ED50 fixed power eyepieces in the US? (2 Viewers)

[Hermann]

If you mainly use those bigguns for the higher powers, why not try get a 75x ep? Way better for eye relief and viewing ease, also somewhat better brightness.

Well, as far as I'm concerned I only use such high powers to grab an ID. For scanning flocks of shorebirds (or "waders", as the Brits would say) 75x isn't very convenient due to the small exit pupil, the limited DOF and so on. So I'd have to switch eyepieces all the time - and that's anything but convenient.

Hermann

 

[Ries]

I mainly use the zoom ep too because of its convenience and rarely need to go to 75x (often just for fun because I can and it's still sharp), it was just a suggestion to AP it delivers a nice 40x on the ed50 also

 

[Alexis Powell]

If you mainly use those bigguns for the higher powers, why not try get a 75x ep? Way better for eye relief and viewing ease, also somewhat better brightness.

I have a 75x, and I've tried it for lots of things, but I don't use it for the reasons Hermann gave. My dad was an astronomy enthusiast, so he bought it for me on the thought that I should have something high power for occasional astro applications. I have found some such uses. Particularly memorable was how handy it was for watching transits of Mercury and Venus.

--AP

 

[Saxatilis]

I have just received a new 13-30x MCI zoom that is outstanding with my ED50.
To date, I have only had fixed eyepieces (I own and mainly use also a Fieldscope ED 82A and mount them via a DIY 1"25 adapter on a Celestron C5) but this is a little gem in a 550g body. I have both the 20x MC and the 27xDS but sharpness and brightness of the 13-30x zoom are truly remarkable.
It also depends on the kind of birdwatching you practice IMHO: the wide field of view of the 27x is a requirement if you often watch birds flying against the sky or over the sea -at moderate distance-. I also have a 40xMC (the 75x with the ED82) but use it little, because gets the scopes against the ropes: sometimes it can be irreplaceable, however, for me it is usually difficult to manage in ordinary situations.
The viewing angle of the zoom is very narrow, but this one will be perfect for observing birds that are not very mobile (birds perched, waders on the shoreline) as for the most part I will happen to do, around my city or for short trips and excursions

 

[Ries]

I have a 75x, and I've tried it for lots of things, but I don't use it for the reasons Hermann gave.

--AP

Well, for further offshore seabird (flocks) watching I find it more convenient than the zoom eyepiece. Sure, when you want to watch some closer birds the other arguments come into factor On the ed50 I find the 40x great for seabirds! Had a real joy with it! So well; maybe it's just me, maybe opinions and uses differ

Imo, without glasses on the ed50 the zoom ep suffices nicely, the fixed ep's take it beyond "great" to "fantastic", practicality left unbespoken.

 

[Jaywalk]

As OP I'll mention my findings with my new setup: Nikon ED50 with fixed 27x eyepiece, and Velbon Ultra 455 with OEM head: the scope and the 27x eyepiece are keepers. Without the fixed eyepiece I would have returned the scope - the 13x-30x has too little eye relief and too a narrow field of view - just as I'd been told.

I tested the ED50 against my only other scope, a 55-year-old 60mm Kowa TSN-1 with fixed 25x (and 40x and 60x, but I didn't test them). For what it's worth, the 13-30 had slightly better field of view than the TSN-1 - I counted 6-1/2 fence boards across my backyard with the 13-13x compared to 6 boards with the TSN-1 25x. with the ED50 I counted 10.

I did a dollar bill test at 50 feet, and the ED50 derived smaller details, but the TSN-1 did surprisingly well, I thought. I could see tiny leaves on the dollar bill with the Nikon, but could guess pretty well what they were with the Kowa.

With colors, the Nikon won easily.

If you had to use a scope to drive a nail, the 53-oz Kowa would be my choice.

The Velbon Ultra 455 is a mixed bag. I like its portability and sturdiness, but it's too high for my height. Sure, I can shorten the legs, but that cuts into the easy-deployment character of the tripod - pull, twist, scope. I have to pull, twist, push each back in a little and measure against each other, then scope. And I'm carrying around metal I'll never use. I may keep it for home, leaving it set up, or car trips where I can leave the legs where I want them, but I think I still need something for travel.

I've tried twice to replace the heavy head that might allow me to extend the legs perhaps fully - an Andoer (wrong size base screw) and Kakafoto cheap ball head (couldn't tighten it enough to keep it from rattling).

It's a process, and I'm learning. I appreciate your help.

 

[etudiant]

As OP I'll mention my findings with my new setup: Nikon ED50 with fixed 27x eyepiece, and Velbon Ultra 455 with OEM head:

I've tried twice to replace the heavy head that might allow me to extend the legs perhaps fully - an Andoer (wrong size base screw) and Kakafoto cheap ball head (couldn't tighten it enough to keep it from rattling).

It's a process, and I'm learning. I appreciate your help.

