-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Swarovski ATS65HD (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter dennyb
- Start date
Elizabeth Bigg
Addicted member
Hi denny, and welcome to the forum. I reckon someone will be along soon to answer your question!
IanF
Moderator
Hi DennyB,
On behalf of Admin and the Moderators, welcome to Bird Forum :t:
I have the ATS80 HD 20-60x and must say it is a nicely designed scope and of course optically very good indeed. I am sure that some of our members own the ATS 65 HD too and will perhaps be better able to pass comment on this model and alternatives.
Our scope reviews page contains some inforamtion which you may find useful though member reviews are of the ATS65 - http://www.birdforum.net/reviews/showcat.php?cat=12
See you around.
On behalf of Admin and the Moderators, welcome to Bird Forum :t:
I have the ATS80 HD 20-60x and must say it is a nicely designed scope and of course optically very good indeed. I am sure that some of our members own the ATS 65 HD too and will perhaps be better able to pass comment on this model and alternatives.
Our scope reviews page contains some inforamtion which you may find useful though member reviews are of the ATS65 - http://www.birdforum.net/reviews/showcat.php?cat=12
See you around.
IanF
Moderator
I did look at them both, but really I was already sold on the ATS 80 HD. The 65 is bright enough but in our dull climate I wanted a scope that would let in as much light as possible especially as I had digiscoping in mind too. Being hopefully the last scope that I will buy I wanted the best that I could get. I felt if I got the 65 I'd no doubt be hankering after the 80 at some point.
scampo
Steve Campsall
We have a birding family and have a Swaro 65HD, a Nikon ED82A and a Zeiss 85T*FL. Being the most expensive, generally (and perhaps especially ergonomically...) speaking, the Swaro 65HD is probably the best small scope available but in my experience... not with its zoom. The Zeiss zoom is so w-i-d-e in comparison that the Swaro looks tube-like in comparison - and such a wide field makes locating a bird far easier and it's good to see what else is around whilst looking through the scope. You'll do what I did with my Nikon if you buy it - get a 30xW to complement the zoom (and that is a superb eyepiece - both the Nikon and Swaro are truly magnificent with a 30xW).dennyb said:
The Swaro is indeed bright for a 65 and its rubber coating is reassuring, but a look through either the Nikon 82 or Zeiss 85 will show, even in quite decent late afternoon light, its limitations such that the Swaro does eventually struggle to give a bright enough image at times. The Swaro is however, excellent even against the light, rarely showing any flare or colour fringing.
If I were looking for a small scope, I'd look closely at the Zeiss if I wanted just a zoom, or the Nikon Fieldscope IIIED if I wanted a 30xW fixed. This latter little gem will, I feel sure, surprise you very pleasantly if you put it against a Swaro 65 - and save you a significant amount of money, too.
Last edited:
Alastair Rae
London birder
I have the 65HD and am really happy with it. Optically wonderful and not too heavy. It's only when I want to do some digi-snapping that I regret not getting the 80. I have got some good shots but could do with a bit more light.
Charles Harper
Régisseur
I have the 65 HD too. Only problem is that sometimes in the heat of the hunt, the view completely disappears-- that is, I can't get my eye centered-- or whatever-- on the viewing aperture. Everything is black until I find the sweet spot again. It's a minor knack that needs acquiring, I suppose, but I never had that problem with my old Bushnell.
Charles Harper said:
This is a common problem with the eyepieces that have "too good" an eye-relief. It occurs to me quite often with many high quality instruments (which is very disturbing!). Fortunately it usually disappears, when the eye is placed farther away from the eyepiece: 1) you may start using glasses
2) you can try to extend the eyecups by adding a longer tube on the original or 3) learn to use another support-spot under your eyebrows. HTH.
Ilkka
I've had a Nikon Fieldscope III ED (60mm obj) for four years and a Swarovski ATS HD 80 for several weeks. The zoom on the Swarovski is much more eyeglass friendly than Nikon's. I don't feel that Swarovski's zoom gives a tunnel like view compared to Nikon's. Both zooms are sharp edge to edge at all powers and to my eye have good color and contrast. Nikons zoom does have a little yellow fringing at low power. My impression from looking over water with sun on it that Zwarovski's zoom has less flare, however, if so it is minor. Flare in neither zoom is a problem.
As Scampo has said Zeiss's zoom gives a wider field of view. Others over time have remarked on centering the eye on Swarovski's new zoom. I have no problem as long as I adjust the eyecup to the correct height.
I purchased the Swarovski scope because of the frequent need to use 50 to 60X and the larger objective provides more light and better resolution/detail/color. Yesterday my friend was carrying my Nikon and I the Swarovski. It was a cloudy bright day and viewing a very distant flock of shorebirds to look for the unusual one--the Nikon failed, the Swarovski did not.
You may wish to compare the Zeiss to the Swarovski IF you are going to purchase a large objective scope.
