
Field of view at 1000m 26m. 1000yds 78ft.
Exit pupil diameter 2.2mm.
Eye relief infinitely adjustable to 20mm.
Weight 12.7 ozs 360g.

The zoom 25-78x:
Field of view at 1000m 26m.- 14m 1000yds 78ft –42ft.
Exit pupil diameter 3.9mm –1.3mm.
Eye relief infinitely adjustable to 20mm.
Weight 19.4 ozs 550g.

I have never tried digiscoping with the Pentax but Paulyoly who lives in Florida and appears on these pages is using a CoolPix 990 married to the Pentax PF- 80ED.

Finally, the debit side.
The telescope, +22 1/2x eyepiece, tripod and head weighs 16 ½ lbs – 7.5k. Add the other two eyepieces, binoculars, stool, picnic, two bottles of wine and it becomes rather heavy.
Fortunately I have a manservant.

Good luck.

Gordon Boreham-Styffe.

Hi Gordon,
Thank you very very very much for your exhaustive advice & information on the Pentax. It sounds like its way above my head honestly.
Noticed that you had some difficulty getting the equipment yourself.
I live in Singapore, and scoping equipment resellers have not evolved to the stage like they have in the UK and the States.
There are shops here selling scopes for sure, but I am fairly certain I may experience the same grief (if not more) you experienced with dealers.
In fact, theres only one dealer here that I feel absolutely comfortable dealing with, as they do know about digiscoping, and they have apparently been in the business supporting the hobby here in Singapore for some time.
Unfortunately, they carry only Swarovskis, Kowa and Opticron scopes.
It does look more and more likely to me that I will be getting my hands on a Kowa scope very very soon.

Thanks again for your inputs Gordon. I really do appreciate it, and it shows absolutely my inadequacies on the subject. Lots to learn.

Hi gordon and all, Just wanted to update veryone that I made a purchase this afternoon. I bought a classic Swarovski AT 80 HD for SGD$2600, which works out to approx US$1500.
Decided not to go for the Kowa scope after I had the chance to try out the Swar AT 80 and ATS 80, both of which I felt performed better than the Kowa 823.
Now its time to go birding. Unfortunately, I'll have to wait for my scope adaptor to arrive in a couple of days before I can head out.

Dear Paul,
Thank you for reading my letter and taking the trouble to reply.
I didn’t anticipate that you might purchase a Pentax just on my recommendation. No it was designed more as an information sheet, to help you make the correct decision.

Reading your reply you list Swarovski, Kowa and Opticron as being readily available. If it is possible try them side by side in poorish light and take your time. You will be living with your choice for a long time. I was going to say rather like a marriage but it doesn’t really apply these days. Then go back to the dealer and have another try. Testing three telescopes in one day is about the limit for most people, If the dealer is any good he will understand.

You can only spend it once.

The other thing. Manufactures backup. I hear favorable reports about Swarovski and they are exelent telescopes.

I would very much apreciate receiving the odd progress report, through these pages, as your bird watching career progresses. With a few of your pictures of course.

Bird watching is still a great adventure for me. Hope you find the same fun.
Gordon Boreham-Styffe

Hi Gordon, thanks for your reply. I'm quite looking forward to it really.
This morning while at the dealer (which is located in the Singapore Botanical Gardens), I had the priviledge to try out 3 scopes, namely the Kowa TSN 823(which I originally wanted to buy), the Swarovski ATS 80, and the classic Swarovski AT 80 HD.
I tried the ATS 80 first, and completely fell in love with it. Not only was it ergonomically well designed(to say the least), it was light and the Swa digi-adaptor fits perfectly to my coolpix 4300. That was the moment I realised why people kept singing the praise of Swarovski scopes.
I then tried out the Kowa TSN 823, which in my opinion wasn't worse off then the ATS 80, but felt more cumbersome handling, with the eyepiece, focusing rim and general shape feeling quite unatural to me.
I then noticed a classic Swarovski AT 80 which the dealer said they had much difficulty in obtaining as it was already out of production. I asked to try it, and realised that I liked very much the focusing rims, eyepiece and the pictures I took from it.
General handling was significantly better than the Kowa.
I didn't try out the Opticron, because it was a 66mm scope, and I didn't really want to get a 66mm scope.
The decision wasn;t too difficult, as teh AT 80 HD was slightly cheaper than the Kowa TSN 823, and had better handling as well.
I walked away a happy man today.
I didn't get the chance to try it out in poor lighting though.
I'll definitely start posting pictures once I get them. If you like, you can see some of the pictures I took from my existing CrystalVue 8x32 monoscope (which wasn;t enough, and resulted in me using the digital zoom, which blurred things up). Its at http://www.birdforum.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7047

Paul

Dear Paul,
I don’ need to be a gypsy to know what you will be doing in the coming days.

I am pleased for you. Super.

G B-S.