[The Kingfisher]

Maybe a strange question..

I´m new at birding and will now buy my very first scope. I want to buy a scope with top optics so I don´t need to upgrade in the future.

I have looked at the small scopes from Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica..and finally the bigger one from Nikon - ED82. I didn´t like Zeiss at all and the Leica was not a scope I liked very much either. Both Swarovski HD65 and Nikon Fieldscope ED82 would be great to own. But wich one should I spend money on!?

I think I have the answer my self, but it would be nice to hear your comments about them. I think I will go for the ED82 with 24x/30x because:

1. the optics seems to be first rate with natural colours, good contrast and it´s also sharp.

2. The colours in ED82 seems to be exactly the same as in my binoculars - Nikon 8x32 SE CF. Nice to have the same colour balance in both binoculars and scope I think.

3. Bigger scope = more light. It is a huge difference when it comes to brightness between the two.

4. Here in Sweden, the ED82 costs about 1/4 less than an HD65.


The things I didn´t like to 100% with the Nikon was the fast focusing. Sometimes it was difficult to focus correctly. It´s heavier and finally the 24x/30x eye piece was a little soft in the edges. What do you think..are those negative aspects reasons not to buy the ED82 + 24x/30x combination or will I learn to live with them?

Finally..the main reason for me to go for the 24x/30x eye piece is that I´m wearing glasses.


Regards
Jonas

[ESTEBANNIC]

Hello Jonas,

I've just bought my first scope after a lot of investigation. I went for the Nikon ED82a with the 30x eypiece. I have no regrets, this scope has opened up a whole new world to me. I can't get enough of it. It's a marvelous piece of equipment. I had tried the Swaro and the Leica and to be honest the view you get from the Nikon looks somewhat brighter (at least to me). The only thing I miss is the ability to zoom in, so the zoom eyepiece is next on the list when my credit card recovers.

Also worth a look in Ebay, I got mine new from an Ebay shop in the USA. It cost me 700eur (plus import). Quite a bargain
I find the nikon right up there with the "porsche" scopes and the price difference is noticible even at normal retail price.

Regards

Steve

[stanacko]

Originally Posted by The Kingfisher

Maybe a strange question..

I´m new at birding and will now buy my very first scope. I want to buy a scope with top optics so I don´t need to upgrade in the future.

I have looked at the small scopes from Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica..and finally the bigger one from Nikon - ED82. I didn´t like Zeiss at all and the Leica was not a scope I liked very much either. Both Swarovski HD65 and Nikon Fieldscope ED82 would be great to own. But wich one should I spend money on!?

I think I have the answer my self, but it would be nice to hear your comments about them. I think I will go for the ED82 with 24x/30x because:

1. the optics seems to be first rate with natural colours, good contrast and it´s also sharp.

2. The colours in ED82 seems to be exactly the same as in my binoculars - Nikon 8x32 SE CF. Nice to have the same colour balance in both binoculars and scope I think.

3. Bigger scope = more light. It is a huge difference when it comes to brightness between the two.

4. Here in Sweden, the ED82 costs about 1/4 less than an HD65.


The things I didn´t like to 100% with the Nikon was the fast focusing. Sometimes it was difficult to focus correctly. It´s heavier and finally the 24x/30x eye piece was a little soft in the edges. What do you think..are those negative aspects reasons not to buy the ED82 + 24x/30x combination or will I learn to live with them?

Finally..the main reason for me to go for the 24x/30x eye piece is that I´m wearing glasses.


Regards
Jonas

HI.
Ihad the ED78 and it was a great scope with the 36x eye piece I used it for Digiscoping. If you are not digiscoping you could always go for a zoom eye piece.
Stan.

[henry link]

I think you will find the review of this scope at www.alula.fi interesting reading. Click on "reviews of optics". Also, I beleive the 38X eyepiece has the same eye relief as the 30X and better edge performance.

[Anthony Martin]

If you read the reviews, ignore everthing you read about image quality. I intended to buy an ED82A and tested examples at the Bird Fair and far more extensively at a dealers in comparison with both Swarovski and Zeiss. I realy did want the Nikon, I liked the look of it, the feel of it, the quality of construction and the ease of use.
Despite all this, I bought a Swarovski, but I really did want the Nikon, I was very disappointed.
Either I have been looking through a particularly good set of ATS80HD's, a particularly bad set of ED82A's or there is something wrong with my eyes, and I am quite willing to accept this fact. In all the examples I have tested, the resolving power of the Nikon doesn't even come close to the Swarovski.
I prefer the Nikon in every other way intill you look through it and I took no pleasure at all in spending the extra money.


