Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New Nikon Monarch 82ed with 20x-60x & 30x-60x...help me test it for good of all:)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 00:06   #1
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
New Nikon Monarch 82ed with 20x-60x & 30x-60x...help me test it for good of all:)

I just received a Nikon Monarch 82ED 20x-60x and the 30x-60x wide. I'd like to test it out for my own understanding and to get some more data points out there for everyone.

I'll update this post with the tests as I do them. I havent done this before so feel free to chime in with pointers.

(UPDATE)
Star Test w/ 30x-60x Wide
I took it out and focused on a star and then unfocused it both high and low. Both sides of focus produce a perfect circle with an outside border with several smaller rings insed. Based on a couple articles I read, I do not see any astigmatism or mixed abberations. I didnt understand the examples for spherical abberations so cant comment on those at this time. Disclaimer: Its currently a full moon and I can only see the sky in the moon's direction due to mountains. I also had LASIC a few months ago and still get some "haloing" effect from light sources when its dark, if anything, its better than what im seeing. Im not sure how to interpret these results so any insight would be helpful

Last edited by yakyakgoose : Saturday 13th July 2019 at 05:29.
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 03:59   #2
choonsarn
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Singapore
Posts: 20
Hello, will you be doing digiscoping? Like to know more about digiscoping with DSA-N1 adapter if you have or other third party brand. Thanks.
choonsarn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 04:44   #3
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by choonsarn View Post
Hello, will you be doing digiscoping? Like to know more about digiscoping with DSA-N1 adapter if you have or other third party brand. Thanks.

I was actually looking into that. I have a Canon D MK2 that Id like to get hooked up to it. Would I be able to use the DSA -N1 plus a canon adapter?

I will also get an adapter for my phone from the company "Phonescope"
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 11:04   #4
mayoayo
Registered User
 
mayoayo's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: El Garraf
Posts: 2,225
Hi David....congratulations on the new scope..So far so good,but a single star test can be deceiving ,sometimes results are not so consistent,due to atmospheric conditions or even eye placement .If the eyepiece has some Field curvature,object placement in the FOV is also important..and Sky objects move..!
Try also daytime star testing,trying to Focus on(small) sun reflections(dont miss Henry Link advice on this further on the thread),..those can add info to your tests,and then even making artificial stars, maybe with a LED flash light shinning through a pinhole...All These tests are casual and subjetive to a level,but certain consistency in various results would help at least eliminate serious problems..The Spherical Aberration is much more complicated to ascern at 60 power in an 82mm,because those few first rings(airy disc) are just hard to evaluate ..then ,even if you are rings both sides of focus,is not always so clear that they are identical.My current scope tested well when i first got It,but recent tests on night skies are just vague.
Daytime observation (lately using a fixed 37x)confirms that the view is pretty much free from aberrations and can be considered an excellent scope,the way Focus snaps every time,(positive Focus,no hunting)and just the level of resolution.I have also compared my scope side by side with other scopes (ATX,Kowa 88,Harpia 95 and other units of my own model)many times ,to help me understand its quality and limitations

Last edited by mayoayo : Saturday 13th July 2019 at 15:33.
mayoayo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 13:37   #5
choonsarn
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Singapore
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by yakyakgoose View Post
I was actually looking into that. I have a Canon D MK2 that Id like to get hooked up to it. Would I be able to use the DSA -N1 plus a canon adapter?

I will also get an adapter for my phone from the company "Phonescope"
The DSA-N1 is from Nikon, is meant to used with Nikon 1 series interchangeable mirrorless camera.

You can have a look at Novagrade and Digiadapter to pair with your Canon DSLR.
choonsarn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 13:57   #6
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by yakyakgoose View Post
(UPDATE)
Star Test w/ 30x-60x Wide
I took it out and focused on a star and then unfocused it both high and low. Both sides of focus produce a perfect circle with an outside border with several smaller rings insed. Based on a couple articles I read, I do not see any astigmatism or mixed abberations. I didnt understand the examples for spherical abberations so cant comment on those at this time. Disclaimer: Its currently a full moon and I can only see the sky in the moon's direction due to mountains. I also had LASIC a few months ago and still get some "haloing" effect from light sources when its dark, if anything, its better than what im seeing. Im not sure how to interpret these results so any insight would be helpful
First a caution about daylight star-testing. A couple of years ago I was alarmed by one forum member who proposed to use the sun's reflection from a flat window pane. That would produce a large disk of the sun with far too strong a concentration of sunlight, hazardous to the eye. The reflection of the sun should be a tiny glitter point from a small shiny round object like a ball bearing, Christmas tree ornament, etc. at a distance of at least 50 times the focal length of the scope, so for the Monarch at least 25 meters.

