• 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.

Questions on Zeiss 85*FL (1 Viewer)

wrz0170

Active member
Hi everyone. I thought I would drop in and say hi. I have several questions regarding the Zeiss Diascope, in specifically the 85 T*FL and digiscoping.

So far, the lead contender has been the Nikon 82 ED until the Zeiss diascope caught my eye. It certainly is within the realm of the budget.

We do a lot of hiking and our birding can take us from shore lines to hiking some hefty trails. Many of times we would've loved to have captured a pic of a specific bird and hopefully soon remedy the situation. We definitely want to include digiscoping in our adventures.

Many have offered the opinion that we would be best suited with a smaller scope as it is lighter, etc and would serve well for hiking. The trade off is less light and smaller reach. Some have said to try for two scopes. Unfortunately, the budget will not allow the two scope solution (larger scope, smaller scope). So, I have to choose one....

With that said;

1. Are the larger scopes like the Zeiss 85 that difficult to hump in a back pack? This would include tripod, camera, etc. I would love to hear your real world experience in regards to the larger scopes and taking it out in the field. Heavy? Burdensome?

2. Has anyone here also compared the Nikon 82 ED and the Zeiss 85? Since I am posting on a Zeiss board, I would assume you chose the Zeiss! :) What did you find with your results?

3. Why did you choose your Zeiss?

Thanks and looking forward to hearing from you!

William
 
Well if you can afford the Zeiss 85 then might has well get the best as in the Kowa 883/884 and save some $$$ too. As for hiking/backpacking it depends on how tough and how far your course is. It's not so much the scope, but its demand for larger/heavier support. Walking around a groomed park or flat terrain for a mile or two is not such a big deal. But backcountry or hilly terrain will wear you out with a large scope and suitable tripod.

I have a Kowa 883 on a fairly lightweight Induro CF tripod with a Gitzo G2180 head. But I only use it for digiscoping. For most walkabouts and hikes I prefer the Nikon ED50 on a Gorillapod SLR Zoom tripod that weighs in under 1kg.

cheers,
Rick
 
I compared the Nikon 82 and the Zeiss 85 a while back-however please note I was using the zoom and not fixed eyepieces for both.

The Nikon is optically superb, but with the zoom at lower ends of the range the field of view is quite constricted.

I just overall preferred the Zeiss, which to my eyes was a tiny bit sharper, a lot wider in view and just nicer overall. But that is my subjective opinion-you might see it completely different, so the only way to get a judgement for yourself is to try them out.

Although, if the Kowa is cheaper in America, get that, as it is reckoned to be the best. I would have got the Kowa but in Britain the Kowa is about £7-800 more expensive and I couldn't justify that at all for the tiny improvement over the Zeiss!!!
 
Well if you can afford the Zeiss 85 then might has well get the best as in the Kowa 883/884 and save some $$$ too. As for hiking/backpacking it depends on how tough and how far your course is. It's not so much the scope, but its demand for larger/heavier support. Walking around a groomed park or flat terrain for a mile or two is not such a big deal. But backcountry or hilly terrain will wear you out with a large scope and suitable tripod.

I have a Kowa 883 on a fairly lightweight Induro CF tripod with a Gitzo G2180 head. But I only use it for digiscoping. For most walkabouts and hikes I prefer the Nikon ED50 on a Gorillapod SLR Zoom tripod that weighs in under 1kg.

cheers,
Rick

Yes, the Kowa. I looked at the 883. I would have to do some number crunching to see if it would be possible. Factoring in the body, eye piece, tripod, camera adapter and the camera. I am not sure what the $$ difference would be yet between the Kowa, Zeiss or the Nikon (Nikon probably the cheapest out of the three).

I guess I was taken aback a bit on how many prefer to go with the smaller scope when they hike. I can't say I blame them as who really wants an extra couple of pounds?? |=)| When I was thinking of a fieldscope; something you hump out in the field and use it, no matter what. The Wife and I are day hikers, therefore we usually break up the weight load between two packs. Camera, any extra lenses, bins, couple of waters, field guide and some light snacks.

