In praise of small scopes (1 Viewer)

[pbjosh]

But do scope users feel that a head with an adjusting arm are a requirement?

I don’t miss it at all. I am not a hardcore scope user but have found a good connection between the scope and plate, and a decent quality head with smooth motion, far more important than what type or brand or style of parts you have. For me the lightweight scope and light weight ball head work a treat. Again as long as the plate doesn’t work loose from the scope, the body of the scope is already a lever arm and you can point the scope more easily by just grabbing the body.

 

[mskb]

I don’t miss it at all. I am not a hardcore scope user but have found a good connection between the scope and plate, and a decent quality head with smooth motion, far more important than what type or brand or style of parts you have. For me the lightweight scope and light weight ball head work a treat. Again as long as the plate doesn’t work loose from the scope, the body of the scope is already a lever arm and you can point the scope more easily by just grabbing the body.

Hi Josh, I too felt the same until I did my hawk watches last fall. After working with my usual ball head (Gitzo) the first couple of days, tried my fluid pan/tilt head (128RC) and found the latter to work way better really ( aiming, following and keeping on the bird until an ID is made ). Since then, I have become a believer on fluid pan/tilt heads for hawk watches. For birding on wide open marshes, where the birds are quite stationary, I have had no trouble just using a ball head. Just my experience. Cheers!

 

[henry link]

When I was researching for a new scope last year, the two front-runners for me were the Vortex Razor and Zeiss Gavia. These were both 'compromise' options, really, because I was (and remain) very curious about the Zeiss Harpia, but the price is still too high for me, at my current income.

In the end, I went for the Vortex because their second hand prices are excellent, their warranty is very comforting, and I find the Razor Gen II to be very characterful and pleasant to use. (Much better than the old Gen I. I was also rather disappointed with the Viper and Diamondback scopes.)

Not that there is anything wrong with the Zeiss Gavia, however, which seems, in my eyes, to be ever so slightly better than the Razor. Nevertheless, I still plan to upgrade to a Harpia 95 when I get a new job. (The modular Swaro ATX is attractive, obviously - especially due to that gorgeous 115mm objective module - but I've heard a few too many negative experiences from users who complain about optical imperfections. The Harpia might suffer from those, too, as far as I am aware, but very few people seem to own one or have used it enough to comment.)

In the meantime, the Razor is a wonderful companion on all my outdoor adventures.

The Vortex Razor and Zeiss Gavia are sibling scopes, along with a Kite, a Maven and a discontinued Brunton scope, all made by Kamakura in Japan. The two I tested (Brunton ICON and Zeiss Gavia) were not very good. The problems were not exactly the same in those two, so other scopes in the family may be better or worse.

 

[pbjosh]

Hi Josh, I too felt the same until I did my hawk watches last fall. After working with my usual ball head (Gitzo) the first couple of days, tried my fluid pan/tilt head (128RC) and found the latter to work way better really ( aiming, following and keeping on the bird until an ID is made ). Since then, I have become a believer on fluid pan/tilt heads for hawk watches. For birding on wide open marshes, where the birds are quite stationary, I have had no trouble just using a ball head. Just my experience. Cheers!

I'm sure that would be the case! Same for dedicated seawatchers. I have one "better scope" that is bigger / heavier, on a 128RC head and carbon legs. But it's going to get sold as I never use it. For my use (needs to be easy to travel with and easy to backpack and easy to carry), a smaller scope on a ball head and on easier to deploy legs has all the advantages.

Several friends have better scopes but on older/worn heads or with plate/scope attachment woes, or various other issues. I will take a moderate quality scope on a plate that doesn't twist or wiggle, on any head that doesn't twist or wiggle and has smooth action, over a great scope on a wonky head or with a loose plate...

People worry so much about the optical quality of the scope but so many scopes I see in use are so compromised by inability to get them locked in where they need to be, or are so big and heavy that they aren't useful for my kind of birding (lots of hiking, lots of traveling).

Different use cases and all, of course

 

[MiddleRiver]

The Vortex Razor and Zeiss Gavia are sibling scopes, along with a Kite, a Maven and a discontinued Brunton scope, all made by Kamkura in Japan. The two I I tested (Brunton ICON and Zeiss Gavia) were not very good. The problems were not exactly the same in those two, so other scopes in the family may be better or worse.

Henry, have you examined the opticrons? They get a lot of positive reviews. Always good to hear from someone who can provide empirical data
Merry Christmas !

 

[Ratal]

99 times out of 100 my mm4 50ed is on the pistol grip and sling. What it allows me to do is scan distance treelines / lochs without slowing myself down with a tripod.

