Upgrade from Nikon ED series... (1 Viewer)

I just checked one of our ED50's with the 27X DS and the 13-40 zoom. It's early evening in a forested forested environment with subdued light. I viewed several detailed objects on my neighbor's house at a distance of 250 feet.

I tested the 27X first. Yes, it's sharp and detailed BUT the 1.85mm exit pupil degraded image brightness to the point it was a bit of a strain to comfortably perceive details.

The 13-40 zoom, in spite of its narrow FOV and short eye relief, optically beat the 27X DS (50X on ED82). At 13X details were sharp, bright and effortless. As I zoomed, reduced light diminished image clarity though at 40X I could see more detail than with the 27X (as expected). I removed my eyeglasses around 20-25X to see the full view.

As mentioned by others the 16XDS (30X on ED82) on the ED50 is absolutely stellar, though limited in magnification. The 27XDS, loved by many, just doesn't make the grade for me, especially considering the performance of the 13-40 zoom. It's too bad Nikon didn't make a wider FOV zoom for these models but they didn't.

Conclusion.
I could easily agree with the OP that the ED82/30X DS displays a better overall view than the ED50/27X DS combination.

If your going 16x eyepiece why not just get a 16/16x binoculars and enjoy the benefits of two eyed viewing and wider FOV

Dd61999 said:

If your going 16x eyepiece why not just get a 16/16x binoculars and enjoy the benefits of two eyed viewing and wider FOV

Click to expand...

That's simple. Let's assume it's a 15x binocular because there are more good 15x binoculars than 16x binoculars on the market:

1. Any decent 15x binocular will be about twice the weight of the Nikon ED50.

2. It will still need to be on a tripod (or, at least, on a monopod) if you want to fully utilize the magnification it offers.

3. That tripod will need to be somewhat sturdier than the tripod you'd need for an ED50 due to the higher weight of the binocular. It will also need to be taller because the binocular won't have angled eyepieces. And you won't be able to get away with a smallish ballhead, not even if you use a high quality ballhead.

4. The end result is that the combination 15x binocular+tripod+head will be roughly more than twice the weight of the ED50+tripod+head.

5. And the ED50 allows you to switch to higher magnifications VERY easily and quickly with the zoom eyepiece.

I actually looked into switching to a 15x binocular for some time, simply because there are a few excellent choices on the market that I really like. In the end I decided against it simply because the ED50 is a much better choice for the kind of birding I do.

Hermann

Pileatus said:

I tested the 27X first. Yes, it's sharp and detailed BUT the 1.85mm exit pupil degraded image brightness to the point it was a bit of a strain to comfortably perceive details.

Click to expand...

I fully agree. As soon as the light goes down an exit pupil below ~2.5mm isn't ideal, especially not for prolonged observations.

Pileatus said:

The 13-40 zoom, in spite of its narrow FOV and short eye relief, optically beat the 27X DS (50X on ED82). At 13X details were sharp, bright and effortless. As I zoomed, reduced light diminished image clarity though at 40X I could see more detail than with the 27X (as expected).

Click to expand...

I personally believe the 13-40x zoom may well be the best of the Nikon eyepieces - except for the field of view. The optical quality on any of the fieldscopes is quite something.

Pileatus said:

As mentioned by others the 16XDS (30X on ED82) on the ED50 is absolutely stellar, though limited in magnification. The 27XDS, loved by many, just doesn't make the grade for me, especially considering the performance of the 13-40 zoom. It's too bad Nikon didn't make a wider FOV zoom for these models but they didn't.

Click to expand...

Once again, I fully agree. I also believe the 16x24x/30x eyepieces are the best of the Nikon wideangle eyepieces. The 16xDS is outstanding, but the other versions are also excellent.