Thanks for your thoughts RJM!!

Any other experiences with regards to my original post?
 
I would expect the Zeiss to be more expensive and the Nikon the cheapest and certainly the best value. The reason small scopes are so popular is that they satisfy most nature hiking/viewing scenarios in typical good weather conditions. Only at the extremes of viewing distance and under low light/poor weather do larger scopes show their worth.

I had an ED82 until I was given a good deal on the Kowa. The Kowa has the better focuser and the better zoom eyepiece and attachment method. The Nikon has the best fixed focal length eyepieces with a max mag 75x but at the expense of a 30x min mag. Many folks feel the best Nikon combo kit to have is the ED82 and ED50.

cheers,
Rick
 
Hi William,

1. Are the larger scopes like the Zeiss 85 that difficult to hump in a back pack? This would include tripod, camera, etc. I would love to hear your real world experience in regards to the larger scopes and taking it out in the field. Heavy? Burdensome?

To the first question: I think that the Zeiss is one of the smallest big scope. I carry it in a stuffed Zeiss case and usually enough a small, 30 l backpack to the scope, compact digicamera, adapter, binocular, food and drink. During our trips aroound the world, a 42 l Saleva Country backpack was far more enough for one day trips.

2. Has anyone here also compared the Nikon 82 ED and the Zeiss 85? Since I am posting on a Zeiss board, I would assume you chose the Zeiss! :) What did you find with your results?

I never compared directly the both modell, but I have seen several hundred photos taking through them. I was disappointed because of the Nikon overall not-so-good quaility with digiscoping technique. The color rendition is little bit blueish at the Nikon but the big problem is the dim, not very sharp picture result. The Zeiss has a neutral or little bit yellowish, warm coloured picture and better sharpness.

3. Why did you choose your Zeiss?

It is small, with a very big front lens; beautiful colors; incredible wide field of view; very sharp at 60x; view given very close to the eye and a very easy use with glasses; big ocular lens; robust and good shock-resistance (first hand experience); metal body; excellent zoom ocular; light picture in every condition; excellent waterprofness (first hand experience); no problems with the lens coatings; good dual-focusing knob. And at the end of year 2006 it was far more cheap compared with Swaro.

Best regards,

Vámi
 
William,

I generally carry the Zeiss 85 over my shoulder attached to the tripod. I don't find it too burdensome. Though I'm usually walking with it, I wouldn't consider it "hiking" (usually no more than 5 miles). It might help if you described what your day hikes were like.

Reviewing the specs of the 82 mm Nikon Fieldscope and the Zeiss 85, you're talking about a weight difference of about 10 ounces. The real weight differences will come in when you consider your choices of tripod, tripod head, and digiscoping adaptors. To lower the carrying weight you may want to look into a carbon fiber tripod (and increase your total costs).

There is also a question of how you intend to use the scope. You mention carrying it in a backpack. That's fine to transport the scope, but not for looking through it. Do you plan on hiking to a location where you're going to be setting up the scope, or is it your intention to pull out the scope as you're hiking along when you spot something that catches your eye. If it's the latter, you may be disappointed because the bird may disappear by the time you get everything set up.

I have used a backpack to carry the scope while traveling. Just not in the field. Nikon has a "recon optics fieldpack" that may suit your needs (I don't use it). It is designed to carry a scope and other optics.

Others have suggested you go with the best and purchase a Kowa. Whether or not its the best, I cannot say. Looking at one website, there is a $450 price difference between the Zeiss and Kowa, and that's before you purchase an eyepiece (the Nikon Fieldscope, which was priced about $300 less than the Zeiss, comes with an eyepiece). If budget is a concern (it was to me when I purchased my scope), you may need to compromise and purchase a really good scope that is not considered "the best" (though not currently considered "the best," I don't hear many Swarovski owners complain about their scopes). If you can, try looking through the scopes before you buy. Of course, that's not always possible, and we sometimes have to rely on the opinions of others.

