Nikon Fieldscope III vs. Pentax 80
Hi. Please advise me on a scope purchase.
A year ago I picked out the Nikon Fieldscope III 60 mm (the better-glass version) as the scope I wanted, based on various reviews, particularly the Better View Desired Web site. I then waited patiently to win the lottery so I could buy the thing I was looking for good optics, ease of use, ruggendness, and portability. (I didn't really want to be a birder who is always in one spot, although I confess that much of my birding has turned out to be just that--seems to be pretty standard OP.)
However, then my very nice family decided to buy me a scope, and based on the opinion of the helpful folks at Anacortes Telescope (who I think have a certain bias to bigger, brighter that is so critical for celestrial observation), got me the nice Pentax 80 ED, with the understanding that I might want to exchange it. They acted, however, like this was a no-brainer in favor of the Pentax and I'd be crazy to do the Nikon. (Maybe yes, but read on.)
I'm having a hard time deciding between the two, and frankly I don't have enough time to adequately research some of the related issues, such as the digiscoping potential. (On the latter point, I do realize the 60 mm Nikon will be limited in this regard, both because of the camera choice limitations and the size of the objective lens.)
I basically think I understand the tradeoffs. The Nikon is proven (now passe?), has good glass, is much more compact, and feels good--I like the focussing mechanism in particular . The Pentax is brighter, has gotten some great reviews, is apparently a (much?) better value, has the standard focussing mechanism, and is quite large. How much of a hassle will it be to hoist that thing around (even though it's not heavy, it's likely to get banged around in the car) or shlepp the bigger tripod I'd think it needs to be steady.
Then there is the warranty issue. My info is incomplete here, but I believe the Nikon has some sort of no-fault warranty, but the Pentax reportedly has a more standard faulty-product warranty. (This is close to a kill decision on the Pentax, I must say, if my info is correct--although I have yet to see a review that mentions it.)
So--and sorry for the long, perhaps old-hat post--Do I stick with my previous decision and go for the smaller Nikon, or take the warranty risk (ouch, what if my nephen, who probably hates birds, knocks it over on concrete) and go for the big, bright Pentax? If I stick with the Nikon, will I regret this down the road when I want to get more out of the scope (photography)?
(The Nikon is a bit cheaper--could probably get the tripod as well for a price comparable to the Pentax--but I'm not reallying considering that a major factor. Of course, if I had unlimitted cash, I'd go for the Swarovski ATS 65HD ... Or, would the Fieldscope III 78, which is apparently relatively compact (but I've not read much about it) be a worthy alternative (still relatively compact, good warranty) for a bit more cash?
... very grateful for your opinions.
-jb
Hi. Please advise me on a scope purchase.
A year ago I picked out the Nikon Fieldscope III 60 mm (the better-glass version) as the scope I wanted, based on various reviews, particularly the Better View Desired Web site. I then waited patiently to win the lottery so I could buy the thing I was looking for good optics, ease of use, ruggendness, and portability. (I didn't really want to be a birder who is always in one spot, although I confess that much of my birding has turned out to be just that--seems to be pretty standard OP.)
However, then my very nice family decided to buy me a scope, and based on the opinion of the helpful folks at Anacortes Telescope (who I think have a certain bias to bigger, brighter that is so critical for celestrial observation), got me the nice Pentax 80 ED, with the understanding that I might want to exchange it. They acted, however, like this was a no-brainer in favor of the Pentax and I'd be crazy to do the Nikon. (Maybe yes, but read on.)
I'm having a hard time deciding between the two, and frankly I don't have enough time to adequately research some of the related issues, such as the digiscoping potential. (On the latter point, I do realize the 60 mm Nikon will be limited in this regard, both because of the camera choice limitations and the size of the objective lens.)
I basically think I understand the tradeoffs. The Nikon is proven (now passe?), has good glass, is much more compact, and feels good--I like the focussing mechanism in particular . The Pentax is brighter, has gotten some great reviews, is apparently a (much?) better value, has the standard focussing mechanism, and is quite large. How much of a hassle will it be to hoist that thing around (even though it's not heavy, it's likely to get banged around in the car) or shlepp the bigger tripod I'd think it needs to be steady.
Then there is the warranty issue. My info is incomplete here, but I believe the Nikon has some sort of no-fault warranty, but the Pentax reportedly has a more standard faulty-product warranty. (This is close to a kill decision on the Pentax, I must say, if my info is correct--although I have yet to see a review that mentions it.)
So--and sorry for the long, perhaps old-hat post--Do I stick with my previous decision and go for the smaller Nikon, or take the warranty risk (ouch, what if my nephen, who probably hates birds, knocks it over on concrete) and go for the big, bright Pentax? If I stick with the Nikon, will I regret this down the road when I want to get more out of the scope (photography)?
(The Nikon is a bit cheaper--could probably get the tripod as well for a price comparable to the Pentax--but I'm not reallying considering that a major factor. Of course, if I had unlimitted cash, I'd go for the Swarovski ATS 65HD ... Or, would the Fieldscope III 78, which is apparently relatively compact (but I've not read much about it) be a worthy alternative (still relatively compact, good warranty) for a bit more cash?
... very grateful for your opinions.
-jb
Last edited: