[jforgham]

What to do? Which would people suggest be the better buy? I have saved for a quality scope and am now looking at either
Leica televid APO 77 with 40WW eyepiece and skua case (£1229 best price so far)
Swarovski ATS 80mm with 45SW eyepiece and skua stay on case (£1128 best so far)

I am primarily a birder who visits all sorts of habitats, frequently with no hides as am not on reserves. I have a good Manfrotto tripod already so no expense needed there. I am replacing my 20+ year old Charles Frank scope witrh a 20x eyepiece, with which I have been very pleased. Will pass this on to a good home when I have got me new 'un. Also, like to use my coolpix 990 for a spot of digiscoping.
Is there really a big difference between these two quality scopes and which should I go for. I would appreciate comments based on fact and experience rather than bias and favouritism, thank you. £100 spare gets me to loads of European bird hot spots, or a good meal with wine for my partner!!
Thanks for any advise.
Have posted this in both swarv and leica threads.

Jono

[postcardcv]

Hi Jono

Firstly I'd ask if you've tested these scopes with these eyepeices? These high mag fixed eyepeices don't really get the best out of these scopes, the 30x/32x will deliver a better image and be much more use for digiscoping.

As for which is best, only you can answer that. Optically they are both outstanding scopes, so you need to test them side by side and see which you prefer. They do deliver colour is a slightly different way to each other and use very different focusing systems, so it really does come down to personal preference.

Also worth noting that the price you've found for the Swarovski is very low, so it must be a slightly older scope and not have the current coatings (only been on the scopes for a few months). To get the Swarovski with the newest coatings you'd probably have to pay another ~£200.

[pduxon]

Peter

I think Jono has the price for the NON HD swaro.

Jono

have you considered the Nikon ED82. The fixed eyepieces are considered top notch and it can be got for under £900.

[BobCesme]

The 20x eyepiece on the Leica is excellent for Digiscoping as well.

[postcardcv]

Originally Posted by pduxon

Peter

I think Jono has the price for the NON HD swaro.

Jono

have you considered the Nikon ED82. The fixed eyepieces are considered top notch and it can be got for under £900.

That could explain it.... standard glass Swaro vs APO Leica - no contest, it would have to be the Leica.

Totally agre with you that the Nikon ED82 is well worth a look - a great scope at a great price.

[Brian Stone]

Others have commented on the mag. When it comes to digiscoping the lower the mag the better. I have the 20x and 32x for my Leica and hardly ever switch to the 32 even if the camera isn't in use.

What about the Kowa TSN-823M? The digiscopers are getting outstanding results with this. E.g.:
http://weedworld.blogspot.com/

[BobCesme]

Originally Posted by brianhstone

Others have commented on the mag. When it comes to digiscoping the lower the mag the better. I have the 20x and 32x for my Leica and hardly ever switch to the 32 even if the camera isn't in use.

What about the Kowa TSN-823M? The digiscopers are getting outstanding results with this. E.g.:
http://weedworld.blogspot.com/

I know exactly what you mean Brian I hardly ever use 32x eyepiece,maybe for a distant wader now and again but very seldom.

[pduxon]

Originally Posted by postcardcv

That could explain it.... standard glass Swaro vs APO Leica - no contest, it would have to be the Leica.

Totally agre with you that the Nikon ED82 is well worth a look - a great scope at a great price.

maybe I should offer to sell him my APO62 with 26ww and buy myself a Nikon (already got the Nikon zoom on the ED50)

[jforgham]

Thanks for these. I have indeed tested them, but sometime ago and not side by side. Note the comments for the non HD. Indeed I gave the price for the glass. Thanks also for comments regarding eyepieces. So far then 20x and maybe 32x for birding?) leica APO 77. Seem to think this was the direction I was going, except try to steer clear of what Bill Oddie advertises!! Off to Titchwell next weekend with school bird club, so give them a go then. Is the Nikon ED82 in thesame class? Not familiar with this scope.
Jono

[pduxon]

http://www.alula.fi/gb/test_nikon82edGB.html

[postcardcv]

Originally Posted by jforgham

Off to Titchwell next weekend with school bird club, so give them a go then. Is the Nikon ED82 in thesame class? Not familiar with this scope.
Jono

I use and APO77 and would put the ED82 right up there with it - I think that the Leica has the edge optically (to my eyes), but if I was buying new tomorrow I'd have a hard time convincing myself that it was £300 better than the Nikon

[pduxon]

Originally Posted by postcardcv

I use and APO77 and would put the ED82 right up there with it - I think that the Leica has the edge optically (to my eyes), but if I was buying new tomorrow I'd have a hard time convincing myself that it was £300 better than the Nikon

if I was buying a zoom then I'd lean away from the Nikon but with fixed eye pieces.....

You could buy that ED50 you always wanted and still have change

[James]

Originally Posted by pduxon

if I was buying a zoom then I'd lean away from the Nikon but with fixed eye pieces.....

You could buy that ED50 you always wanted and still have change

You again Pete! Quiet day in local government?

