New scope and tripod from scratch (1 Viewer)

Hello everyone. I'm afraid this is a bit lengthy, sorry! I am new to birdwatching, digisciping and bird photography and am seeking advice on a suitable scope, tripod and head combination(heard that question before?!).

I have been looking at the Bird Forum (extremely useful) and a few web sites with product reviews, have phoned a small number of recommended retailers for advice and have had a cursery look in practice at the small and large Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski (but not Nikon, Pentax or Kowa yet). I know that in the end the only way to choose is to try several out in field conditions. However, I still would like a few more pointers as I don't feel I can bother even the best retailer by asking to see ten or so different scopes, each with a fixed ww and a zoom eye piece in combination with an equal number of different tripod/ heads!! So I want to try to narrow down the field a bit more before asking the retailer to let me play with perhaps two or three for a longer time, hence this note to tap into other members' experience and comparisons, particularly those of you who have, or have used, one of the current models from these makers.

I do want a really good scope optically and "feel" which will last me a lifetime and I get genuine joy out of using well engineered products; I want value for money (not just to pay for the name) but I'm prepared to fork out if it is going to give me lasting pleasure in use (and as someone's note said, the extra price of some scopes is quickly amortized over the years of pleasure given). And I don't want to make a purchase that I'm going to regret after a few months.

I have two prime considerations in addition to quality;
a) I wear glasses, so is there a scope model(s)/ eye-piece combination which people find consistantly outstanding in this respect and/or have you advice on what I must make sure to check when I am field testing to decide and
b) I will walk short-medium (but probably not long) distances (say 1-4 miles) with it sometimes (but also use in the garden, etc) and I will take it on holidays abroad.

The advice on this latter point seems to be "go for a 60-65mm objective", but is this still so with the current range of shorter, lighter 80-85mm models from Nikon, Zeiss and Swarovski? And does the extra couple of hundred grams really make a difference when you have anyway to carry a tripod which (I havn't got one yet- see below!) seem to come out at between 2 and 4 kg on their own. In other words, I guess what I'm asking here is, would it be good to go for the bigger objective anyway to get the extra light gathering power and maybe save a few hundred grams by going for a slightly lighter tripod (but obviously still sturdy- carbon fibre?)? Or are the best 60-65mm scopes so good now that you can save weight on both scope and tripod and have a more comfortably experience all round?!

On eye pieces I think I have decided to go for a 20ww or 30ww-ish as the standard one and later complement it with a zoom if I find that necesary. Does this sound sensible?

Since the tripod/ head is as important as the scope, do members of the forum have suggestions for the "gems" to look for here also?

I'm sorry to ask so much but I don't want to spend over £1000 on the wrong things! I guess what I'm asking all you experienced members is "if you had the opportunity and luxury to buy a completely new kit from scratch and you had the particular considerations I mentioned above (glasses, walking/travel, etc) what scope/ tripod/head combinations would be at the top of your list"?

Hi Malcolm, and welcome to the Forum. I'll be very interested to see the replies to this post, because we are in the same situation (and one half of the "we" is also called Malcolm). However it's a very open question - I've just been re-reading lots of posts, and having thought most of the decisions were made - we're hesitating. We've made a modest start with a Coolpix 4500!!!

You need to try scopes with your glasses on but my experience is (and I'm long-sighted) that no scope allows easy full-field view. I most often take my glasses off to use my scope (a Nikon ED82) even though, when I was field testing scopes, the Nikon was, for me, the easiest to use with glasses and still see the whole field of view (I can't stand not seeing the full field). But even though the Nikon zoom is fully useable with glasses, I still find it more comfortable viewing with the naked eye (same with my Swaro binos).

I would say go for an ED / Flourite scope with at least 77mm + objective (Leica, Nikon, Kowa or Swaro) and buy a 30x wide or zoom - you'll be thrilled with any of these scopes for sure - it really is down to personal preference in the end as they are all optically superb.

I chose the Nikon because it is so compact and yet has such a large objective lens for light gathering power. The more light you have coming through the scope, the faster your shutter speed can be - hence less chance of camera shake.