Good luck in choosing your scope.

JSO
 
Last edited:
Have you considered a 60/65mm Scope? - a smaller and lighter proposition. Many are short enough to fit in a backpack. I've carried my Zeiss 65 this way a number of times, especially if walking a fair distance before needing to set up, and find this quite easy. The Leica APO 62 is also a very compact quality scope worth considering.
There have been a lot of very impressive digiscope pics posted on BF using both these. Also, purchase of a Carbon-Fibre tripod makes for a lighter load.

Beware, there are many birders out there that bought big scopes that get left at home or stay in the car if any distances are being walked, then end up buying something lighter (as per RJM above).
 
Hi,

I've owned a Zeiss 85 for a few years now and can't recommend it highly enough. All my shots are digiscoped (hand-held) through a 20-60X zoom lens, and as with anything, if conditions are favourable, the results can be quite fantastic (decent camera needed of course!!)

I've looked through the Leica Apo 77, Swarovski and Nikon fieldscopes and personally prefer the Zeiss. It's quite manageable particularly coupled with a Scopac ( see link below). Kowa seem to be the new benchmark although I haven't looked through one, though it's seriously overpriced.....which doesn't say much for the new Leica which is retailing for ridiculous money.

My own opinion is to go on ebay and look for a Diascope 85 or 65 or alternatively the leica Apo televid 77. There's a Leica (brand new) on ebay now (minus eyepiece) for $800. Get yourself a Scopac or Cleyspy type harness and you're away. If there's two of you, the other person can carry a small backpack for any extras.

If on a budget, smart money goes on a Leica Apo Televid 77 or Zeiss 85 T*FL, both fantastic scopes and still a great investment. If money were no option, then from what people are saying, Kowa would be the way to go. I personally don't consider Nikon scopes contenders to any of the above.

Hope this helps.

http://www.scopac.co.uk/

Regards,
 
Hi,

I've owned a Zeiss 85 for a few years now and can't recommend it highly enough. All my shots are digiscoped (hand-held) through a 20-60X zoom lens, and as with anything, if conditions are favourable, the results can be quite fantastic (decent camera needed of course!!)

I've looked through the Leica Apo 77, Swarovski and Nikon fieldscopes and personally prefer the Zeiss. It's quite manageable particularly coupled with a Scopac ( see link below). Kowa seem to be the new benchmark although I haven't looked through one, though it's seriously overpriced.....which doesn't say much for the new Leica which is retailing for ridiculous money.

My own opinion is to go on ebay and look for a Diascope 85 or 65 or alternatively the leica Apo televid 77. There's a Leica (brand new) on ebay now (minus eyepiece) for $800. Get yourself a Scopac or Cleyspy type harness and you're away. If there's two of you, the other person can carry a small backpack for any extras.

If on a budget, smart money goes on a Leica Apo Televid 77 or Zeiss 85 T*FL, both fantastic scopes and still a great investment. If money were no option, then from what people are saying, Kowa would be the way to go. I personally don't consider Nikon scopes contenders to any of the above.

Hope this helps.

http://www.scopac.co.uk/

Regards,

It helps a lot! Thanks for your input. Please forgive my neophyte questions but I guess we have all been there at one point or another.

When looking at the specs between the Zeiss 65/85, it appears to be about a half pound difference, body only (38.8oz to 51.2oz). It doesn't seem all that much, but when you are humping 1/2lb over a distance, it could get to be a bit burdensome.

