Done with Viper HD - current best scopes for under $1000 (1 Viewer)

FrankD said:

I can confirm your comment about the Theron Mag82. I had a few folks interested in purchasing one after using mine at one of the local waterfowl spots. I contacted them to see if it could be ordered and was told that they were sold out. They didn't have any left in stock and because they weren't a big seller they chose not to order any more.

I would encourage you to order both the Zen Ray and the Pentax and compare. Do it from a place with a good return policy...Camerlandny for example. I believe Doug carries both.

Reading your other comments about size being a concern I think you will be pleasantly surprised with the Zen Ray in particular because it is fairly compact for an 82 mm scope.

Click to expand...

Thanks again for all your help Frank. I think I'm going to have to bite the bullet and order more than one and deal with the hassle of returning. I'm too picky to risk getting this wrong.

So I'm real close to ordering the Zen-Ray, but now I've researched the Fieldscope ED III a bit and it sounds fantastic, especially for its small size. That quality of construction and image, coupled with the portability is really tempting me. I found a used one without an eyepiece and it appears that elsewhere I can still get the eyepiece that came with that model (the MCII 20-60x zoom). My total cost would be right around 1000...

I'm not sure if the newer MCII eye piece is any better quality or just higher magnification. I would like someone who knows better to chime in. I have the newer MCII and find it stellar. If you are looking for a smaller lighter weight option the FS III would be your best bet. All the reviews put it ahead of the highly regarded pentax and on par with the best of the best only to be bettered in fov on the zoom

jayman_1975 said:

I'm not sure if the newer MCII eye piece is any better quality or just higher magnification. I would like someone who knows better to chime in. I have the newer MCII and find it stellar. If you are looking for a smaller lighter weight option the FS III would be your best bet. All the reviews put it ahead of the highly regarded pentax and on par with the best of the best only to be bettered in fov on the zoom

Click to expand...

Ah, choices, choices...

All right folks, thanks for putting up with me - I've put in orders for a couple of scopes to try. A new Zen-Ray and a Fieldscope ED III demo deal I couldn't pass up from samplelist.com.

A bit of a mismatched combo, but I think one of them will work for me and my picky but budget conscious mindset right now. I plan on paying for one of the big boys some day, but for now I need to find something moderately affordable. Even if neither of them works for me, I think they'll give me an idea of what my next step should be. Tempted to order a Pentax to try too, but I can only feel comfortable with so much on the credit card at once!

Nice! Let us know how you like them and which you keep and why. Which eye piece comes with the FS III?

jayman_1975 said:

Nice! Let us know how you like them and which you keep and why. Which eye piece comes with the FS III?

Click to expand...

I absolutely will. I know how helpful it is to read others impressions when deciding on these things.

The FS III has the 20-60x, which I take to be the MCII.

Did you receive either of them yet? Impressions?

Yes the suspense is killing us!

Ha! Ok, here you go.

I received both about a week ago and have been having a very hard time choosing.

The fieldscope I received first and was blown away by its image quality, build quality, and even the case/cover quality. There is almost zero CA to my eyes, even at higher powers, and it is very sharp. Despite having a single focus knob, precise focusing feels pretty easy. As soon as I used it I knew I could never keep the Viper. For the first time I felt my scope was of equal optical quality to my binoculars. I got the fieldscope for sub-$1000 in like new condition (demo) with the praised Nikon 20-60 (25-75 for 82mm) zoom eyepiece. One sort-of negative is that it's a straight scope - I actually prefer this for many situations but it definitely has its negatives and would probably prefer angled.

The Zen seems to me to be a great scope for $800. The build quality and case quality are definitely a step down from the Nikon, but not bad. My Zen has a flawed finish with raised bubbles scattered over the exterior casing - not that bad but still disappointing. The case/cover is somewhat flimsy. The image quality is its shining point. It is bright and definitely seems sharper than my Viper. I really like how the body handles and it does not feel big at all for an 80mm scope. The two knob focusing is also very easy (maybe even easier than the FS) to be precise with. For thoroughness I should note there is a slight hitch at one point in the rotation of the fine adjustment knob on mine - a very minor point but a factor to consider when comparing build quality and I'm very conscious of quality right now. If I'd bought this scope 2 years ago instead of the Viper, I'd probably still be happy using it without worrying about better optics being out there.

Deciding between the two has been tough. As mentioned earlier, I want a scope that can comfortably handle 40x+ powers because of shorebirds and gulls around the Great Salt Lake. Dropping back down to a 60mm feels like a step back in that regard. On the other hand I love carrying my score with me (probably more than most birders) and the fieldscope is really compact.