Tony.

[Don Hoey]

I have the Nikon ED82 with the 30wide, 38wide and 25 to 75 zoom. With or without glasses both wide lenses provide a razor sharp image at a measured half a mile (deer watching) in clear air and scope mounted on a heavy tripod.
I find that the 30wide is a better general lens for birding if you don't need high magnification and gives a wide FOV and reasonable DOF, nice and bright too. The zoom I mainly use for wild deer observation as wide FOV is not a key requirement but bright image at 25magnification and the ability to zoom in to a distant object is.

[The Kingfisher]

Thank´s for your advice!

When I make a list of feutures and compare HD65 against ED82, the ED82 wins the battle I think.

My personal thoughts about the two:

* Colour balance: Nikon
* Contrast: Swarovski
* Sharpness: Swarovski
* Focusing: Swarovski
* Brightness: Nikon
* Flare: Even
* 30x eye piece: Nikon (soft edges, but with the Swarovski I get some "black-outs")


The points above tells me that it´s a tough battle, but Nikon have better colour balance and a more comfortable eye piece. Two of the most important things if you ask me. Also..it´s cheaper.

But the strange thing is that the HD65 makes me say "wow" when I look through it. The picture feels nice and right as long as I´m not slicing it down in pieces and compare it bit for bit with the ED82.

Strange was the word..


Regards
Jonas

[Edward woodwood]

cos the ED 78 (basically the old version of the ED82) is indistinguishable optically and is several hundred quid cheaper

Tim

[StevieEvans]

hi Jonas
ED82
cheaper than its nearest competitors
large central focusing ring ideal for gloved hand in winter
you will quickly get used to the focusing.
comes into its own at dawn & dusk, brighest image, imo.
SE

[The Kingfisher]

Thank´s for all your inputs!

I have now decided to buy an ED82 with 30x eye piece. I think I can´t go wrong with that combination. Like you said Stevie..I will probably get used to the focusing faster than I might think.

Thank´s again!


Regards
Jonas

[ESTEBANNIC]

Originally Posted by The Kingfisher

Thank´s for all your inputs!

I have now decided to buy an ED82 with 30x eye piece. I think I can´t go wrong with that combination. Like you said Stevie..I will probably get used to the focusing faster than I might think.

Thank´s again!


Regards
Jonas

Good decision Jonas you won't regret it

[kabsetz]

Jonas,

Even if you are going to use a 30x, make your choice with a zoom attached. Have both scopes side-by-side, set them at 60x (with the Nikon, this is about one-third distance from 50x to 75x on the ring), and see which one focuses faster and more accurately to a sharp image. That is the better scope, and that is the one you should buy if you wish to be ever and always happy with it. Because of sample variation, this comparison will only tell you about those two physical specimen, and not about Swaro ATS 65 HD versus Nikon Fieldscope ED 82.

All the aspects you listed in your comparison above EXCEPT FOR CONTRAST SHARPNESS and to some extent, flare, are model-specific, whereas contrast and sharpness are largely unit-specific. From you post, it seems that the Swaro was the better specimen.

Tony,

A good Nikon ED 82 is definitely sharper (at equal magnifications) than an equally good Swaro. You have been unlucky about the specimen you have seen, but this serves as a reminder that it is all too easy also to be unlucky about the one you buy.

Kimmo

[StevieEvans]

Kimmo
A very good point.
Allways buy the exact same scope (not one under the counter in an un-opened box) that you've field tested.
SE

[Anthony Martin]

Tony,

A good Nikon ED 82 is definitely sharper (at equal magnifications) than an equally good Swaro. You have been unlucky about the specimen you have seen, but this serves as a reminder that it is all too easy also to be unlucky about the one you buy.

Kimmo[/quote]

Kimmo, I am gobsmacked. I tested at least 6 examples of each scope over a period of time, and got the same result on each occation. I wonder how many it would have taken to get a change.
I in no way dispute your findings, you obviously get to test more than I do but the results I got were constant.
The scope I was "upgrading" from was a Leica APO77, purely to get compactness, and the Nikons couldn't even match this.