I evaluated our trips and we don't take trips all that often (once or twice a year) and a wide majority of any digiscoping will be from our deck and into the woods. When we do go on trips to the coast line, I would imagine you would want your best out there. That said, I am about 95% sure we will go with a larger scope. JSO made an excellent point about deployment if you are hiking and need a quick deployment. I would surmise that it would be true for any scope. Maybe In a year or so, we will look at getting a companion :t:

The other opinion that seems to be common is that the Nikon, while very good optically has some short comings. Approx. 10 oz heavier compared to the Zeiss 85 and the FOV is not as great. Several reviews have also mentioned they didn't like how the eyepieces were attached to the scope, I think it was screw in as opposed to bayonet style.

A couple more questions, sorry :)

1. Let's say I get a Zeiss 85. In trying to keep the weight down, would a carbon fiber tripod holds it's own on a windy day? Windy and the coast line go hand in hand, not to mention many windy days at Lake Tahoe, NV./Ca. our favorite hiking area when we go.

2. This question deals with learning about the glass itself. The Kowa 883 boasts pure flourite glass which seems to be sought after, hence the hefty price of the Kowa. $2100+/- US. The Zeiss, according to description, Super Low dispersion flouride glass. The big difference there?

These companies throw out a lot of terms when referring to their glass and it can be quite confusing. In general, what is the pecking order? HD seems to be at the top of the spectrum with pure flourite close behind, ED, extra low ED and run of the mill.

Thanks so far everyone! Fantastic discussion and I am learning quite a bit.

William
 
Hi again,

I'm not going to even pretend I'm well up to speed on any technical info regarding different glass types etc. There are many people and threads on here which can explain that one nicely.

Just speaking from my own experience, when it comes to digiscoping, it makes sense surely that an 85mm optical lens will "work" much better than a 65mm due to increased light etc. As already mentioned, the Zeiss 85 is small for one of the top big scopes...thoroughly manageable so I doubt the difference in weight between the 65 and 85 will matter that much.

As regards tripods, carbon fibre is much lighter than aluminium. If you can afford it, buy it. I can tell you that after a day with an alu tripod on your shoulder, you'll feel it. You really should consider the Scopac though; weight is evenly dispersed and the scope/tripod can be "worn", legs already extended and immediately ready to use. Simply carrying it in a backpack doesn't compare...I've tried :)

Finally, most birders I know use Zeiss, Swarovski or Leica. Granted, in Ireland the birding community is quite small but they know their optics. The new Kowa is a relatively new scope but quite expensive so stands to reason I haven't seen one in the flesh yet. As I said, the other scopes are fantastic and most birders use one of the 3....and there's a good reason for that!! If it aint broke, don't fix it!

Can't really offer any more......best of luck with your decision. Which ever model you choose, I'm sure you'll be more than happy.

All the best.
 
A couple more questions, sorry :)

1. Let's say I get a Zeiss 85. In trying to keep the weight down, would a carbon fiber tripod holds it's own on a windy day? Windy and the coast line go hand in hand, not to mention many windy days at Lake Tahoe, NV./Ca. our favorite hiking area when we go.

William - go to you local store if you can? and try the scope on different tripods a sturdy tripod is essential but so is carrying it, also ensure that the choice of head on the tripod is balanced enough to hold a camera and an adapter. Look on my gallery to see Digiscoping pictures taken with a Zeiss 85.

2. This question deals with learning about the glass itself. The Kowa 883 boasts pure flourite glass which seems to be sought after, hence the hefty price of the Kowa. $2100+/- US. The Zeiss, according to description, Super Low dispersion flouride glass. The big difference there?

I can only speak for the Zeiss scope as i actually work for Zeiss here in the UK, but the FL actually means something, its main job is to reduce the colour fringing or "Chromatic Abberation" around the subject you are looking at, particularly birds set against a sky.

These companies throw out a lot of terms when referring to their glass and it can be quite confusing. In general, what is the pecking order? HD seems to be at the top of the spectrum with pure flourite close behind, ED, extra low ED and run of the mill

There isnt a pecking order as such as far as i know William, i am sure others will be along to point that out. ;)

Regards

Paul
 
Hi again,

I'm not going to even pretend I'm well up to speed on any technical info regarding different glass types etc. There are many people and threads on here which can explain that one nicely.

