Straight or Angled Eyepiece Scope for Birding? (1 Viewer)

Milo · Aug 15, 2004

I am new to this group (and a relatively new birder) and hope I am not repeating a question you have heard many times before. I have two pairs of really great binoculars Nikon LS 8x42 and Nikon LS 10x42 but now would like to buy a really fine scope. After much research, I have more or less decided on the Zeiss Diascope 85 T* FL (unless someone here convinces me otherwise). My problem is should I get the straight view model or the angled view model. My gut feeling on this is the straight view would be better for regular birding. Wouldn't I be using the scope more for looking at perched birds or lower objects which would be anywhere from on the ground to maybe just above the horizon? The angled view would be better for viewing things in the air, but hard on the neck when viewing things nearer the ground. How often do you attempt to follow a flying bird using a high power scope. I am tall, 6'1" if that makes a difference. I realize that this may be merely a matter of personal preference, but I would like to hear what your preferences are. Thank you.

Milo

KC Foggin · Aug 15, 2004

Hi Milo.
I think it really is a matter of comfort for a lot of us. I, myself, prefer straight as I am on the short side - 5'4" and it just makes aiming a bit easier for me. But I learned on a straight scope. Had I learned on an angled my answer may be different. I do think it is easier to sight in the subject with a straight scope but again, I may get some arguments on that one as well

IanF · Aug 15, 2004

Hi Milo,

I guess it's a personal thing. I have always favoured angled scopes and wouldn't consider and straight one. Some people dislike angled ones as you are not looking straight at the subject, but after using it for a while I can get straight on a bird within in a few seconds whether in flight or stationary.

I'm glad you mentioned your height. I am 6'2" which was another reason for getting an angled scope. Most tripods with the column not extended are great for people around 5'6" to look through with a straight scope!

With an angled scope viewing is a doddle as with the Mannfrotto tripods at least their height is ideal unextended for an angled scope. Another bonus is that my wife is a lot shorter than me and so we can both use the scope without adjusting the height every time. By having the column unextended you gain greater stability.

Best thing I guess is to pop into a shop and try the scope you fancy with the tripod you intend to use. Don't forget the tripod is as if not more important than the scope. BTW I don't think that you'll be disappointed in that particular scope!

hornet · Aug 15, 2004

Hi Milo,

I think you're right about personal taste, and the usual advice applies - try before you buy.

But for what it's worth, I've never regretted buying an angled scope. I'm 6ft and so a straight scope means having to ratchet up the central column of the tripod too high - you lose stability the higher it goes.

I find the action of looking down into the scope to be a natural one - it also makes it easier to sketch in the field because I can move my eye easily from scope to pad and back again. Shame I'm such a lousy artist really. :bounce:

Having said that, I know some people swear by straight-throughs, particularly from a hide. Whichever you choose, I'm sure you'll be happy - the Zeiss are great scopes.

Quark5 · Aug 15, 2004

Hi Milo
I used to use a straight for target archery for 15 years. It was fine but had not started birding then. I tried an angled about two years ago when I started birding and would not go back.
I actusally find it easier to find a bird with the angled now. It also keeps the scope lower so it should be slightly more stable and easier to use in hides as most hides are not designed fo the taller person.
Angled does seem to pick up more rain drops in showers than my straight but not really a problem.
You might get slightly more neck strain if used for prolonged periods but I have not found this so.
Digi scoping is made easier as the camera alignment seems to be more comfortable.
Best to get out and try some. Suppliers are not bad but not likely to lend one for a day. Try asking fellow birders to look at theirs. They are a pretty good bunch I've found.

Bill Atwood · Aug 15, 2004

I moved from straight to angled just over a year ago. A friend had one and I never had trouble acquiring a bird with it, sitting or flying. In fact I was better at it than he was. I had decided to try to lessen my kit weight as much as possible, yet still retain a fairly stable image. I figured that an angled could be set lower than a straight, therefore not as big a tripod was needed. Plus, in windy conditions its easeir to lay an arm on to steady it. And as noted above , its easier for groups to use.