You could also save a lot and lose very little in quality (if any) by looking at the Opticron ES80 - many digiscopers on this forum use that - and it is ED.

Manfrotto tripods seem very popular - I'm sure you'll have some recommendations from others. Watch the weight is my tip - I'm perfectly happy with my Velbon.

I use a 60 mm fluourite Kowa, mostly on a shoulder pod though not always, and a large Nikon (which I bought recently) on a 'normal' tripod. I only use the Nikon when I'm staying close to the car! The weight is okay at first and the image is lovely but is a serious pain after a while. If I go somewhere warm or into a rainforest the Kowa is still useful and beautifully light - a major consideration. The shoulder pod allows for great movability and you can take notes easily too. with a large scope and tripod the temptation is to carry it around fully extended all the time....something that would drive me nuts in minutes especially when searching bushes and trees for migrants etc. The Nikon would not get a look in for a trip abroad....but is very nice to use on the beach seawatching etc or for scanning say at Holkham freshmarsh.
Depends if you're a travel light or not birder. I just hate clutter

I think I have the best of both worlds with the two but if i had to choose one it would be the Kowa as I can do everything with it. The Nikon's excellent optically etc but not good for travelling or staying out all day.

you can buy scopes cheaply at Warehouse express and get a sec. hand lightweight scope in addition for about the same price as some of the new model big scopes

Is that the 82 Nikon, Tim? I forget! I've spent hours today walking around with mine and not found it uncomfortable at all.

I'm not as tall and strong as you Steve!
- it's the 77 (don't know the weight) but it is suprisingly short which convinced me to buy it. It's not a lot heavier than the Kowa really and I love looking thru it - as good as the Swarovski for me...crisp right to the edge....takes the new mc eyepiece which helps.

I've got really used to gretting straight onto stuff with the shoulder pod and feeling like I'm not carrying anything. But I did buy, and do use, the Nikon so I must like it a lot.

and bear in mind my views are usually erratic and out-of-step. I am often told I live in the past!

After mulling over which new scope to buy myself, it really does come down to the design that suits you best.

I like the focus system of the Leica 77 mm as it was easier to control fine focussing but to be honest the optics didn't seem to me at least to be up to those of my Kowa 823. I know the Kowa is a 82 mm scope and will let more light in, but it's a couple of years old and I was looking through newer Leica angled and straight scopes in the field and they didn't measure up. I'll be ugrading my scope shortly and it's the Swarovski ATS 80 HD that I am going for as from the scopes I have seen there is nothing to beat it - though to be fair I haven't checked out the Nikon or the Zeiss ones as I was looking to save weight and for compactness.

Despite the Kowa being a large scope I have had no trouble carrying it around for five and six mile jaunts.

Optically I'd suggest the Kowa with 20-60x zoom eyepiece for flexibility. I have the 32WA as well which is an excellent lens, but not as versatile as having the zoom. I previously owned a Kowa 611 which was very good for viewing and I sometimes regret selling it as it was a nice sized compact scope - but no good for digiscoping.

If you're just after having one for viewing through then the smaller scopes will suffice, but if at some point you decide you want to try digiscoping then in our climate I think the 77mm or more with ED type glass is a must.

It really is a personal thing. We all will have our own favourites and our own biases. So try out a few and pick a day with bad light. You'll notice the difference more.

80 or 60mm? well my Opticron ES80 weighs no more than a Zeiss 65 (ok it isn't as good optically but is half the price! and performs well). I walked around Norfolk for 2 days and it didn't bother me weight wise.

I think you should try a few mid priced scopes from the likes of Nikon,Kowa & Opticron and compare them with the big boys and see if you reckon the extra money is worth spending.

Don't try auditioning too many scopes at once you'll just get confused.

Here a few weights:

Nikon 78 50 ounces or so
Swarowski ATS 80 48 ounces
Kowa 614 12 ounces!!!


as Pete mentiones it may be worth having a look at other possibilites away from the obvious. I bought some Nikon HGs and was astonished by them in comparison to other top makes but hardly anyone uses them....haven't use the ES80 but I've heard good things. You could even get a back up scope with the money you save perhaps
the weight factor will come more into play if you decide to go less birder-friendly environments

Tim Allwood said:

I'm not as tall and strong as you Steve!
- it's the 77 (don't know the weight) but it is suprisingly short which convinced me to buy it. It's not a lot heavier than the Kowa really and I love looking thru it - as good as the Swarovski for me...crisp right to the edge....takes the new mc eyepiece which helps.