[kabsetz]

Tony,

Well, I'm not that surprised by your findings, since the difference between the ATS 80 HD and the ED 82 A in the best specimen I have seen was not dramatic, wheras the difference between a poor-mediocre sample and a good-excellent sample (within as well as across brands) is immediately obvious. One would certainly hope that six would be a large enough number to include at least one good one, but perhaps this time it didn't. From the sample size I have with both scopes, statistically valid interpretations are impossible to make, but it seems plausible that Swarovski's quality control might not let out samples quite as bad as what some other makes do.

Jonas,

The one thing I forgot to add is that as you wear glasses, and as I suspect you would eventually be tempted to buy a zoom, the Swaro zoom would be significantly better for you than the Nikon. In fact, I think all Nikon owners should embark upon a lobbying campaign to try to convince Nikon to produce a Swaro/Leica/Zeiss zoom clone for the Fieldscopes. If Nikon is convinced that their present design is superior, they could justl leave it in the lineup and see which version would sell better.

Kimmo

[The Kingfisher]

The comparison I did above is not really 100% right I think. The specifics I´m 100% sure about are colour balance, focusing, flare and brightness. Contrast and sharpness was actually more a feeling I had. Like I said, the image in 65HD gave me a strange "wow-feeling" I really can´t explain. The image felt very crisp and clean, but when comparing the sharpness side by side with Nikon I couldn´t se any big difference. The ED82 was also very sharp and nice. I think the easier focusing on the Swarovski was one reason that I felt it was sharper.

I dislike zooms because I can´t use them with high magnification (I´m wearing glasses). 40x or so - that´s the maximum magnification for me. Higher mag will be uncomfortable! One reason though, to buy a zoom is that it´s possible to zoom out. But I think a 30x eye piece will be just fine! :-)

The advice to buy the exact same scope that I have field tested is a very good point. I will ask the seller if it´s possible to try out new scopes (not "demo-things") from Swarovski and Nikon..and then choose one of them.


Regards
Jonas

[Steve Jones]

Originally Posted by kabsetz

Jonas,


Tony,

A good Nikon ED 82 is definitely sharper (at equal magnifications) than an equally good Swaro. You have been unlucky about the specimen you have seen, but this serves as a reminder that it is all too easy also to be unlucky about the one you buy.

Kimmo

Having looked at the Nikon 82ED a couple of days ago ('research' before investing in a new scope) I was gobsmacked at the image this scope produced with a 30X wide lens - just fabulous and the best I've seen to date. However, this issue of sample variation worries me. Would a 'bad un' be obvious when testing at the shop ??? (in this case at Martin Mere = good viewing facilities).

[kabsetz]

A bad specimen of any scope is obvious if you get to try it with a high enough magnification (preferably 60x) and the conditions are okay - relatively clear air without much heat haze and definitely without a window pane in front of the scope. A bad scope does not snap to focus decisively, does not "appear" satisfyingly sharp to your eye, and tires your eye out rather quickly as it is struggling to accommodate to an inferior image. It is invaluable to have two scopes side-by-side so you can compare - if you can do this, you will very likely be able to tell which is better.

Usually, anything that looks "fabulous" as a first impression really is quite good even after carefull scrutiny.

Kimmo

[Steve Jones]

Originally Posted by kabsetz

A bad specimen of any scope is obvious if you get to try it with a high enough magnification (preferably 60x) and the conditions are okay - relatively clear air without much heat haze and definitely without a window pane in front of the scope. A bad scope does not snap to focus decisively, does not "appear" satisfyingly sharp to your eye, and tires your eye out rather quickly as it is struggling to accommodate to an inferior image. It is invaluable to have two scopes side-by-side so you can compare - if you can do this, you will very likely be able to tell which is better.

Usually, anything that looks "fabulous" as a first impression really is quite good even after carefull scrutiny.

Kimmo

Thanks for the advice Kimmo, which I will certainly use when I buy.
When you spend this much on a scope you don't want anything sub-standard!

[The Kingfisher]

Hello again!

I have to tell you this..

I have now bought the Fieldscope ED82 with 30xW (for some weeks ago)..and I´m very happy with it. Much more happy than after the first time I tested it and started this thread. The optics is as great it can be and the eyepiece is not soft as I wrote for some months ago. It´s sharp right to the edge! :-)

The scope has everything that I wish..so I´m very pleased. First rate optics, compact to be a large scope, fast "heli-focus", nice design etc. The first two days though, I was a little bit disapointed about the focusring. It was rather stiff and it was hard to fine focus with it. But suddenly it became smoother and now the focusring is the best I ever have used. Fast and accurate and just wonderful! :-)

/Regards Jonas