Spotting Scope Research: Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica (3 Viewers)

[pppppvvvv]

That's interesting to know. Its curious that Zeiss glass at that level should display more CA than the Swarovski equivalent. I wonder if other people have that experience, too.

Out of curiosity, why did you make the change from the ATX to the Harpia?

Field of view. I couldn't use the atx95. I found myself regularly wanting to zoom out more, or spending all my viewing trying to keep the (moving) subject in the view.
To the point I wasn't actually watching/identifying birds.

 

[Will K]

Field of view. I couldn't use the atx95. I found myself regularly wanting to zoom out more, or spending all my viewing trying to keep the (moving) subject in the view.
To the point I wasn't actually watching/identifying birds.

I completely understand that feeling. The constant wide AFOV of the Harpia throughout the entire zoom range is certainly a very attractive feature. I wish more scopes employed it.

 

[Will K]

Any thoughts about light transmission and brightness in these scopes? This kind of thing is probably hard to quantify, because brightness is always affected by variable magnification.

Which scope would be the best performer at max zoom under low light conditions? I guess the ATX 115?

 

[William Lewis]

It's tempting to go for the biggest scope but are you really going to want to carry it or will the vortex go out most of the time?

Ultimately in theory and certainly according to the marketing as well as pricing the atx 115 would be the ultimate scope, big objective, you can use the 1.7 extender for mega zoom and it would have the largest exit pupil for every magnification as well as the option of strapping on the btx module to enjoy it all in stereo!

If your happy with the shape and carrying of the vortex though why not have a glance at scopes in that size or smaller - you may be surprised by the improvements you can enjoy especially if you try a few samples.

I'm content with my Chinese made £1000 including the eye piece ex demo monarch 82 (I didn't accept the first sample though). If I had the budget for an atx 115 though and wasn't happy with the cheap Nikon I'd be having a look at the new Kowa 66.....

Will

 

[pppppvvvv]

Problem here is Will, you've lost 6 months of use with this study! assuming you haven't bought a scope in the interim.
Even the worst fit for you would have been more use than evaluating for this long, and owning nothing.

 

[Will K]

I do still have the Razor and I take that out a lot. It’s a very fine scope and I get a lot of pleasure from it. I also like how small and portable it is for an 85mm. But I’d be willing to sacrifice portability for a better quality view. I might eat my words if I do end up getting a massive replacement, however!

 

[wllmspd]

A massive optic for those times and locations that suit it could be a good addition, but do keep a light weight option for those locations and times that need it! Not having a scope on you is as bad as having to lug a monster and associated tripod. Is the razor “light enough” or do you actually need a smaller and larger replacement?? What aspects of “better quality” are you most in need of?

Peter

 

[Will K]

A massive optic for those times and locations that suit it could be a good addition, but do keep a light weight option for those locations and times that need it! Not having a scope on you is as bad as having to lug a monster and associated tripod. Is the razor “light enough” or do you actually need a smaller and larger replacement?? What aspects of “better quality” are you most in need of?

Peter

The main attraction for me is maxing out image quality. Size and portability is secondary. What I look for in optics is a tool which will max out the capacity for large AFOV, true colours, edge to edge sharpness, image quality at high zoom capacity, also first-rate brightness / light transmission at high zoom capacity, and minimal CA.... all of that in an attractive, well-made and well-machined package which is a pleasure to own and operate.

I'd be loath to part with the Razor (I like to idea of keeping it if I buy a larger objective, +95mm), but if I find a good trade-in deal, I might make the swap.

 

[wllmspd]

Zoom…. AFOV can be maximises if you aren’t always jumping the magnification around the place?!

Peter

 

[Will K]

Zoom…. AFOV can be maximises if you aren’t always jumping the magnification around the place?!

True 😁

The Zeiss Harpia would disagree, however

 

[wllmspd]

As a Morpheus and Nagler user….

Peter

 

[Will K]

Does anyone have the AFOV statistics for the Vortex Razor 85mm 27-60x?

I own this scope, but don't have confidence in my ability to measure it accurately. And as far as I am aware, Vortex do not provide this statistic online.

For comparison, the same data for the Swarovski ATX 95 is 57-71°

Thanks!

 

[Tringa45]

Does anyone have the AFOV statistics for the Vortex Razor 85mm 27-60x?

I own this scope, but don't have confidence in my ability to measure it accurately. And as far as I am aware, Vortex do not provide this statistic online.

For comparison, the same data for the Swarovski ATX 95 is 57-71°

Thanks!

A simple and precise method of measuring AFOV

Speculation about the AFOV in a recently linked binocular test prompted the following:- AFOV is often calculated by multiplying true FOV by magnification, e.g. 10 x 6,4° = 64°, or using the ISO standard, which for the same binocular (112 m @ 1000 m) gives 58,5°. However, angular magnification...

www.birdforum.net

You would have to tilt the scope 45° so that the eyepiece is horizontal and it's helpful if your tripod head also has a tilt scale.
Viewing through the objective at effectively 1/60th "magnification" is a little more difficult than at binocular magnifications but you should nevertheless be able to measure with a tolerance of better than +/- 1°.

John

 

[Will K]

I’ve just pulled the trigger on a Leica APO Televid 82.

A spur of the moment thing, I’d say, were it not for all the procrastination. Although I still don’t have the funds to go the whole hog on something (e.g., ATX 115), it’s been a long year and I fancy something new.

It’s an intriguing choice, anyway. A bit of an outlier, but it will still be a significant step up from the Vortex Razor. I’m looking forward to seeing how it performs.

 

[henry link]

My unsolicited advice is the same as always: don't assume anything. The Leica specimen you bought might not even be as good as your Vortex specimen. Compare image quality at 60x and star-test them next to each other if you can.

 

[Will K]

My unsolicited advice is the same as always: don't assume anything. The Leica specimen you bought might not even be as good as your Vortex specimen. Compare image quality at 60x and star-test them next to each other if you can.

Yes. My first test will be a side by side comparison. I'll probably use both for a week or so and then make a decision about which one to keep.

 

[kabsetz]

You will pretty much immediately see which one is better unless the difference is very small. If it is, trust your instincts.