Just speaking from my own experience, when it comes to digiscoping, it makes sense surely that an 85mm optical lens will "work" much better than a 65mm due to increased light etc. As already mentioned, the Zeiss 85 is small for one of the top big scopes...thoroughly manageable so I doubt the difference in weight between the 65 and 85 will matter that much.

As regards tripods, carbon fibre is much lighter than aluminium. If you can afford it, buy it. I can tell you that after a day with an alu tripod on your shoulder, you'll feel it. You really should consider the Scopac though; weight is evenly dispersed and the scope/tripod can be "worn", legs already extended and immediately ready to use. Simply carrying it in a backpack doesn't compare...I've tried :)

Finally, most birders I know use Zeiss, Swarovski or Leica. Granted, in Ireland the birding community is quite small but they know their optics. The new Kowa is a relatively new scope but quite expensive so stands to reason I haven't seen one in the flesh yet. As I said, the other scopes are fantastic and most birders use one of the 3....and there's a good reason for that!! If it aint broke, don't fix it!

Can't really offer any more......best of luck with your decision. Which ever model you choose, I'm sure you'll be more than happy.

All the best.

Thanks! I did a brief comparison of scope sizes, weight, etc. and Zeiss compares favorably. If I did my math right, there is about a 8 oz difference between the Zeiss 85 and 65. We are fairly fit so the 8oz shouldn't pose too much of a hassle. The Nikon 82 I was thinking about comes in at about 10oz more. The Scopac seems to be ideal for our hiking needs!

The optics; I don't really need the real technical stuff. It's just that between all the manufacturers, they tend to throw out a lot of terms in regards to the optics used. It can be quite confusing to a newbie. HD, ED, Extra Low Ed, APO, pure flourite. :eek!:

Unfortunately locally, I cannot get my hands on a Zeiss 85 to look at it in person. A lot of my inquiries are on faith and the real word use and opinions of others. I suspect my purchase will be on faith as well. The only place that came close was a Cabelas superstore that is relatively close and when I called, they were clueless, but yet had them online at a fairly high price compared to where I can get it from other places. I still have to factor in tripod, head, eyepiece, camera and camera adapater. Our best solution will be to get our pack and put something with comparable weight and see how we do.

Another odd question came to mind though:

Those of you who travel via plane and take your scopes, do you have any reservations of putting it in your check in luggage or do you carry on? When we travel, we NEVER leave our Canon Rebel in the check in. We are fearful of what TSA does when they rummage through your luggage.

Thanks again!!!

William
 
William,

You say: "It can be quite confusing to a newbie. HD, ED, Extra Low Ed, APO, pure flourite." It's confusing to many of us. There are people on the forum who will be happy to explain all of the intracacies to you. Simply put, it's each manufacturers version of low dispersion glass. Its used to prevent chromatic aberration. You start to find it in "mid-priced" scopes such as the Bushnell Elite and the Vortex Skyline. If you're planning on digiscoping, and can afford a scope with low dispersion glass, you will probably want to make the investment (and, the scopes you are looking at -- the Zeiss and Nikon -- both contain low dispersion glass).

You also mentioned that, "I cannot get my hands on a Zeiss 85 to look at it in person." I know the problem. I purchased through an on-line retailer that allowed for an easy return if I did not like the scope. If you can head to NYC, I think one of the big camera stores does have scopes out on their floor. Otherwise, I recall an old discussion either in the spotting scopes area of the forum or the binocular area, discussing a shoe store in Pa. that also carried optics. You might want to try looking around for it.