The Swarovski and the Nikon provide 60X in the "small scopes" whereas the Zeiss and Leica do not. The nod goes to the Swarovski because of its' zoom and little larger objective. However, it is signicantly more expensive and I'm not sure it warrants it. Of course the key is to spend time with both scopes.
One more opinion heard from--for what its worth.
Bob
As Scampo has said Zeiss's zoom gives a wider field of view. Others over time have remarked on centering the eye on Swarovski's new zoom. I have no problem as long as I adjust the eyecup to the correct height.
I purchased the Swarovski scope because of the frequent need to use 50 to 60X and the larger objective provides more light and better resolution/detail/color. Yesterday my friend was carrying my Nikon and I the Swarovski. It was a cloudy bright day and viewing a very distant flock of shorebirds to look for the unusual one--the Nikon failed, the Swarovski did not.
You may wish to compare the Zeiss to the Swarovski IF you are going to purchase a large objective scope.
The Swarovski and the Nikon provide 60X in the "small scopes" whereas the Zeiss and Leica do not. The nod goes to the Swarovski because of its' zoom and little larger objective. However, it is signicantly more expensive and I'm not sure it warrants it. Of course the key is to spend time with both scopes.
One more opinion heard from--for what its worth.
Bob
scampo
Steve Campsall
Is that the new Nikon zoom, Bob? The yellow fringing is supposed to have been a feature of the old MCI zoom lens. The Swaro zoom certainly isn't tube-like next to the Nikon zoom, but both of those scopes are next to the Zeiss (although I take your point about magnification levels with the smaller scopes - I suspect that asking for 60x from a 60/65mm scope is rather much, particularly in poor light.
(Is that the new Nikon zoom, Bob? The yellow fringing is supposed to have been a feature of the old MCI zoom lens.)
Scampo, yes it is the new Nikon MC 20x60 zoom (60 mm obj.) I should have been clearer that the yellow fringing is only at the very most edge. And it is somewhat related to eye position. On my eyepiece it goes away a little above 20X. Now my assumption is that the 20x60 zoom came out as the MC2 when it was introduced.
Perhaps this is peculiar to my zoom-- it was one of early ones available in the USA. It was obtained in April 2002. I sent it to Nikon because a minor amount lint was apparent at low power at the edge of the field of view. I did not think enough of the yellow fringing to even mention it to Nikon repair.
Bob
Scampo, yes it is the new Nikon MC 20x60 zoom (60 mm obj.) I should have been clearer that the yellow fringing is only at the very most edge. And it is somewhat related to eye position. On my eyepiece it goes away a little above 20X. Now my assumption is that the 20x60 zoom came out as the MC2 when it was introduced.
Perhaps this is peculiar to my zoom-- it was one of early ones available in the USA. It was obtained in April 2002. I sent it to Nikon because a minor amount lint was apparent at low power at the edge of the field of view. I did not think enough of the yellow fringing to even mention it to Nikon repair.
Bob
scampo
Steve Campsall
I have no fringing at all in mine - but it is attached to the new ED82 so that could be the reason. My favourite eyepiece with the Nikon scope (and I have used an EDIII quite a bit, too) is the 30x. With this, the scope is as good as they come in my view - and the little EDIII is a beauty at a very fair price.
iporali said:This is a common problem with the eyepieces that have "too good" an eye-relief. It occurs to me quite often with many high quality instruments (which is very disturbing!). Fortunately it usually disappears, when the eye is placed farther away from the eyepiece: 1) you may start using glasses
HTH.
Ilkka
Ilkka: I see the same thing with the Leica APO 77 and 32xw eyepiece, but not the 20xw despite the same quoted eye relief in each case. I did notice that when wearing glasses extending the eye tube of the 32xw a few mm helped. Maybe an elastic band wrapped round it will help it stay put. The eye-tube extender idea makes sense. Maybe one could be cut from packing foam?
AlanFrench
Well-known member
Charles Harper said:
I am surprised to read this. Are you using the adjustable eye cup? I sometimes use my scope with glasses, and sometimes without. As long as I have the eye cup in the "down" position with glasses, and up without, I have no problem placing my eye. I've been using scopes for almost 40 years, so maybe it is just the "knack," and I might not be doing so well just starting out.
Clear skies, Alan
scampo
Steve Campsall
That's not something I find using my son's 65HD at all - in fact, I've found it very easy to look into and gain an immediate (and always superb) image.
These things must be individual and depend on eyesight differences, I suppose. With older binocualrs, I certainly found this a difficulty, but, again, with newer designs, not at all.
I think it could be that you are so used to your Bushnell that you haven't quite got used to the newer scope.
These things must be individual and depend on eyesight differences, I suppose. With older binocualrs, I certainly found this a difficulty, but, again, with newer designs, not at all.
I think it could be that you are so used to your Bushnell that you haven't quite got used to the newer scope.
