[dwatsonbirder]

I have just aquired an ED50 (thanks JBT) with a 20x MC lens, and I have to say that its cracking. I also own a Swarovski ATS65HD (lucky me!) which Im sure I have no need to go into any details about specification...
Most of my birding is done on foot and covers long distances, I am rather emphatic about self-finding rares and as a result I think the ED50 may be the scope for me. I was wondering if any other forum users have "down-graded" (or should that be down-sized) from a Swaro to a Nikon? I would love to keep both, but I'll be studying for a masters/PHd next year and as a result of a funding defict I think Ill have to sell one of them. I know that the compromise with such a small scope is the loss of light gathering capability, but the image is knife sharp, and with my CF tripod I forget theres anything on my back...
I'd love to hear others thoughts.

[Hermann]

I've got both the ED50 and a Nikon ED IIIA. The ED50 is nice, no doubt about it, but I *always* take the ED III when I expect to use the scope a lot or when the distances involved are large. The ED 50 may be the best of the small scopes, but the difference to a good 60mm or 65mm scope is still quite considerable, even at fairly low magnifications.

Hermann

[LabradorDuck]

I too own this scope, and it has been very good to me even though I haven't yet tracked down one of the wide-angle eyepieces. The best scope is one you'll take with you (pretty sure I stole that turn of phrase from someone on here), and this one weighs less than my binoculars (tripod excluded of course).

I will say that this scope w/ 13-30x eyepiece doesn't quite give good views of the middles of the biggest lakes around here, and if I lived somewhere with seawatching I'd be very tempted to get this scope a big brother (I might give in to the urge even now). But I have found myself using it in situations I never anticipated bothering with a scope, such as warbler-watching in the woods.

[seanofford]

I sold a Swaro 65 in favour of an ED50 and in general I am very happy - except for seawatching....
Sean

[postcardcv]

Originally Posted by seanofford

I sold a Swaro 65 in favour of an ED50 and in general I am very happy - except for seawatching....
Sean

I just read the first post as was about to comment that for me the ED50 is a very good scope for many uses but for seawatching I'd always choose a bigger scope.

[Mark Batten]

Have both the small swaro and the little nikon. Have not used the nikon for some time. The swaro with a light tripod and a scopepack is ideal all round setup. The nikon is a great scope for its size but does have limitations. It is below par as a seawatching scope.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by postcardcv

I just read the first post as was about to comment that for me the ED50 is a very good scope for many uses but for seawatching I'd always choose a bigger scope.

Agreed. The ED50 (I use mine with 27x MC ep) is superb for covering long distances, cycling, travelling abroad. But for seawatching, estuaries or challenging lighting situations, I'd use my bigger scope. Before you sell either the ED50 or your ATS65HD to fund your studies, think carefully. You'll probably want to replace whatever you sell at a later date, so it may be a false economy.

[mooreorless]

I don't see where the OP says anything about seawatching. I agree he might regret selling the ATS65HD later.

[Tanager]

Hi,

I have the 65mm swarovski with the old 20-60 zoom and I have recently purchased the Nikon ED50 and have both the 27x DS and more recently the 16x wide DS eyepieces, both scopes are used on a Velbon CF545 carbon fibre tripod. I've bought the Nikon as a travel scope, and I've got to say I'm amazed at the quality of the image, although I did feel that the view with the 27x was a little to higher magnification (my swarovski zoom is nearly always set to 20x), which is why I wanted to try the 16x DS, but things may change once I get used to it.

I have found that I've increasingly become unhappy at having to lug the swarovski around, especially if carrying a 40D and 400mm lens as well and as has been said before 'the best scope is the one that you have with you'.

Having said that, I'm not selling the swarovski yet, but it is definately the nikon that is coming to Jamaica with me on saturday.

All the best,

Mark

[Kevin Conville]

"ED50: The ultimate compromise?"

To my thinking the 65mm scope is more of a compromise.
The ED50 is the best featherweight scope available and is very easy to tote.
An 80mm class scope is best for high power and/or low light, and digiscoping.

I use both an ED50 and an ED82.

How about keeping the ED50, as you seem to like it and have found it useful, keep on collecting a few more EPs as they pop up, and add an ED82 later when money is less tight?

[dwatsonbirder]

Thanks for the replies, they have been very useful. I havent decided what I will do just yet, the ED50 was bought for a forthcoming trip. The Swarovski is one of the very best, and as I will be working in ecology, I doubt Im going to have the funds any time soon to replace it, there is also the issue of resale value, which strikes me as being significantly low for such an expensive and high quality item. Im not sure I would agree with a 65mm being a compromise for anything larger at this end of the market tbh, I could have bought the 80mm but decided against it! I have to admit, Im not much of a seawatcher.
Thanks again.

