• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Swarovski ATS80 HD (1 Viewer)

G

gah55

Member
Hello
New to the forum , today I tried out the Swarovski ATS 80 HD scope against the Zeiss 85T * FL scope. First of all I have to say I am a big fan of Zeiss optics my first quality binoculars were the original 7 x 42 Zeiss and after many years of not indulging in my love of wildlife and raptors in particular ( I have a HND in Raptor Biology ), I bought a pair of bushnell trophy 8x42`s which were very good for the price . However I remembered my 7x42`s and how good they were , ( I sold them in a moment of madness !!!) , I invested in a pair of the new Zeiss 7x42`s which I absolutely love . So I thought I would try out the Zeiss 85 T*FL scope and also the Swarovski ATS 80 HD because I had heard good reports on both , and because of my bias towards Zeiss I expected the Zeiss to out perform the Swarovski . Even thought the Swarovski is the more expensive scope I was shure the Zeiss would be the one. I was totally wrong , testing the scopes , both with 20-60 eyepieces the Swarovski was clearer , brighter and great edge to edge definition ,very ,clear ,crisp and bright . The weather was overcast and dull so good conditions for a test as far as I am concerned. The Zeiss was very fuzzy at the edges and the image was "dull" compared to the Swarovski , I was very surprised at this as I was expecting to buy the Zeiss , even the owner of the shop was very surprised at the difference between the 2 scopes. But we had tried the Swarovski 65 against the Zeiss and that was just as bright and clear an image as the Zeiss. The reason for this post is TRY BEFORE YOU BUY because before I bothered to test the scopes against each other I was ready to mail order the Zeiss just based on the binoculars I owned. The swarovski ATS 80 HD blow the Zeiss 85 T*FL out of the water in all areas and I for one was very very surprised at this , ( and being a Zeiss fan a bit dissappointed as well ). Sorry for the long post . Cheers
 
Last edited:
Welcome aboard gah55 :t:

Sound advice! At the end of the day I think the top brands are all very comparable and that which anyone chooses really is down to personal preference as to feel, colour cast, weight, focus etc.

Any of them are suitable for the job, it's a question of which feels best to each individual.
 
gah55 said:
Hello
New to the forum , today I tried out the Swarovski ATS 80 HD scope against the Zeiss 85T * FL scope. First of all I have to say I am a big fan of Zeiss optics my first quality binoculars were the original 7 x 42 Zeiss and after many years of not indulging in my love of wildlife and raptors in particular ( I have a HND in Raptor Biology ), I bought a pair of bushnell trophy 8x42`s which were very good for the price . However I remembered my 7x42`s and how good they were , ( I sold them in a moment of madness !!!) , I invested in a pair of the new Zeiss 7x42`s which I absolutely love . So I thought I would try out the Zeiss 85 T*FL scope and also the Swarovski ATS 80 HD because I had heard good reports on both , and because of my bias towards Zeiss I expected the Zeiss to out perform the Swarovski . Even thought the Swarovski is the more expensive scope I was shure the Zeiss would be the one. I was totally wrong , testing the scopes , both with 20-60 eyepieces the Swarovski was clearer , brighter and great edge to edge definition ,very ,clear ,crisp and bright . The weather was overcast and dull so good conditions for a test as far as I am concerned. The Zeiss was very fuzzy at the edges and the image was "dull" compared to the Swarovski , I was very surprised at this as I was expecting to buy the Zeiss , even the owner of the shop was very surprised at the difference between the 2 scopes. But we had tried the Swarovski 65 against the Zeiss and that was just as bright and clear an image as the Zeiss. The reason for this post is TRY BEFORE YOU BUY because before I bothered to test the scopes against each other I was ready to mail order the Zeiss just based on the binoculars I owned. The swarovski ATS 80 HD blow the Zeiss 85 T*FL out of the water in all areas and I for one was very very surprised at this , ( and being a Zeiss fan a bit dissappointed as well ). Sorry for the long post . Cheers
Click to expand...
There simply must have been a fault with the Zeiss you tried, I'm afraid. I have regular access to Swaro, Zeiss and Nikon scopes and prefer the Zeiss simply because the field of view of its zoom is about 50% greater than offered by the Swaro. This means you see much more of what you are looking at and can catch birds on the edges of vision that the Swaro misses. Unquestionably, the brightness of the Zeiss, Swaro and Nikon are all but comparable, even when viewing in the dullest light.

Yes, the outer edges of the Zeiss are less sharp, but this is simply because Zeiss have opted to give what a birder really needs - to see far more of what you're looking at. Locating a bird with such a wide fov is bound to be easier - you can simply see more of the action; in fact the Zeiss zoom is so wide, you really have no need for a 30xW, whereas one look through the Swaro with its undoubtedly magnificent 30xW and you'll soon see think the zoom is really quite narrow - this just isn't thecase with the Zeiss. If Zeiss had cut off their fov to match that of the Swaro, then it, too, would be sharp edge-to-edge.