The fieldscope CLEARLY wins on build quality (it really is beautifully built) and even the case is excellent. Image quality is tougher. I've been trying to compare the two in various real birding situations locally, from close up to far away. What's surprised me is that up to 40x I can not discern a noticeable difference in brightness between the two (at least during the day) - really impressive stuff from the Nikon. The Zen image looks bigger at a given power, but I suppose that's because of the bigger objective? The Nikon seems slightly sharper at the lower powers and definitely has less CA, particularly at the higher powers. The Zen's advantage comes at 60x where it does have a noticeable brightness advantage and seems somewhat sharper. The fieldscope is still quite usable at 60x, but this is where it falls back of the bigger scope. However, it still has very little CA while the Zen shows a noticeable (though not bad) amount.

All of the above said, I have a bit of a quandary. The fieldscope is my clear choice for most situations, but the Zen's greater ability at 60x is a big draw and something about its image is appealing - it seems big and bright when I look through it even though a side by side comparison does seem to indicate it is NOT noticeably brighter until after 40x. As I said, I think it's something with the optics of an 80mm vs 60mm.

At this point I think I'm going to keep the fieldscope ED III because I'm a sucker for its quality and amazing 60mm image, and because MAYBE I can and will find a good used (angled) fieldscope 82 floating around and I can just swap the zoom eyepiece over. That MAY be the scope I really want - too bad I didn't buy one when they were available and moderately affordable.

Whew! Those are my current thoughts. Didn't mean to go on quite that long but hey, scope hunting is serious business! One thing I'm learning through this process is that going the high end, used route may be the solution for what I personally want. That said I don't think anyone would go wrong with the Zen-Ray. I'll post more if things change for me or if anyone has questions about my experience.

I knew you would like that little Nikon. Wait till you discover the DS eyepieces for it, you will be blown away. I have the fixed 24x DS as well as the fixed 40x. FYI, the fixed 40 has as wide of FOV as the zoom has at minimum 20 power. And the 24x is just unreal. I think they make a fixed 60x as well. That might just be what you need to get that extra brightness that you feel it lacks compared to the zen at 60x.

jayman_1975 said:

I knew you would like that little Nikon. Wait till you discover the DS eyepieces for it, you will be blown away. I have the fixed 24x DS as well as the fixed 40x. FYI, the fixed 40 has as wide of FOV as the zoom has at minimum 20 power. And the 24x is just unreal. I think they make a fixed 60x as well. That might just be what you need to get that extra brightness that you feel it lacks compared to the zen at 60x.

Click to expand...

Ok, now I'm going to have to go shopping for eyepieces - I'm sure they're not cheap either! That 60x fixed is intriguing me. If it could get me good brightness at 60x I would be over the moon being able to carry this little scope around with that power.

One point to add on the Zen and a significant factor in my leaning toward the Nikon is that the Zen exhibits something that seems to be common to more affordable optics with otherwise quality images - it's harder to keep your eye on the "sweet" spot where there are no "blackouts" and the image is optimal. In the short term this doesn't matter but I know from experience that this gets fatiguing after half an hour or more of studying birds. The Nikon on the other hand is easy to look through for long periods and to keep your eye in position for the optimal image.

I have tried the EDIII 60 Nikon along with the 20-60x 82ED2 Zen, Kowa PROMINAR 774, and Leica 77 non-APO last summer when viewing at late afternoon one Red Phalarophe and other waders nearby.

My findings were a little diferent, but so was probably light. I found the Nikon much dimmer at 40x and eaven at 20x you didnt get the bright, vivid image given by the newer coatings of the most recent models of spotting scopes. It had that yellow cast found when you compare the older Swaro habitch HD with the ATM HD...or the old Leica vs de new Leica!!! Anyone who have tried both side by side knows what I am saying, although it affets your perception of true colors and overhal image but they are still Sharp and resolve the same.

The Zen is a fine scope given the price it costs, the Kowa 774 was better (40x)...it had the same brightness to my eyes, and view was slightly better much because of bigger depth of field, on the Zen I had to fine-focus the waders more often when they where feeeding becuse they were constantly getting back and forward, putting more eyestrain to you before you realise that your eyes were asking to adjust focus. Please keep in mind that this diference was just about the relaxing trait better on Kowa...you had more time to adjust your eye and that enabled you to resolve better what you were seing. Color fidelity was to me the same as also for brightness....although the Kowa owner very impressed by the Zen performance said the Kowa was tiny little bit brighter.

Sorry for not adding more to the Zen 82ED2 vs Nikon 60 EDIII but to my eyes they are not on same league, with light going away at 40x the nikon dont resolved the same, it was not as close in apparent brightness, and overhal image seemed to be a 15 years step back due to coatings.

Dont get me wrong the Nikon is a very fine scope if you want to spend less on second hand and if portability and weight its an issue....built quality is super, image is still great and will do the job, but I would look to an ED50 first!!!!!......everytime I use one, I regret using an 82mm.

