• 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.

50ED v any top range 65mm (1 Viewer)

G

gkw

Well-known member
Hi all, I know this is possibly a subjective thing, and I am really happy with my 50ED + 13/40zoom and 20xWA

I am interested if any of you have the 50ED and also a 65mm L/Z/S and if you notice any real difference apart from the smaller FOV

Certainly I preferred my 50ED to a decent Opticron 65, but to be fair, apart from slightly more brightness and FOV of the Nilon, there was really nothing in it

Thanks

Geoff
 
Last edited:
I considerably prefer my Zeiss 65 optically, although I've never done any formal comparision but it is hard to be objective as I have a 15-45x zoom on the Zeiss and 20x wide angle on the Nikon. The Nikon is great for when I don't want to carry alot in the UK, or when I want to travel light abroad. I find I use both of them about equally overall but the Zeiss a lot more in winter when the light is often low and I'm more likely to want the higher mag as I'm staring out across estuaries rather than into bushes.
 
I have ED50, and had Swaro HD65. The Swaro was superior in all respects, but in normal daylight viewing at distances of a few hundred metres, the difference was irrelevant. It´s when the light begins to fade, or in very dull conditions, or at great distances (like seawatching) that the top-class 65mm was necessary. But as I was using the ED50 so much, I sold the 65mm and bought an 82mm Nikon, reckoning that for low-light and long-distance, that would be even better than the 65mm.
 
Some think that 65mm is not portable, nor powerful enough.

Me on the other hand think 65mm is indeed portable, and the performance difference between, ie. 65mm and 80mm Swaro ats hd, is so small it is hard to notice on daytime. With a 65mm I don´t have to decide before I go out if I need long distance power, like seawatching, or if I want low weight and portability. Win win.

Therefore I have two 65 mm scopes ;) But i understand those who prefer a 50mm and 80mm too. Just different taste.
 
Thanks guys, hope more reply,
I liked your comments Sancho. I only go to the sea a couple of times a year, and 95% of my observing is after dawn, and really before dusk, so it seems that apart from fancying a 65mm L/S/Z I would not really get any benefit and it would cost me a grand at least.

Geoff
 
I have both 50ED and Swaro HD 80. At low power and good light differences in resolution are insignificant. At high power and/or bad light there is a big difference in resolution. Bottom line is that any scope in the field outperforms the scope left at home or in the car.
 
Steve Babbs said:
I considerably prefer my Zeiss 65 optically, although I've never done any formal comparision but it is hard to be objective as I have a 15-45x zoom on the Zeiss and 20x wide angle on the Nikon. The Nikon is great for when I don't want to carry alot in the UK, or when I want to travel light abroad. I find I use both of them about equally overall but the Zeiss a lot more in winter when the light is often low and I'm more likely to want the higher mag as I'm staring out across estuaries rather than into bushes.
Click to expand...

I had resolved myself to a similar combination. I was using the Pentax 65 with a 20x wide angle eyepiece for one application and a Zeiss 65 Diascope with zoom for everything else. Sadly, at least for me, the Pentax is headed Kristoffer's way.
 
bcskr said:
I have both 50ED and Swaro HD 80. At low power and good light differences in resolution are insignificant. At high power and/or bad light there is a big difference in resolution. Bottom line is that any scope in the field outperforms the scope left at home or in the car.
Click to expand...

This mimics my thoughts and experiences.

I have an ED50 and a Pentax PF80. I do very little (if any) viewing at magnifications over 40x (big scope, or not) as there never seems to be any point to it where I live. I'm mostly at or around 30x. I also do little viewing during the lowest light of the day, partially because that part of the day is short lived. So, given the above, I find myself using the little Nikon most always.

I don't think anyone would argue that a good 65 or 80mm scope will have more optical horsepower than a 50mm scope, it's just a matter of what you need. Kind of like how one doesn't need a 400 horsepower V-8 to commute to work with when a 4 cylinder Honda does just fine. At 70 MPH on the highway, it just doesn't matter.

