spotting scope test (1 Viewer)

Found this test on straight scopes, (from Jagtpraxis 2/2014)

http://www.meoptasportsoptics.com/c...itz-sternwarten-spektive-test-1404043544.html

click on "artikel lesen" at the bottom

Seems that nikon EDG compared to the latest scopes, lags behind a bit,
the angled model would probably fair a bit better, at least in transmission?

Considering price Meopta S2 HD seems like "best buy" to me,
though transmission figures are a bit lower than expected?
(transmission figures I got from meopta said 85% for the S2 + eyepiece,
test says 80%)

And the winner is: Swarovski STX 80 HD.

Why is the transmission figure different for min and max magnification?
I find that a bit strange…
Shouldn't the same number of lens elements be engaged at all magnifications?

I have come up with the same conclusion...the best scope for your money, the best scope that comes darn near close if not spoton is the Meopta. The Swaros' and Zeiss have simply priced themselves out of the market and you simply are not going to find one much better optically than the Meopta.

I have had my share of Swaro's thru the years and recently sold mine and am now in the market for a new scope. But not the newest and greatest Swaro at the price they are asking. I know many people will look at my future purchase of the Meopta as a Swaro/Zeiss/Kowa 'wanna-be' and if "I Had the Money" I would purchase one of those.

But I 'Do Have the Money' and have determined that it is best not to waste my money on optics that have gotten to the point where the next level down price wise, is equal to the top. In this economy, in this world....both the consumer and the manufacture have to begin thinking what is truly right. For me, it is not purchasing the 'over-pricers' anymore.

The link send me to the meopta main page, where i can find the test? thanks!

Cosme said:

The link send me to the meopta main page, where i can find the test? thanks!

Click to expand...

http://www.meoptasportsoptics.com/c...itz-sternwarten-spektive-test-1404043544.html

updated the link in my first post also

click on "artikel lesen" at the bottom

Vespobuteo,

Thanks for sharing the JP test. It was interesting reading, although I don't read German all that well.

It is curious that they would get different transmission readings for minimum and maximum magnification, but it is more than likely that this is due to measurement methodology or measurement error, since it is highly unlikely that measurements like these would be made so carefully that a precision and repeatability of less than +- 1-2 % would be reached.

Another part I did not quite understand were the resolution measurements. I tried to figure out how they were done, but apart from understanding that for point scoring they compared the actual measurements to what DIN ISO would consider maximum for the aperture of the scope, I couldn't figure out what they were doing. It was curious that the resolutions (in arc seconds) given for maximum magnification were lower than for minimum magnification. I would be grateful if someone could explain what was done here, since if by resolution we mean what is the smallest patterns an observer viewing with the scope can discern, higher magnifications give higher resolution in well-made scopes.

In my own tests, the Meostar S2 HD has had among the best resolution results for an 82 mm scope, and with 70x magnification has shown smaller detail to the eye than any other 82 mm scope at 60x. I therefore suspect that the JP resolution readings are somehow related to the magnification, which would result in a bias in favor of smaller maximum magnifications.

Kimmo