James

[Brian Stone]

Originally Posted by jforgham

Thanks for these. I have indeed tested them, but sometime ago and not side by side. Note the comments for the non HD. Indeed I gave the price for the glass. Thanks also for comments regarding eyepieces. So far then 20x and maybe 32x for birding?) leica APO 77. Seem to think this was the direction I was going, except try to steer clear of what Bill Oddie advertises!! Off to Titchwell next weekend with school bird club, so give them a go then. Is the Nikon ED82 in thesame class? Not familiar with this scope.
Jono

Really look closely at the 32x before buying it. The 20x hardly ever comes off my scope - I prefer a really wide field of view and it is amazingly bright and sharp. When I got the kit I questioned the 32x as I thought it looked poor optically. I was convinced otherwise but have always thought there was something wrong with it and have never been totally happy.

[BobCesme]

Originally Posted by brianhstone

Really look closely at the 32x before buying it. The 20x hardly ever comes off my scope - I prefer a really wide field of view and it is amazingly bright and sharp. When I got the kit I questioned the 32x as I thought it looked poor optically. I was convinced otherwise but have always thought there was something wrong with it and have never been totally happy.

I always thought the same ,but I have come to the conclusion it's because the 20x is so bright and has such a brilliant FOV the 32x always seems inferior!!!

[kabsetz]

Postcardcv,

I beg to differ with you concerning Leica Apo vs. Nikon Fieldscope ED 82 A. I am yet to see a Leica (and I have looked through quite a number of them) that would optically equal a prime sample of the Nikon. A subpar specimen of any scope is a different matter, and I have also seen Nikons which are worse than most Leicas as well as Leicas which are worse than most Nikons.

With telescopes, it is unfortunately rather important to test the very unit you might buy, and to coldly refuse it if it does not snap into sharp focus at high magnification. I'm not saying that it would be a waste of time to study matters beforehand, quite the contrary, but after you have narrowed down your choice, it is wise to let your eyes and heart make the final choice.

Leica's zoom eyepiece has a more expansive field at comparable magnifactions than the Nikon zoom(s), and is much more suited to viewing with spectacles. However, every other parameter except for eye-relief and field of view are top-notch in the Nikon zoom, and the wideangles, as many have already pointed out, are excellent.

Kimmo

[postcardcv]

Originally Posted by kabsetz

Postcardcv,

I beg to differ with you concerning Leica Apo vs. Nikon Fieldscope ED 82 A. I am yet to see a Leica (and I have looked through quite a number of them) that would optically equal a prime sample of the Nikon. A subpar specimen of any scope is a different matter, and I have also seen Nikons which are worse than most Leicas as well as Leicas which are worse than most Nikons.

Kimmo

Hi Kimmo

as I did stress my preference for the Leica is a personal thing and I understand others having opposing views. I work in an optics shop and regularly view through the top four scopes (Leica, Nikon, Swarovski and Zeiss), I find that there is little to choose between them optically. This opinion is reflected in the fact that all four sell well, if one was significantly better optically everyone would buy it.

I do own the Leica APO77 (on my second one now), for me it's the best of the bunch. To my eyes it delivers the truest colours and the sharpest image, plus I love the twin focus wheel system.

I would agree that the Nikon is a great scope and delivers a very sharp image. But I do not get on too well with the zoom eyepeice, as this is what I use it is an important consideration.

I completely agree with you that it is vital to test these things for yourself, if possible testing the scopes side by side.

[scampo]

Originally Posted by jforgham

What to do? Which would people suggest be the better buy? I have saved for a quality scope and am now looking at either
Leica televid APO 77 with 40WW eyepiece and skua case (£1229 best price so far)
Swarovski ATS 80mm with 45SW eyepiece and skua stay on case (£1128 best so far)

I am primarily a birder who visits all sorts of habitats, frequently with no hides as am not on reserves. I have a good Manfrotto tripod already so no expense needed there. I am replacing my 20+ year old Charles Frank scope witrh a 20x eyepiece, with which I have been very pleased. Will pass this on to a good home when I have got me new 'un. Also, like to use my coolpix 990 for a spot of digiscoping.
Is there really a big difference between these two quality scopes and which should I go for. I would appreciate comments based on fact and experience rather than bias and favouritism, thank you. £100 spare gets me to loads of European bird hot spots, or a good meal with wine for my partner!!
Thanks for any advise.
Have posted this in both swarv and leica threads.

Jono

Either scope will suit you down to the ground - that's the truth. They both offer excellent quality optically and mechanically. You might find you prefer the slightly warmer image of the Leica compared to the slightly cooler image of the Swaro.

40x is not a typically useful birding eyepiece, but I suppose you have you reasons for wanting it.

You must also surely have discounted Nikon ED82 and Zeiss Apo85 for good reasons so I'll say only that these two scopes are also excellent indeed: the Nikon with 38xW is stunning and offers the most natural view imaginable and in such a compact body (about the same length as the Swaro 65 and much more compact than the Leica); the Zeiss stands out if you wanted a zoom - its 20-60x Vario eyepiece offers a uniquely wide field of view allowing you to see more of what you're looking at by far compared with either Swaro or Leica.