However, an 80ish mm scope compliments the 50mm scope whereas a 65mm scope competes.
 
Last edited:
bcskr said:
Bottom line is that any scope in the field outperforms the scope left at home or in the car.
Click to expand...

Of course, but it's also true that when there's a choice the one you left at home is always going to be the one you want more than the one you brought with you!

Its like that nagging doubt that the Zeiss binoculars which remained in the shop might well have had less CA than the Swarovskis I instinctively wanted and bought. (That's not the pair I had for Mrs Roger P from you Sancho - they are fine! We fight over them on long trips!)
 
I cant wait to get started with it ;)
FrankD said:
I had resolved myself to a similar combination. I was using the Pentax 65 with a 20x wide angle eyepiece for one application and a Zeiss 65 Diascope with zoom for everything else. Sadly, at least for me, the Pentax is headed Kristoffer's way.
Click to expand...
 
Kevin Conville said:
This mimics my thoughts and experiences.

I have an ED50 and a Pentax PF80. I do very little (if any) viewing at magnifications over 40x (big scope, or not) as there never seems to be any point to it where I live. I'm mostly at or around 30x. I also do little viewing during the lowest light of the day, partially because that part of the day is short lived. So, given the above, I find myself using the little Nikon most always.

I don't think anyone would argue that a good 65 or 80mm scope will have more optical horsepower than a 50mm scope, it's just a matter of what you need. Kind of like how one doesn't need a 400 horsepower V-8 to commute to work with when a 4 cylinder Honda does just fine. At 70 MPH on the highway, it just doesn't matter.

However, an 80ish mm scope compliments the 50mm scope whereas a 65mm scope competes.
Click to expand...
The ed50 cant really compete with ats65hd at magnifictations over 35, and i use that power very often.
 
Thanks guys, very interesting.
I have just come back from taking my ED50 to the local river 1 mile away for the last half hour of light. Having nothing to compare it with, it was fair until the last 10mins or so, I could recognize that it was a Mallard at I suppose a 100 metres or so, but then asked myself the question "why or when would I be bird watching when it was like this", and I guess never. So, the next test will be what is it like in a hide at at Reservoir or Reserve on a bad Feb day, when I could imagine myself out - in fact have been.
Is it worth P/exing just for that??

Now, I see you can get a Nikon straight ED111 for half the price of an angled?? and I have the eyepieces already. That way I effectively write of the cost of the Nikon(£170 'cause it is pink - but still keep it(not that it matters with a free cover, but a great price) - or, take a big P/Ex hit and still spend approx £900 and lose the ED50
Any thoughts on that, or are the Z/L/S's that much better?



Regards

Geoff

edit. just seen the half price Nikon 111 is not an ED scope
 
Last edited:
:-O

OK, Fieldscope EDIII ! I was reading it one-eleven. As in ED50, ED82, and ED111. I'm a knuckle head I guess. I've never seen ones used like that, but now I see.

Regarding what to do, though I won't tell you not to get a straight scope, remember a straight scope requires a much taller and necessarily stiffer and therefore heavier tripod.

As for the p/exing being parts exchange, maybe you're a warehouseman or buyer or something as that lingo is foreign to me. But thanks for clearing it up.
 
Hi Kevin,
Part Exchange or "trade in "is pretty common here in the UK. Most optic shops will do that.

I like a straight scope as I am small, and so it suits me in a hide situation.

Cheers

geoff
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 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

R
Gitzo Traveler series 2 for seabirds?
Replies
17
Views
1K
MiddleRiver
MiddleRiver
Passakorn
Better but smaller options than the Nikon Monarch 60/82ED that can reach 60X?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Tringa45
T
D
Traded my NL 10x42 for a NL 10x32
Replies
17
Views
2K
ReinierB
R
S
ED50: 20x or 27x eyepiece?
Replies
12
Views
3K
Hermann
Hermann
Passakorn
Upgrading from Nikon ED50
Replies
0
Views
1K
Passakorn
Passakorn

Users who are viewing this thread

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