The shape of the unfocused diffraction disks is most revealing of defects like astigmatism and pinching at about 2-4 rings from best focus. By the time the star is unfocused to 10 rings or more all scopes tend to show perfect circles. Typically spherical aberration shows as strong well defined outer rings (with a hollow out center in bad cases) on one side of focus contrasting with weak or no rings with a fuzzy bright core on the other side of focus. One thing you don't have to worry about with the Monarch is a defective roof line splitting the diffraction disk since the roof edge is outside the light cone. I assume you're using 60x. 80-100x or more would be better if it were available. I used a 3X booster and a 4mm eyepiece for higher magnifications.

I agree with mayoayo that ease of focus snap in steady air at 60x is a good casual test. If you can access a USAF 1951 Resolution Test Pattern you should hope for resolving power close to 1.4 arcseconds (which may require more than 60x to see). A reference scope of known high quality is very useful for comparison and to evaluate the limits imposed by the test conditions.

Since you have both zoom eyepieces I would be interested to hear about off-axis aberrations, particularly how the two zooms compare for lateral color in the area of 4-10 of apparent field from the center.

Henry

Last edited by henry link : Saturday 13th July 2019 at 16:07.
henry link is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 15:06   #7
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,449
Hi Henry,
I tried PM, no luck.

Monarch focal length 1.5 feet?

But Christmas tree ornaments are large, so maybe 75 metres.

Regards.
B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 15:30   #8
mayoayo
Registered User
 
mayoayo's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: El Garraf
Posts: 2,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry link View Post
First a caution about daylight star-testing. A couple of years ago I was alarmed by one forum member who proposed to use the sun's reflection from a flat window pane. That would produce a large disk of the sun with far too strong a concentration of sunlight, hazardous to the eye. The reflection of the sun should be a tiny glitter point from a small shiny round object like a ball bearing, Christmas tree ornament, etc. at a distance of at least 50 times the focal length of the scope, so for the Monarch at least 75 meters.

Henry
Thanks Henry..this is very important to remember
mayoayo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 16:03   #9
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,384
Thanks Binastro,

I meant 25 meters. I'll correct the distance on the original post.

The Monarch focal length is about 505mm, 1.66 feet

Henry
henry link is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 18:30   #10
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Quick update, my biggest issue right now is some immediate and poweful eyestrain from the wide eyepiece. I had a bit of a headache so hoping thats the issue but ill try again tomorrow. If that stays consisent I will probably have to return it. Ive never looked through an optic that wide either so we'll see.
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 19:43   #11
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,580
Test Chart
Attached Files
File Type: pdf USAF 8x11.pdf (41.3 KB, 44 views)

Last edited by Pileatus : Saturday 13th July 2019 at 19:46.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 21:43   #12
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,449
Post 10.

In bright light, possibly migraine aura?

B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 22:30   #13
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
Post 10.

In bright light, possibly migraine aura?

B.
You may have nailed it, I had a migraine kick in all afternoon. Probably was just starting.
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 22:32   #14
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pileatus View Post
Test Chart
Thanks, Ill get this printed out, whats the standard distance to test?
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 14th July 2019, 18:41   #15
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,384
There is no standard distance. There's a formula for converting the line pairs per mm resolved on the target at the distance you choose into seconds of arc.

I'm sorry to have suggested something which requires spending money on a proper target. The problems with home printed targets is first that they must be sized very accurately so that the bars and spaces of Group 0/element 1 are each exactly 1mm wide, which probably won't happen if you just download and copy and second the printing quality must be good enough to use the target at a reasonably short distance. I just printed out the chart in the link on my printer and found it printed a little too small and the print quality wouldn't allow accurate measurements below about Group -2/Element 4 at best. To measure 1.4" using Group -2/element 4 requires placing the target at a measured distance of 1900 feet from the telescope, just not very practical.

Henry
henry link is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 14th July 2019, 18:52   #16
mooreorless
Registered User
 
mooreorless's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntingdon,Pa.
Posts: 3,532
Henry I have a Edmund Optics Pocket USAF Test Pattern card that is only $6 that is very good, not sure if these are still that good or not. I have to look at it again to see how far it is good to. I guess if someone was interested they could have someone from EO check out the one they would send. And well the distance could be longer to test if need be.Supposed to be good to Minimum Group 0 Element 1 and Max Group 3 element 6 mine comes very close to that.