[mayoayo]

I changed a Nikon EDIII for an ED50, mainly because the ED50 is cheap,and I had some spare change after the change...The ED50 is decent instrument,cheap, that ,in some instances,can give decent views of NEAR by objects and gives me the feeling of having a scope at hand and is so easy to carry ..Image wise it is more and more frustrating to try to get a good view at any magnification..Its resolution just cant compare with the EDIII ,or any other large scope..I took it out with a monopod recently ,in a walk ,with my kids and was wonderful to have with us.....But on a tripod ,at long distance ,doesnt deliver,,...even at medium powers,27X-30X,the resolution start to get poor as distance increase..Yes..it is very sharp...at 10 m..15mm...but then at loger distances ,even with the same magnification I regularly use,and decent exit pupil ,the resolution is just not there.. It complements wonderfully a larger scope of your choice ,either 6@X or 8@X,whatever you rather carry(in that case YEs there is possible comparison and reasons to choose one or the other)..but it is no substitute in my view

[looksharp65]

Manuel,

that's not in accordance with my experience. You must have had a bad sample. I bought mine from Sancho and it's so sharp that my eye can't take full advantage of it.
Recently I were in a situation where I, if I had had an eyepiece for it, easily would have achieved full sharpness at 50x or more. However there is no eyepiece that goes beyond 40x with the ED50.
I have tracked a mint ED82A now and am anxious to sell my Pentax. Still interested?

//L

[dbradnum]

Originally Posted by Kevin Conville

"ED50: The ultimate compromise?"

To my thinking the 65mm scope is more of a compromise.
The ED50 is the best featherweight scope available and is very easy to tote.
An 80mm class scope is best for high power and/or low light, and digiscoping.

That echoes exactly what I'd been saying to a mate recently - he's got a big Swaro and has bought the ED50 with 27x lens recently, but was wondering whether the little Swaro 65 was a better travel scope. I don't think so, in any real world sense.

I was incredibly impressed with the quality of the little Nikon (at reasonable, realistic distances, not just short-range 'toy-telescope' range)... in good light, when you don't want to carry much weight and won't use a scope often (ie - on many trips abroad, especially outside Europe), it's brilliant. It dominates the small Swaro in terms of portability and weight, for sure - which is what matters on these trips, for me at least.

But there's no getting away from the benefits of a really good quality big scope when the distance, or weather, or light is against you. Seawatching is a great example - sat at Pendeen on a murky day, with the rain coming down, I don't want to compromise on scope optics in any way - and (however good it may be) I think a <80mm objective scope is a compromise.

[horukuru]

From my experience, in the rainforest even on 40x, the view is sharp when I had the ED50 with 13-40x MCII zoom eyepiece. That's my preferred scope for walking in the rainforest with my clients.

At the beach and paddy field, I used my EDG85 with 20-60x eyepiece

[Kammerdiner]

I'm way late to the ED50 party, but earlier in the week Eagle Optics had the ED 50 angled with 13-30x zoom at a blowout price and I jumped. Sold out now, but the straights remain. $530.

Glad I Jumped! This puppy is incredible! I'll probably try to get the 27x MC someday, but the zoom works pretty darn well, even with my glasses. I don't have much trouble getting on a target, but I haven't spent a lot of time with it yet. It's not going to replace an 80mm alpha, but I don't like lugging around 80mm alphas very much.

I can't get over how tiny the ED 50 is, how sharp it is, how light it is. Oh, this thing will get some USE!

Mark

[mooreorless]

Mark, Welcome to the "The Little Scope that can Club".

[jaymoynihan]

I am interested in the 50ED. But, being an obligate eyeglass wearer, I am not amused by the zoom. When i searched, it appears the 27x eyepiece is gone? Am i correct.

[Kammerdiner]

Originally Posted by jaymoynihan

I am interested in the 50ED. But, being an obligate eyeglass wearer, I am not amused by the zoom. When i searched, it appears the 27x eyepiece is gone? Am i correct.

Two things, Jay:

The 13-30x zoom seems to work pretty well with glasses. In my (so far limited) experience it does. Also check out the Porter's review on their Spotting scope review. They gave the ED 50 top billing for mid-priced scopes and said it worked pretty well with glasses. I wouldn't mind some more ER, say from 20-30x, but it works OK.

Which brings up the 27x MC of course. Scarce as hen's teeth. There's one on eBay for $590 LOL. I have to believe Nikon will produce some more of these, at some point, unless they really don't get it, which given Nikon's track record, is possible. Nikon seems to have some trouble "getting it," from time to time.

Mark

[RJM]

Nikon USA always seems to march to its own drummer. Here in Japan, all the MC Wide and DS eyepieces are generally available and their stock regularly replenished. On the otherhand, I can see why the 27/40/50x and 40/60/75x Wide MC and DS eyepieces would be scrapped as they yield sub-2mm exit pupils in all the fieldscopes and are generally too much power for digiscoping.

FWIW, I recently started using the 24/30x Wide MC which appears to operate at 16x in the ED50. Nikon does not recommend this eyepiece for ED50 as it supposedly vignettes the FoV. Now I have not bothered to measure but it still shows a wider FoV than the 20x, a sharp fieldstop and little if any apparent dimming at the edge. I may like it even more than the 20x.