Another difference between the two scopes is that the Swaro has a slightly cool "blue" look to its view, whereas the Zeiss has a slightly warmer, "yellower" look. This is supposed to allow the Zeiss to cut through haze more easily. I have to say, I do prefer the Swaro on this score, but for the best colouration of all nothing beats Nikon.

All in all, what counts is to be able to see as much of what you're looking at as possible, and on that basis, the Zeiss wins hands down.

There is an excellent review of these scopes on the highly respected Finnish Alula website - http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm - to quote their reviewer: "On the whole, it [Swaro] rises to the level of the Zeiss Diascope 85 FL, and it depends on the individual users’ preferences and habits which would be the better birding partner". There you'll see the qualities of the three scopes are on a par in many important ways.
 
Last edited:
IanF,
The thing is I was so surprised at the difference between these scopes. it really was an eye opener , ( excuse the pun ). They are both high end scopes and I would expect very slight differences between the two, really down to the individuals "tastes" if you get my drift. But for me the difference was very obvious and the Swarovski was the winner , ( which I bought , although I like to " count the pennies !!!! " ). It just shows you cannot have any pre judgemental ideas when buying optics . I am so glad I did not go with my feeling of " well it`s Zeiss it must be the best " because this is not always the cases .






.
 
scampo,
Have to disagree, the Zeiss did not cut the mustard for me and thats my choice. I aint a pratt swayed by price and I expected to buy the Zeiss. Given the overcast/dull conditions it was a good comparison test and the Zeiss did not cut the mustard . The Swarovski may not be your choice but it`s mine and I stick by that. As far as having a fault on the Zeiss, come on at that price very few duff ones should get through. I am happy with what I have bought and you are happy with yours .
 
gah55 said:
scampo,
Have to disagree, the Zeiss did not cut the mustard for me and thats my choice. I aint a pratt swayed by price and I expected to buy the Zeiss. Given the overcast/dull conditions it was a good comparison test and the Zeiss did not cut the mustard . The Swarovski may not be your choice but it`s mine and I stick by that. As far as having a fault on the Zeiss, come on at that price very few duff ones should get through. I am happy with what I have bought and you are happy with yours .
Click to expand...
You're not just disagreeing with me but with some of the top reviewers of optics. As I said, I could have bought any of those top scopes but chose the Zeiss. That Zeiss you looked through could easily have been faulty - it happens even among top scopes. They can become slightly damaged in transit, for example.

Among the leading scopes, Zeiss, Swaro, Nikon and Kowa the views are very comparable. The differences are in other areas - ergonomics, etc., except with the Zeiss which has its uniquely wide zoom.
 
scampo said:
Yes, the edges of the Zeiss are less sharp, but that is because Zeiss have opted to give what a birder really needs - to see more of what you're looking at. Locating a bird with such a wide fov is bound to be easier - you can simply see more of the action; in fact the Zeiss zoom is so wide, you really have no need for a 30xW, whereas one look through the Swaro with its magnificent 30xW and you'll soon see think the zoom is really quite narrow. If Zeiss had cut off their fov to match that of the Swaro, then it, too, would be sharp edge-to-edge.
Click to expand...

Claiming that Zeiss give the birder what they really need is a very sweeping statement. I'm a birder and have tested the Zeiss extensively and cannot get on with the zoom eyepeice for exactly this reason. The soft edge constantly drew my attention and I just could not get past it. While this feature might appeal to some it's certainly not what we all want.
 
It still proves the point that it's an individual thing. Some people prefer one over the other for the optics/view but there is no one single manufacturer that makes the 'best of the best' that everyone agrees is the best. For gah55 it's the Swaro and for others it's a different brand.
 
Scampo
What are you going on about ?? My choice is the Swarovski yours is the Zeiss , so what . What ? do you think you a right in your choice and everyone else is wrong ???? I tested them and the Swarovski was for me . O.K.
 
Last edited:
scampo said:
You're not just disagreeing with me but with some of the top reviewers of optics. As I said, I could have bought any of those top scopes but chose the Zeiss. That Zeiss you looked through could easily have been faulty - it happens even among top scopes. They can become slightly damaged in transit, for example.

Among the leading scopes, Zeiss, Swaro, Nikon and Kowa the views are very comparable. The differences are in other areas - ergonomics, etc., except with the Zeiss which has its uniquely wide zoom.
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean that he looked through a dud scope, just that he didn't like the Zeiss. What one person loves another will hate, just because a reviewer raves about something it doesn't mean that we'll all like it. The top scopes are all very good, but no one stands above the rest, if it did the others simply would not sell.

Incidently I think the Leica has to be included in a list of the top scopes, time will tell if the new Kowa deserves to be classed with the other big guns.
 
postcardcv
Again your right it`s down to personal choice , but some people think they are right and everyone else is wrong . Just because a scope/binoculars suits one person it does not mean they suit everyone, we are all individuals , thank god !! Cheers
 
optics are personal. I know of a few people who dislike the Zeiss zoom and of course people who love it.