Last edited by mooreorless : Sunday 14th July 2019 at 19:12.
mooreorless is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 14th July 2019, 23:17   #17
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Wow, you arent kidding Henry. I looked up those test charts and they are pretty pricey.

As far as the eyestrain, Binastro nailed it. No migraine today and no eyestrain. I will say the eye relief is less than I would want especially at 60x on the 30x-60x. There is a noticable difference between the 20x-60x and the 30x-60x.
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 10:59   #18
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by yakyakgoose View Post

(UPDATE)
Star Test w/ 30x-60x Wide
I took it out and focused on a star and then unfocused it both high and low. Both sides of focus produce a perfect circle with an outside with several smaller rings insed. Based on a couple articles I read, I do not see any astigmatism or mixed abberations. I didnt understand the examples for spherical abberations so cant comment on those at this time. Disclaimer: Its currently a full moon and I can only see the sky in the moon's direction due to mountains. I also had LASIC a few months ago and still get some "haloing" effect from light sources when its dark, if anything, its better than what im seeing. Im not sure how to interpret these results so any insight would be helpful
Hi,

congratulations to your new scope!

Regarding the star test - perfect circles are good - so we can rule out astigmatism, coma and some higher order variants of those...

Spherical aberration and zones will show themselves with different round and concentric diffraction patterns inside and outside of focus (by the same amount).
They all tend to bring more energy away from the center which will result in blurry stars even at "best" focus in bad cases...

Joachim

Last edited by jring : Monday 15th July 2019 at 16:21.
jring is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 21:38   #19
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Jring, Thanks for that, Ill take another look tonight.


Since I wont be getting my hands on an "official" resolution chart I figured I could do a comparison with a low tech print out one as long as the scopes were being tested under the same conditions.

I printed out an USAF resolution chart, grabbed my Nikon scope & 30x/60x eyepiece and headed down to Cabelas where they had an ATX 85 and 95 in stock.

I set up the chart about 40-50 yards across the store in a more dimly lit area and put the ATX 95mm and Nikon Monarch 82ed on tripods. This test was pretty easy, the 95mm was brighter and had better resolution than the 82ed, hands down. I wasnt really surprised by this with the larger objective.

I then swapped out the 95mm with the ATX 85mm for a more apples to apples test. This was interesting, I prob spent an hour looking back and forth through these two scopes at the resolution chart and I landed on they seemed to be exactly the same to me. If one did happen to look better than the other it was usually because it was the first one I had looked through after resting my eyes. The winner would swap the next time I rested and started with the other scope. I also asked 2 employees and 1 customer to take a look for their opinions and 2 people said they couldnt tell the difference while 1 said he thought the swaro was fractionally better.

As far as image I think they are tied, however, I still think the Swaro is the better overall scope. All testing was done at 60x.

The Swaro has
1. Lighter weight
2. Wider field of view
3. Better eye relief
4. I liked the feel of the focus better, seemed a bit easier to "tune" the focus
5. The eyepiece cover stays on better (This is a pet peeve of mine)

The price difference between these is around 2k. Personally, the list of items above doesnt warrant buying the 85mm over the 82ed. It also doesnt seem that surprising that we are seeing similar performance at lower price points now. The ATX has been around close to a decade...technology becomes cheaper with time and other companies will be able to undercut you on price. If Swaro doesnt find a way to increase optic tech beyond the ATX series I imagine we will see several other companies catch up to them and at lower price points.

Personally, I probably should have never looked through ATX 95mm because I am now considering returning the Nikon and getting that. I wouldn't do it for the 85mm though.

Last edited by yakyakgoose : Monday 15th July 2019 at 21:41.
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 21:49   #20
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,580
Quote:
Originally Posted by yakyakgoose View Post
Jring, Thanks for that, Ill take another look tonight.


Since I wont be getting my hands on an "official" resolution chart I figured I could do a comparison with a low tech print out one as long as the scopes were being tested under the same conditions.

I printed out an USAF resolution chart, grabbed my Nikon scope & 30x/60x eyepiece and headed down to Cabelas where they had an ATX 85 and 95 in stock.

I set up the chart about 40-50 yards across the store in a more dimly lit area and put the ATX 95mm and Nikon Monarch 82ed on tripods. This test was pretty easy, the 95mm was brighter and had better resolution than the 82ed, hands down. I wasnt really surprised by this with the larger objective.