I've got really used to gretting straight onto stuff with the shoulder pod and feeling like I'm not carrying anything. But I did buy, and do use, the Nikon so I must like it a lot.

and bear in mind my views are usually erratic and out-of-step. I am often told I live in the past!

Click to expand...

I'm going to have to look into this shoulder pod business - never seen one in my life! How steady a view can you achieve?

I was at Rutland Water late afternoon and was more than pleased with the Nikon scope - it really is a lovely piece of glass!

Tim Allwood said:

Here a few weights:

Nikon 78 50 ounces or so
Swarowski ATS 80 48 ounces
Kowa 614 12 ounces!!!

Click to expand...

Not quite sure how many grams you think there are to the ounce, Tim! The Kowa is a lot heavier than that (even though it's a light scope). The Kowa 660 series (ED / flourite is needed for best photo results) is also a lot heavier.

IanF said:

After mulling over which new scope to buy myself, it really does come down to the design that suits you best.

I like the focus system of the Leica 77 mm as it was easier to control fine focussing but to be honest the optics didn't seem to me at least to be up to those of my Kowa 823. I know the Kowa is a 82 mm scope and will let more light in, but it's a couple of years old and I was looking through newer Leica angled and straight scopes in the field and they didn't measure up. I'll be ugrading my scope shortly and it's the Swarovski ATS 80 HD that I am going for as from the scopes I have seen there is nothing to beat it - though to be fair I haven't checked out the Nikon or the Zeiss ones as I was looking to save weight and for compactness.

Click to expand...

You'll not get a more compact scope than the Nikon 82ED. But, if you have the cash, the Swarovski + zoom is not going to be surpassed, even if many think it can be equalled (And I'm one who does!)..

I just did what Malcolm is considering and my choice ended up based strictly on the image - wide, bright, crisp. The weight is way up there and convenience down somewhat, but I don't mind because the view is spectacular. I've said it before on other forums - Tele Vue 85 with Nagler and Radian eyepieces. Still amazes me every time I look through it, even (particularly) with a 5mm Radian, giving 120x. But not every one's cup of tea.

I'd love to see how good it is - just the weight against it I suppose.

Oh, and I forgot to say a 60 degree apparent field of view and 20 mm eye relief with the radian eyepieces.

Not waterproof either, Steve. But if you do see one over there sometime, give a look. And the eyepieces matter just as much as the rest. You have to try Naglers and/or Radians.

Tim Allwood said:

Here a few weights:

Nikon 78 50 ounces or so
Swarowski ATS 80 48 ounces
Kowa 614 12 ounces!!!

Click to expand...

Got to say I don't believe your weights!! My little Midget 2 weighs about 450grams or 16 ounces!!

Malcolm,
Here is an old thread which may contain some useful tips. I wrote a few pointers in this thread and you may find some of them useful to eliminate various options and therefore have less to ponder on when in the shop and getting an assistant to set up various different outfits. E.g. have you decided on a straight or angled scope. Take a look, it may be that you have already covered these.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=73

Many thanks for the suggestions. I will certainly look seriously at the Nikon 82 and the Kowas. I'm not sure the TeleView is available in Britain to compare (does anyone know?). I will also look at the Opticron 80 which as you say is much lower price. I think it will take a few weeks to research properly and I'll just compare two or three at a time. As I say, I would hate to make the wrong choice and regret it! If there are any other useful inputs please keep them coming.

I had an interesting conversation with one of our top local birders this afternoon. I noticed that he was now using new Nikon kit. He said it was because he had found that Nikon gives a totally naturally coloured image. He put it down to the fact that Nikon alone use a unique ED glass developed for their photography lenses whereas others use fluorite which apparently gives too much prominence to the blue end of the spectrum, thus producing a "cold" colouration. Interesting if it is true.