On first looking through a Nikon zoom I was a bit disappointed but I've got used to it on the ED50 and the image (if not the ergonomics) are superb.

Line up the Leica APO, Swaro HD, Nikon ED fieldscopes, or Zeiss Diascopes either 60 or 80mm and frankly you'll get lots of different answers as to the best scope.
 
scampo said:
You're not just disagreeing with me but with some of the top reviewers of optics. As I said, I could have bought any of those top scopes but chose the Zeiss. That Zeiss you looked through could easily have been faulty - it happens even among top scopes. They can become slightly damaged in transit, for example.

Among the leading scopes, Zeiss, Swaro, Nikon and Kowa the views are very comparable. The differences are in other areas - ergonomics, etc., except with the Zeiss which has its uniquely wide zoom.
Click to expand...

bit sweeping Stevie. Firstly you have to include the Leica both at 60 and 80mm.

Some people really find the less than perfect edges of the Zeiss irritating that's them. Some will prefer the 75x power of the Nikon zoom. If FOV was everything you wouldn't have a 10x25 Ultravid but an 8x20.

as to the zeiss being faulty? not necessarily, one of the wwt staff at welney hated the zeiss zoom. as postcardcv will tell you I really dislike the Leica Ultravid compacts and yet I like the Nikon HGL compacts and yet Kimmo Absetz rated then VERY closely
 
Last edited:
One reason the Swarovski may have won this particular birder's hard-earned cash is that the contrast is undoubtedly, in my view, better on the Swarovski than the Zeiss. The Zeiss is brighter, as you would expect from an 85mm objective. My view on this is shared by Stephen Ingraham (before he went to work for Zeiss!). See his review on the betterviewdesired website.
Sean
(Swav owner, and keen tester of other people's scopes)
 
Got a swaro ATS80HD myself and would recomend it to anyone, at the end of the day we're all going to have our own preferences
 
postcardcv said:
Claiming that Zeiss give the birder what they really need is a very sweeping statement. I'm a birder and have tested the Zeiss extensively and cannot get on with the zoom eyepeice for exactly this reason. The soft edge constantly drew my attention and I just could not get past it. While this feature might appeal to some it's certainly not what we all want.
Click to expand...
I take your point, but a wide field of view is exceptionally useful when birding, simply because when you can see more, there is bound to be more chance of picking up a bird within the view. This is why 30xW eyepieces are so popular and much loved. The Zeiss field of view offers a width of view that is almost 50% greater than that offered by the Swaro. I'm not saying the Zeiss is to everyone's taste, I actually did made the point that all top makes are similarly good optically - but, that said, I'd like to see someone try to sell a pair of binoculars with 50% less field of view and sell many.

What I cannot accept is that the Zeiss is optically inferior - less bright, etc. - compared to the Swaro in the ways that have been suggested here. I have no axe to grind in a sense, I have a Zeiss, my son a Nikon and my brother a Swaro. I prefer the Nikon for its natural colour, the Zeiss for its zoom and the Swaro for its focusing.
 
Last edited:
gah55 said:
Scampo
What are you going on about ?? My choice is the Swarovski yours is the Zeiss , so what . What ? do you think you a right in your choice and everyone else is wrong ???? I tested them and the Swarovski was for me . O.K.
Click to expand...
Hang on a minute... all I was doing was reacting to your comments that the Zeiss was "dull" and that the Swaro blew it out of the water...
 
Last edited:
No , what you were saying was your opinion was right and mine was wrong. I do not care if your dog , cat ,fish , or bicycle prefer the Zeiss I DO NOT . So leave it at that because i aint intertested in anybody giving me hassle for my opinion.
 
pduxon said:
bit sweeping Stevie. Firstly you have to include the Leica both at 60 and 80mm.

Some people really find the less than perfect edges of the Zeiss irritating that's them. Some will prefer the 75x power of the Nikon zoom. If FOV was everything you wouldn't have a 10x25 Ultravid but an 8x20.

as to the zeiss being faulty? not necessarily, one of the wwt staff at welney hated the zeiss zoom. as postcardcv will tell you I really dislike the Leica Ultravid compacts and yet I like the Nikon HGL compacts and yet Kimmo Absetz rated then VERY closely
Click to expand...
Sorry, Pete - I forgot about Leica. It was simply comments such as "dull" and "blows out of the water" that I was reacting to.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

S
Swarovski ATC vs ATS 65
Replies
8
Views
4K
ticl2184
ticl2184
J
Swarovski ATC 56 ? ATS 65 ? Others ?
Replies
5
Views
5K
jb b
J
A
Alternative to Swarovski tripod head
Replies
11
Views
3K
Amadeus1756
A
T
help with mounting plate & head for a circa 1993 85mm Swarovski
Replies
6
Views
785
4John
4
K
Swarovski Spotting Scope
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
Kidcharlemagne
K

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top