I then swapped out the 95mm with the ATX 85mm for a more apples to apples test. This was interesting, I prob spent an hour looking back and forth through these two scopes at the resolution chart and I landed on they seemed to be exactly the same to me. If one did happen to look better than the other it was usually because it was the first one I had looked through after resting my eyes. The winner would swap the next time I rested and started with the other scope. I also asked 2 employees and 1 customer to take a look for their opinions and 2 people said they couldnt tell the difference while 1 said he thought the swaro was fractionally better.

As far as image I think they are tied, however, I still think the Swaro is the better overall scope. All testing was done at 60x.

The Swaro has
1. Lighter weight
2. Wider field of view
3. Better eye relief
4. I liked the feel of the focus better, seemed a bit easier to "tune" the focus
5. The eyepiece cover stays on better (This is a pet peeve of mine)

The price difference between these is around 2k. Personally, the list of items above doesnt warrant buying the 85mm over the 82ed. It also doesnt seem that surprising that we are seeing similar performance at lower price points now. The ATX has been around close to a decade...technology becomes cheaper with time and other companies will be able to undercut you on price. If Swaro doesnt find a way to increase optic tech beyond the ATX series I imagine we will see several other companies catch up to them and at lower price points.

Personally, I probably should have never looked through ATX 95mm because I am now considering returning the Nikon and getting that. I wouldn't do it for the 85mm though.
The ATX 95 goes to 70X magnification. How did you know you were at 60X for the comparison to your Monarch ED82?
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 00:08   #21
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pileatus View Post
The ATX 95 goes to 70X magnification. How did you know you were at 60X for the comparison to your Monarch ED82?
The zoom levels are marked on the eyepiece.
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 06:51   #22
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,024
Hi,

very nice test - always think about the weight of the ATX95 when you want to buy it...

Joachim
jring is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 09:11   #23
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
BF Supporter 2019
 
Kevin Conville's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: State of Chaos
Posts: 2,131
Factoring in price there doesn't seems to be much doubt, for me. Bravo Nikon!

Over $4k (Swaro) for a spotting scope is too much for this guy.

Still, a shame that Nikon makes one buy the 20-60 with the Monarch.
__________________
my bird pics

Scott's Miracle Grow KILLING Birds, for Years!
read this: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=226714
Kevin Conville is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 15:09   #24
Steve Babbs
Steve Babbs
 
Steve Babbs's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: England
Posts: 3,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Conville View Post
Factoring in price there doesn't seems to be much doubt, for me. Bravo Nikon!

Over $4k (Swaro) for a spotting scope is too much for this guy.

Still, a shame that Nikon makes one buy the 20-60 with the Monarch.
This doesn't happen in the UK. Mind you the only place I can find actually selling it in the UK is Nikon UK, so there isn't much price competition. There is somewhere in Europe where we can get it more cheaply.
__________________
Please visit my website at www.stevebabbs.com

@SteveBabbs
Steve Babbs is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 19th July 2019, 04:57   #25
yakyakgoose
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 53
Just to be clear to anyone that reads this thread later, I tested with the 30-60x wide, my sample of 20x-60x had an outside ring of the image that was pretty unusable. I took this off and never used it again.

I did end up returning the Nikon and getting the Swaro 95mm. Im getting married and got a partial contribution from the significant other as a wedding gift. I live in the Colorado Rockies and train using heavy packs in the mountains. I don't mind carrying a little extra weight for that image. Its actually only a little bit heavier than the Nikon Monarch 82 and the original Nikon ed3 scope +2 eyepieces I had been carrying around.

I still maintain that it wouldn't be worth the upgrade to the Swaro ATX/STX 85mm in my humble opinion.
yakyakgoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Monarch 82ED, a Perfect Ten henry link Nikon 50 Friday 9th August 2019 20:45
Nikon Monarch HG wins 1st Place in Field and Stream test of 13 new Binoculars. ceasar Binoculars 160 Saturday 4th November 2017 19:35
Nikon Monarch DCF Mk3 8x42 good? Akseli Pallonen Nikon 7 Friday 16th August 2013 22:48
Nikon P-4; good match for Nikon Fieldscope 82ED(angled)? Steve Park Digiscoping cameras 6 Monday 17th May 2010 22:19
Good tripod/head for Nikon 82ED cnybirder Tripod and Heads 11 Wednesday 3rd September 2008 10:01

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.30424809 seconds with 40 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:49.