[pduxon]

Originally Posted by kabsetz

Postcardcv,

I beg to differ with you concerning Leica Apo vs. Nikon Fieldscope ED 82 A. I am yet to see a Leica (and I have looked through quite a number of them) that would optically equal a prime sample of the Nikon. A subpar specimen of any scope is a different matter, and I have also seen Nikons which are worse than most Leicas as well as Leicas which are worse than most Nikons.

With telescopes, it is unfortunately rather important to test the very unit you might buy, and to coldly refuse it if it does not snap into sharp focus at high magnification. I'm not saying that it would be a waste of time to study matters beforehand, quite the contrary, but after you have narrowed down your choice, it is wise to let your eyes and heart make the final choice.

Leica's zoom eyepiece has a more expansive field at comparable magnifactions than the Nikon zoom(s), and is much more suited to viewing with spectacles. However, every other parameter except for eye-relief and field of view are top-notch in the Nikon zoom, and the wideangles, as many have already pointed out, are excellent.

Kimmo

I have to admit I was puzzled on reading your review of the APO77 becuase a mate has one with zoom and it and the APO 62 (+ zoom) I own are excellent. But each to his own isn't that the fun of it. Curious why you've never reviewed the 62.

I agree the Nikon zoom is optically brilliant. When you get used to it you realise that the image is excellent as good as anything about. I think that eye relief and field of view puts people off.

I have to say if I was buying a scope today I'd buy an ED82 for sea watching etc and an ED50 for my patch.

[pduxon]

Jono

is there a reason you've ruled out zoom lenses? All the big 4 have optically good zooms..

I think this thread is fascinating, you have people who love 20x lenses and those who love zooms.

[JohnnyH]

I have to say if I was buying a scope today I'd buy an ED82 for sea watching etc and an ED50 for my patch.[/quote]

Exactly the set up I have, ED82 & 30x & ED50 & 27x, fantastic optics to cover all situations.

John.

[jforgham]

Good day to all,
Wow thanks guys, now I really have no idea!!! No seriously, this has been most educative, along with kind PM'd offers to try them out in my own time. Totally agree that I shall need to try them out side by side. Haden't considered zoom lens as sometime ago tried one out at Dunge RSPB and wasn't over excited, but I suspect technology has moved on. They seem to get rave reviews wherever I look, some more than others. Yep, big investment (My latest BMW only cost £200 a year ago and still motors along wonderfully) so am in no rush to plunge headlong in. Main reason for new one is the thread for tripod attachment on my old Charles Frank has just about given up the ghost. To have it re threaded or halicoil fitted would only be temporary and would be guaranteed to fail at the most inappropriate moment.
Thanks to all for their advice, much appreciated.

Jono

[greg g]

Originally Posted by postcardcv

Hi Kimmo

as I did stress my preference for the Leica is a personal thing and I understand others having opposing views. I work in an optics shop and regularly view through the top four scopes (Leica, Nikon, Swarovski and Zeiss), I find that there is little to choose between them optically. This opinion is reflected in the fact that all four sell well, if one was significantly better optically everyone would buy it.

I do own the Leica APO77 (on my second one now), for me it's the best of the bunch. To my eyes it delivers the truest colours and the sharpest image, plus I love the twin focus wheel system.

I would agree that the Nikon is a great scope and delivers a very sharp image. But I do not get on too well with the zoom eyepeice, as this is what I use it is an important consideration.


I completely agree with you that it is vital to test these things for yourself, if possible testing the scopes side by side.

Postcardcv,

You work in an optics shop and and you mention four scope brands. Have you had a chance to view Kowa scopes and do you not consider the Kowa to be equal to these?

[postcardcv]

Originally Posted by greg g

Postcardcv,

You work in an optics shop and and you mention four scope brands. Have you had a chance to view Kowa scopes and do you not consider the Kowa to be equal to these?

In my opinion the top Kowa scopes (until recently the 823/4) are excellent, though to my eyes they are slightly behind the other top scopes. That said they are noticabley cheaper too and therefore offer extremely good value.

hopefully the new Kowa scope will be a real step up (it certainly is in price). I have only tested a standard glass version of the new 88mm scope, but was impressed with it. A good bright, sharp image, I like the new focusing system (twin wheel like the Leica and Zeiss) and was impressed by the seemingly solid build and relatively light weight. The big test will be putting a Prominar version next to the current top four and seeing how it performs... I just hope it's as good as it's price tag suggests it will be.

[hinnark]

Originally Posted by postcardcv

In my opinion the top Kowa scopes (until recently the 823/4) are excellent, though to my eyes they are slightly behind the other top scopes. That said they are noticabley cheaper too and therefore offer extremely good value.

I´m not sure about that. I´ve got the impression that variation from sample to sample is of more relevance than the differences between the brands. The 82 mm Prominars have very good contrast at daylight compared with some of the Top brands IMHO. Unfortunately the Kowas aren´t really cheaper here.

Steve