Opticron MM3 60 GA ED vs Nikon ED 50/82 scopes? (2 Viewers)

After using only the Nikon ED50 with 16x eyepiece for several weeks (and sometimes with 13-40x zoom), I've discovered two things:

1. How wonderfully it is to carry less weight and manage a smaller scope
2. That I really appreciate the use of low magnification

However, I realize that I sometimes lack higher magnification when using the 16x eyepiece. The zoom providing higher magnification, but it has poor eye relief and relatively narrow field of view.

In addition to the ED50 I also have a Nikon ED82 with 30x, 50x and 25-75x. After only having used the ED50 for several weeks, I now think that the ED82 is heavy to carry around for longer periods. I also think that 25-30x in many cases is too high magnification for my purposes.

This means that I am now thinking about getting me a 60-65mm scope where one can access a zoom range of approximately 15-50x. I have thought about the Nikon EDG 65, but it is simply too large and heavy to be only a 65mm. Zeiss has the Diascope 65, but I do not like Zeiss..

A cheaper alternative that I now have found is Opticron MM3 60 ED. On paper it seems to have everything I'm looking for: 15-45x zoom with good eye relief and decent field of view, relatively compact and easy to be a 60x scope, affordable, etc.

The question now..is it a good scope, i.e. without obvious color cast, more or less free from chromatic aberration and sharp (even the edges)? Is it sharp all the way up to 45x? How is it compared to the Nikon ED50 and ED82?

A buddy told me you can use the 25-75 eyepiece on the 50 it would be a 13-40 on the 50 ED.
Sounds like something worth trying since you already have one and won't have to spend more $.
Let me know if it works out, I am curious about it as well. My ED50 goes with me on vacation's for all the reason's you mentioned.

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd363/bman940/Vacation/ED50.jpg

Hello,
I've got no personal experience of the new Opticron travelscope (but I've heard speaking very well of it so far), but, as a happy user of the Nikon ED50 (with the 13-40x zoom EP), I wonder what would you gain in terms of image quality and magnification from swapping to the Opticron? They look very similar, perhaps too similar to justify a change
Just saying...

Won't your 50x lens on the ED82 work as a 27x on the ED50? Mine works very well on it.

gmax said:

Hello,
I've got no personal experience of the new Opticron travelscope (but I've heard speaking very well of it so far), but, as a happy user of the Nikon ED50 (with the 13-40x zoom EP), I wonder what would you gain in terms of image quality and magnification from swapping to the Opticron? They look very similar, perhaps too similar to justify a change
Just saying...

Click to expand...

Much better eye relief! I wear spectacles..and the Nikon zoom is ok at 13x, but at higher powers it is like looking thru a keyhole.. ;-). I also think the Opticron 60 ED has better field of view, and of course..it´s brighter!

Andrew Whitehouse said:

Won't your 50x lens on the ED82 work as a 27x on the ED50? Mine works very well on it.

Click to expand...

To much power and to dark to use as an everyday eye piece!

The Kingfisher said:

To much power and to dark to use as an everyday eye piece!

Click to expand...

Which version do you use? I have the 27x DS eyepiece and it works extremely well on the ED50. It's certainly not too dark in most circumstances. I'm a bit puzzled that you think it's too much power, particularly as you seem to be looking for an option with more power than the 16x.

Andrew Whitehouse said:

Which version do you use? I have the 27x DS eyepiece and it works extremely well on the ED50. It's certainly not too dark in most circumstances. I'm a bit puzzled that you think it's too much power, particularly as you seem to be looking for an option with more power than the 16x.

Click to expand...

It is the DS version I have. Yes..27x on the ED50 is to much power and to dark most of the time. For me at least. Have you tried the 16x on ED50?

The scope is very very nice to use with that eyepiece - relatively bright, large FOV and "clean" image. With a zoom eyepiece you can use it at low powers to get that clean image, but you also have the opportunity to use 45x power once in a while if you need to. With the 27x you are stuck with that high power. You are stuck with heat waves and a relatively dark image. It´s much easier to "scan" the landscape with 16x than with 27x, works better in non-open landscapes etc. I often use the scope with 16x power instead of lifting my binoculars to the eyes when searching for birds in trees, bushes and so on. 16x works for most of the distant birds also, but not all of them. That´s why it would be nice to have a zoom and higher power when 16x is not enough.

The Kingfisher said:

It is the DS version I have. Yes..27x on the ED50 is to much power and to dark most of the time. For me at least. Have you tried the 16x on ED50?

The scope is very very nice to use with that eyepiece - relatively bright, large FOV and "clean" image. With a zoom eyepiece you can use it at low powers to get that clean image, but you also have the opportunity to use 45x power once in a while if you need to. With the 27x you are stuck with that high power. You are stuck with heat waves and a relatively dark image. It´s much easier to "scan" the landscape with 16x than with 27x, works better in non-open landscapes etc. I often use the scope with 16x power instead of lifting my binoculars to the eyes when searching for birds in trees, bushes and so on. 16x works for most of the distant birds also, but not all of them. That´s why it would be nice to have a zoom and higher power when 16x is not enough.

Click to expand...

I initially had a 16x lens when I first bought an ED50, though it was an older style rather than the DS. It was fine but probably not enough magnification to make it worthwhile. I almost never find the 27x too dark expcept in very demanding conditions. It's not as bright as a larger scope of similar quality would be but that would be true of any lens. I've sometimes wondered if the 20x would be better but I've been happy enough with 27x to not think about it that much. I find the Nikon zoom has much too narrow a field of view, even at lower magnifications. 27x is high enough for giving a close view of most birds but wide enough for it to be easy to scan and find birds. I certainly don't feel I'm missing much with it.