The problem with the Andoer wrong size base screw is easily fixed.
Iirc, the Andoer has a 3/8th inch screw fitting, so the sleeve bushing to fit the Velbon 1/4 inch thread will add microscopic weight. It works fine for me on my old Velbon Ultra Luxi.

 

[Jaywalk]

The problem with the Andoer wrong size base screw is easily fixed.
Iirc, the Andoer has a 3/8th inch screw fitting, so the sleeve bushing to fit the Velbon 1/4 inch thread will add microscopic weight. It works fine for me on my old Velbon Ultra Luxi.

I wish Andoer had included an adapter in the package - I didn't/don't know what to call such a thing and therefore couldn't search for it. Link please, perhaps?

Instead, I concentrated (in another thread) on removing the current 1/4-inch screw and replacing it with a 3/8-inch. That failed, and I don't even know if it's possible. Clearly, the "bushing(?)" is an easier approach.

 

[etudiant]

I wish Andoer had included an adapter in the package - I didn't/don't know what to call such a thing and therefore couldn't search for it. Link please, perhaps?

Instead, I concentrated (in another thread) on removing the current 1/4-inch screw and replacing it with a 3/8-inch. That failed, and I don't even know if it's possible. Clearly, the "bushing(?)" is an easier approach.

This Amazon link includes some of the bushing options:
https://www.amazon.com/Andoer-Tripo...tripod+head&qid=1602517959&sr=8-4&tag=mh0b-20

Or try this directly:
https://www.amazon.com/Standard-Ada...1&refRID=1ZPX9H028TF33G58EN9C#customerReviews

 

[Alexis Powell]

...it's too high for my height. Sure, I can shorten the legs, but that cuts into the easy-deployment character of the tripod - pull, twist, scope. I have to pull, twist, push each back in a little and measure against each other, then scope...

If you otherwise like the Velbon 455, I don't think you'll find a better option. Any other compact tripod will have you opening and closing numerous leg locks, which will take much longer. I think you are being too much a perfectionist about leg length. In the real world, the ground is uneven, so there's no point in extending the legs to _exactly_ the same length. You should be able to hold the tripod in a consistent way so that you pull each leg approximately the same amount (roughly measured by how far you extend your arms from one another during the procedure) before twisting it to lock.

...And I'm carrying around metal I'll never use...

If you ever use your tripod where you are standing on a slope and it is downslope, you will need the additional height. I find myself in such situations very frequently when standing on slopes overlooking waterways.

--AP

 

[Jaywalk]

If you otherwise like the Velbon 455, I don't think you'll find a better option. Any other compact tripod will have you opening and closing numerous leg locks, which will take much longer.

I'll keep looking and hang onto the 455 in the meantime. Thanks.

 

[Jaywalk]

Three-plus year update...

The Nikon ED50 is still working well. I removed the heavy pan head from the Velbon 455 and replaced it with a simple RRS ball head. To that I installed an Arca-Swiss clamp for plates on both my Nikon D50 Camera and my ED50 spotting scope - it's quite versatile that way.

I was a little too harsh three years ago about the 13-30x eyepiece. I remeasured the FOV this morning for both the 13x and 27x, and while they are approximately the same, the 13x is slightly wider. There are new boards on my fence now, and the 13x is about 10-1/2 of the boards width, the 27x is approximately 9-1/2. This is the first time I fitted the 13-30x since I took it off three years ago, and if I hadn't had $200 for a 27x EP back then I might not have noticed that there was anything wrong with it that removing my glasses wouldn't solve - eye relief is still an issue. I still like the scope and prefer the 27x EP, so I leave that fitted.

A common use for it is over a flooded area at Choke Canyon State Park in Texas, from generally 150 - 300 meters. Typically, we'll see Osprey, Glossy Ibis, Roseate Spoonbill, Great Blue Heron, various ducks, and most recently, a roosting Great Horned Owl, and a swimming alligator.

I'm still unsatisfied with the Velbon 455 tripod. Each of three legs has four sections to be tightened - sturdy but unwieldy. I need to resolve that.

 

[Alexis Powell]

...I'm still unsatisfied with the Velbon 455 tripod. Each of three legs has four sections to be tightened - sturdy but unwieldy. I need to resolve that.

Could you explain in more detail what it is that you find unsatisfying? You mention the number of leg sections that need tightening, but the genius of the "ultra" series tripod design is that all tightening for each leg is done by twisting the foot at the end of the leg (i.e. a single adjustment knob for each leg rather than a separate knob for each section of each leg, as is the case for nearly every other tripod in the world).

--AP

 

[Jaywalk]

Could you explain in more detail what it is that you find unsatisfying?

I might be destined for disappointment, but I think I'd prefer somewhat lighter weight, less metallic clanking noises, and three-section legs. Funny thing is I don't feel a need for a fluid pan head.