As for airline travel, I would treat the scope like you would your camera. My scope recently took a trip to Ecuador in the overhead bin (tripod was in the suitcase however). At the first airport, TSA wanted me to take it out of my backpack and ran it through the x-ray separately. It didn't happen on any other leg of the trip (8 flights total including 5 separate passes through security). It got heavy to lug the bag through the airport after a while (two cameras, scope, eyepiece, prescription snorkeling mask, and misc. carry-on items), but there was no way that I would expect these items to make it to my destination otherwise.

Cheers,

JSO
 
I have the Kowa TSN-883 and highly recommend it.

I've travelled a bit with a scope and always had it in my carry-on. Once, in Australia, I had to explain that it was for looking at birds, not a night-vision scope for a rifle |:D|
 
I have the Kowa TSN-883 and highly recommend it.

I've travelled a bit with a scope and always had it in my carry-on. Once, in Australia, I had to explain that it was for looking at birds, not a night-vision scope for a rifle |:D|

The Kowa appears to be a great scope but the TSN may be a bit out of my price range by about $500 US. Great story though with your airport adventure! It does look a little intimidating and I can see where it can be looked at like a sniper scope.

JSO: Thanks for the tips! I am pretty sure that I will go with the Zeiss 85. For the price range, it seems like one hell of a scope. The Nikon is a great scope as well, but the Zeiss won me over. Would you believe that when I started looking; I was looking at a Celestron for about $189. Now I am looking at a nearly $2000 scope. :eek!:

Now it's just a question of a good deal used? Or go the safe route and get it online with an easy return policy. All of these little details. LOL What's the worse that can happen if I buy new? I don't like it and return it. Used can be a bit more complicated and a little costly.

The logistics at the airport will become a bit more interesting as well. I may have to invest in a bigger back pack to go in the overhead storage. There is absolutely no way I will leave a $2000 scope to chance with TSA and check in luggage. Oops sorry, your luggage got lost.......how do you explain that one?

William
 
You should find a reputable dealer that will let you order both the Nikon and the Zeiss to compare. or order from separate dealers with liberal return policies. Could save a cool $1000 when you see how good the Nikon optics are. The Zeiss has better ergonomics and a better zoom, but including the zoom it is ~$2300+ vs ~$1300 for the Nikon w/zoom. You could get a ED50 as your travel scope with the difference! And the Nikon includes a soft case and the USA no-falt flat $10 repair fee warranty is the best there is.

cheers,
Rick
 
Last edited:
I've heard there are problems with Nikon eye relief being too short. Is that true? How come this nikon fieldscope ed 82 fard so poorly (relatively speaking) in the 2008 living bird test.
 
You should find a reputable dealer that will let you order both the Nikon and the Zeiss to compare. or order from separate dealers with liberal return policies. Could save a cool $1000 when you see how good the Nikon optics are. The Zeiss has better ergonomics and a better zoom, but including the zoom it is ~$2300+ vs ~$1300 for the Nikon w/zoom. You could get a ED50 as your travel scope with the difference! And the Nikon includes a soft case and the USA no-falt flat $10 repair fee warranty is the best there is.

cheers,
Rick

Rick. Your arguments for the Nikon Fieldscope are well founded. The financial aspects that you highlighted make it a very good offer for the money. I almost pulled the trigger a couple of times. Zeiss albeit a bit more has some features that appeal to me. It really is not a cut and dry decision or as easy as I thought!! All have their pluses and minuses. That's what makes it difficult in trying to choose.
 
I've heard there are problems with Nikon eye relief being too short. Is that true? How come this nikon fieldscope ed 82 fard so poorly (relatively speaking) in the 2008 living bird test.

The eye relief of the Nikon zoom is a bit short and field width is relatively narrow. Otherwise it's an excellent, bright and sharp eyepiece. Something you need to try before you buy. The fixed magnification Nikon eyepieces have ample ER and very wide fields.

Sorry to say the folks at Living Bird haven't got a clue about how to test telescope optics. Optically, the soon to be discontinued ED 82 is actually one of the best "Alpha" scopes
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 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