 

[Will K]

The Vortex Razor and Zeiss Gavia are sibling scopes, along with a Kite, a Maven and a discontinued Brunton scope, all made by Kamkura in Japan. The two I I tested (Brunton ICON and Zeiss Gavia) were not very good. The problems were not exactly the same in those two, so other scopes in the family may be better or worse.

The Maven S.1A looks like a gorgeous scope. I'd love to try one, but they're only sold online, and I've never met anyone here in the UK who owns one.

 

[wllmspd]

Impressive AFOV on the zoom, impressive Maven even quote it. Be interesting to see how it compares to other scopes for the same money.

Peter

 

[Dyrlege]

I shall have to compose a song in praise of the ATC from Swarovski. I was happy with my MM3, I have found even more happiness in the ATC which is physically slightly smaller (although heavier) but with optics to die for. Or at least look through. They've done the same with the ATC as with the Curio: something small and eminently capable. Same colour...

 

[Ratal]

I shall have to compose a song in praise of the ATC from Swarovski. I was happy with my MM3, I have found even more happiness in the ATC which is physically slightly smaller (although heavier) but with optics to die for. Or at least look through. They've done the same with the ATC as with the Curio: something small and eminently capable. Same colour...

I wanted to love the STC version, and yes the optics are amazing, BUT, the MM4 50ED wins due to the focusing - I cannot get on with the barrel style on the STC.

 

[fazalmajid]

I wanted to love the STC version, and yes the optics are amazing, BUT, the MM4 50ED wins due to the focusing - I cannot get on with the barrel style on the STC.

Thanks for saving me from the temptation to upgrade my MM4/50 to a STC...

I only got the opportunity to look at the ATC at Selfridges, but in a small scope, I think straight makes more sense than angled.

 

[MiddleRiver]

Thanks for saving me from the temptation to upgrade my MM4/50 to a STC...

I only got the opportunity to look at the ATC at Selfridges, but in a small scope, I think straight makes more sense than angled.

Why do think straight makes more sense? Shopping....
It seems like it would be easier to pack (small camera pack already mostly full), but shorter tripod is appealing, not to mention less neck strain.

 

[BKoh]

I'm shopping for a scope and have this head on my tripod. I'm trying to keep things light and compact. But do scope users feel that a head with an adjusting arm are a requirement? I'll admit sometimes with camera on tripod, I do miss the handles sticking out, even tho the ball works pretty well (and of course I LOVE not having handles when packing or toting it).

I use a Sirui VA-5 with my 80mm angled scope. Took the handle off when putting the VA-5 on the tripod. Never missed it. I just move the scope itself to pan/tilt. The VA-5 works much better than the ballhead I had, and is still small enough for the legs to fold up over it.

 

[fazalmajid]

Why do think straight makes more sense? Shopping....
It seems like it would be easier to pack (small camera pack already mostly full), but shorter tripod is appealing, not to mention less neck strain.

I don’t use my small scopes on a tripod, but braced against a window or other improvised supports.

 

[mbb]

I shall have to compose a song in praise of the ATC from Swarovski. I was happy with my MM3, I have found even more happiness in the ATC which is physically slightly smaller (although heavier) but with optics to die for. Or at least look through. They've done the same with the ATC as with the Curio: something small and eminently capable. Same colour...

Could you share your experience on comparing these 2 scopes, the ATC and the MM3 (50 or 60mm?)?
I have no problem with barrel-type focussing, thus I‘m more interested about viewing comfort, brightness and image quality. Though also about real-life size-&-weight comparisons.

 

[Dyrlege]

Could you share your experience on comparing these 2 scopes, the ATC and the MM3 (50 or 60mm?)?
I have no problem with barrel-type focussing, thus I‘m more interested about viewing comfort, brightness and image quality. Though also about real-life size-&-weight comparisons.

Firstly, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the mm3/60 (I have an HDF zoom eyepiece, costs almost the same as the scope) that the Swaro ATC will solve. That said, it does most things just a little better: better build, an even clearer view than the mm3/60, apparent field of view is better (subjectively!), image is better, handling is better. But: it has exactly the same "flash" and "wow" when you look through it as the Curio, the little 7*21, a view that you want to have, and which made the Curio my most wanted binos. Worth the extra money? I like to think it is. As good as a Swaro 65? Yes. And it feels confident. May sound stupid, but it does.
It does not solve heat shimmer and other natural phenomena, and I could have made do with the mm3, but there was the curio-factor...
The mm3 will not be sold. Oh yes, size and weight: about equal, the ATC appears more compact, both are eminently portable. And I'm opinionated!
Cheers