I guess they (60mm, 65mm, 77mm, 82mm)can all apparently look the same in good light conditions, if they are not lemons!!!

Rui_Caratão said:

I have tried the EDIII 60 Nikon along with the 20-60x 82ED2 Zen, Kowa PROMINAR 774, and Leica 77 non-APO last summer when viewing at late afternoon one Red Phalarophe and other waders nearby.

My findings were a little diferent, but so was probably light. I found the Nikon much dimmer at 40x and eaven at 20x you didnt get the bright, vivid image given by the newer coatings of the most recent models of spotting scopes. It had that yellow cast found when you compare the older Swaro habitch HD with the ATM HD...or the old Leica vs de new Leica!!! Anyone who have tried both side by side knows what I am saying, although it affets your perception of true colors and overhal image but they are still Sharp and resolve the same.

The Zen is a fine scope given the price it costs, the Kowa 774 was better (40x)...it had the same brightness to my eyes, and view was slightly better much because of bigger depth of field, on the Zen I had to fine-focus the waders more often when they where feeeding becuse they were constantly getting back and forward, putting more eyestrain to you before you realise that your eyes were asking to adjust focus. Please keep in mind that this diference was just about the relaxing trait better on Kowa...you had more time to adjust your eye and that enabled you to resolve better what you were seing. Color fidelity was to me the same as also for brightness....although the Kowa owner very impressed by the Zen performance said the Kowa was tiny little bit brighter.

Sorry for not adding more to the Zen 82ED2 vs Nikon 60 EDIII but to my eyes they are not on same league, with light going away at 40x the nikon dont resolved the same, it was not as close in apparent brightness, and overhal image seemed to be a 15 years step back due to coatings.

Dont get me wrong the Nikon is a very fine scope if you want to spend less on second hand and if portability and weight its an issue....built quality is super, image is still great and will do the job, but I would look to an ED50 first!!!!!......everytime I use one, I regret using an 82mm.

I guess they (60mm, 65mm, 77mm, 82mm)can all apparently look the same in good light conditions, if they are not lemons!!!

Click to expand...

Maybe you had a bad copy of the Nikon? At 20x mine is as bright and sharp and color accurate as I could imagine optics being. Even at 40x it may be slightly dimmer then the Zen but not significantly so. Other than being noticeably dimmer at the high end of the zoom range, the Nikon optics come across as equal or superior to my Zen, particularly with CA. And my Zen is clearly a step up from my Vortex Viper HD.

Waterwagen said:

Maybe you had a bad copy of the Nikon? At 20x mine is as bright and sharp and color accurate as I could imagine optics being

Click to expand...

That could be true, or the other way to!!! If you are happy with it, thats what counts, and not everyone see the same in every optics, I get shocked everytime a friend birder says to me that he can see everything he wants to see with his <100$ 8x40 Olympus DPS I porro eaven when comparing to the new dialectric ED/HD 400$-800$ class roofs!!! :eek!:

But if you are getting blackouts with the Zen you will never be satisfied with it....I for example dont eaven need to raise the eyecup from 20x to 60x

I just acquired a Fieldscope III from another form member As far as brightness, color, and sharpness is concerned it holds up very well up to 30-40x when compared to my big Zeiss. Above that, it is noticeable dimmer, but still offers a great view at 60x. The only handicap it has for birding is the narrow field with the zoom. With the 30x wide eyepiece, I think it can hold its own against anything out there.

I would have to agree with the statement above, I can see everything I need to through it.

The zoom is its Achilles heel for sure but you it still looks pretty darn good. The Wide angle fixed eyepieces take the scope to another level.

jayman_1975 said:

The zoom is its Achilles heel for sure but you it still looks pretty darn good. The Wide angle fixed eyepieces take the scope to another level.

Click to expand...

Decided I'm definitely sending the Zen-Ray back. It's a good scope but I just enjoy using the Nikon more.

Any tips on finding the eyepieces? It appears they aren't made anymore - I suppose I'll have to scour the web. The FOV with the zoom doesn't bother me at all but I'm assuming the fixed eyepieces are even sharper. If this scope can be improved significantly even over what I have, I'll be extremely happy.

Well it's mostly the FOV and brightness that are improved upon with the fixed eyepieces. Much bigger and noticeably brighter I find. The two that I have are excellent. I received the 24x with the scope when I bought it from an esteemed member from another sight and I came across the 40x by luck on yet another used classifieds site.

One thing to mention is the DS eyepieces do not have a twist out eyecup like the zoom piece does. I found it took a little getting used to eye placement but now it's very comfortable for me. I have heard some say that because the DS is built primarily for digiscoping, it's not as good for general observation because of the lack of the twist up cup. The Wide MC are the ones you want to look for if you want a twist up eye cup. From everything I have learned they are optically equal to the wide DS. Just a heads up though they are rare.