Hermann

"3. That tripod will need to be somewhat sturdier than the tripod you'd need for an ED50 due to the higher weight of the binocular. It will also need to be taller because the binocular won't have angled eyepieces. And you won't be able to get away with a smallish ballhead, not even if you use a high quality ballhead. "

Oh no, I hope we don't get into the straight spotting scope to angled spotter debate again . NPA BTW I have a Nikon 82ED angled and straight Nikon 50ED and I love both!

Hermann said:

That's simple. Let's assume it's a 15x binocular because there are more good 15x binoculars than 16x binoculars on the market:

1. Any decent 15x binocular will be about twice the weight of the Nikon ED50.

2. It will still need to be on a tripod (or, at least, on a monopod) if you want to fully utilize the magnification it offers.

3. That tripod will need to be somewhat sturdier than the tripod you'd need for an ED50 due to the higher weight of the binocular. It will also need to be taller because the binocular won't have angled eyepieces. And you won't be able to get away with a smallish ballhead, not even if you use a high quality ballhead.

4. The end result is that the combination 15x binocular+tripod+head will be roughly more than twice the weight of the ED50+tripod+head.

5. And the ED50 allows you to switch to higher magnifications VERY easily and quickly with the zoom eyepiece.

I actually looked into switching to a 15x binocular for some time, simply because there are a few excellent choices on the market that I really like. In the end I decided against it simply because the ED50 is a much better choice for the kind of birding I do.

Hermann

Click to expand...

Many 15x56 binoculars only weigh 42 ounces. Pretty much any decent tripod can handle that. Even cheap $30 Walmart tripods do. While you might be able to zoom to higher magnification, your starting to degrade the view at 27x. So if you compare a good 15x56 side by side to an ed50 at 20x the image scale is close yet you see more detail views with the binoculars not only due 6mm additional aperture but the “effective aperture” increases of an additional 20-40% due to two scopes, one for each eye. Giving your brain more information to work with.

While it’s not a viable option for everyone. But it’s definitely something everyone should explore

Dd61999 said:

Many 15x56 binoculars only weigh 42 ounces. Pretty much any decent tripod can handle that. Even cheap $30 Walmart tripods do.

Click to expand...

No, they don't. Never ever. Perhaps if you use them on your porch, sheltered from the wind. But not in the field, especially not in windy conditions. No way.

And with binoculars you need taller tripods than with an angled scope. You need a heavier head as well, just like I wrote. I actually tried this, in the field, more than once, and the lightest setup that works for me with the ED50 in the field is about 1300 gr. + the weight of the scope. With a 15x56 it's about 2100 gr. + the weight of the binoculars. That's a significant difference in my books.

Dd61999 said:

While you might be able to zoom to higher magnification, your starting to degrade the view at 27x. So if you compare a good 15x56 side by side to an ed50 at 20x the image scale is close yet you see more detail views with the binoculars not only due 6mm additional aperture but the “effective aperture” increases of an additional 20-40% due to two scopes, one for each eye. Giving your brain more information to work with.

Click to expand...

Sure. My guesstimate, based on actually trying this out in the field, is that a binocular gives me about 25-30% more detail than a scope, so a 15x binocular would give my as much detail as a scope at 20x magnification or thereabouts. However, I can crank up the little scope to 40x, and even if the image degrades somewhat above ~30x, I still get more detail than I can get at 20x, and that difference is not subtle. Not at all.

Dd61999 said:

While it’s not a viable option for everyone. But it’s definitely something everyone should explore

Click to expand...

Agreed.

Hermann

Quick update, I managed to get a pretty good deal on a used ATM HD -20-50 W.

Initial thoughts, at 25x the FOV is significantly narrower than the ED50 with the 27x. The view is actually alot more similar to the ED82 with the 30x. So if I decide to keep it I'll definitely have to practice the cable tie trick.

It's a fantastic zoom though, will have more time to review over the weekend.

Also being the ATM it's a bit lighter than the ATS and seems ok on a sherpa 200 tripod. Could well be the portable solution I was looking for.