One downside of an angled is that the eyepiece glass gets wet in light rain or drizzle. It also has complicated my set-up and take -down, but overall
I'm happy with my decision.

scampo · Aug 15, 2004

I don't think you'll find a better birding scope than the Zeiss if you're getting it with its wonderful zoom. If you're going for a fixed eyepiece, the Nikon or Swaro with 30x are also truly outstanding.

Angled scopes are the only ones for me - if I try looking high into a tree with a straight scope, my neck will soon tell me not to. I think with you being tall (I'm 6' 4"), then I'd go for the angled every time.

Bluetail · Aug 15, 2004

I moved from straight to angled about five months ago. I more or less had to because of neck problems. If it wasn't for that I'd have stayed with a straight scope. The eyepiece is positioned slightly off centre so that you have to aim the scope slightly left of where the bird is positioned. I found I got used to that reasonably quickly and it's not a problem. On the other hand, finding the vertical range is a right pain and I find locating flying birds nearly impossible. I do use a zoom lens, though - no doubt it would be easier with a wide-angle fixed lens.

John Butler · Aug 16, 2004

"I am tall, 6'1", if that makes a difference".

Hi Milo.

Like you I am 6'-1" tall and in my work as a bird tour guide I have used both straight and angled scopes and without doubt I would go for a straight scope every time for the reasons below.

1. I have found that quick locating of a target is much easier (quicker) with a "straight".

2. As stated by others, you get more protection from rain.

3. I have found that there is far less neck strain standing upright than if you were bending the neck at an angle.

4. I accept the arguement that an "angled" scope MAY be a bit more stable in windy conditions, but if you have a good solid tripod this effect should be minimal.

5. Height can be of vital importance in birdwatching. What if the bird you are trying to target is on the other side of a 5'-6" wall or fence? With my height I can rack the scope up to my eye height (just over 5'-8") and see over the wall/hedge and locate my target. With an "angled" scope the maximum height I can get is about 5'-1", which would give me a pretty good view of the wall/hedge, but not the target. No contest.

Regards from Donana.

John.

Bluetail · Aug 16, 2004

John Butler said:
3. I have found that there is far less neck strain standing upright than if you were bending the neck at an angle.

I have to say that's not my experience. The natural position for the neck is slightly forward with the eyes looking slightly down. Anyone who uses a computer at work will have been told this. I found that, when using a straight scope, I was having to crick my neck slightly back to get a view straight through the scope and in my case that's very bad news. For me, bending the neck forward is infinitely more comfortable. Just my experience; others will find differently. I agree your other points entirely, particularly the last.

Jay Turberville · Aug 16, 2004

John Butler said:
"I am tall, 6'1", if that makes a difference".

5. Height can be of vital importance in birdwatching. What if the bird you are trying to target is on the other side of a 5'-6" wall or fence? With my height I can rack the scope up to my eye height (just over 5'-8") and see over the wall/hedge and locate my target. With an "angled" scope the maximum height I can get is about 5'-1", which would give me a pretty good view of the wall/hedge, but not the target. No contest.

It may seem a bit odd and unorthodox, but the ATS80HD that I use can rotate in its mounting collar. So all you need to do is rotate 90 degrees if you need to see over a wall. You will be standing somewhat to the side of the scope, but this will allow you to raise the scope in the same manner as a straight through.

FWIW, I prefer an angled for viewing and a straight through for digiscopng.

Kevin Mac · Aug 16, 2004

A straight scope for me. With both eyes open you can target a bird much faster than an angled scope. Seconds count!

alan_rymer · Aug 16, 2004

Jay Turberville said:
It may seem a bit odd and unorthodox, but the ATS80HD that I use can rotate in its mounting collar. So all you need to do is rotate 90 degrees if you need to see over a wall. You will be standing somewhat to the side of the scope, but this will allow you to raise the scope in the same manner as a straight through.

FWIW, I prefer an angled for viewing and a straight through for digiscopng.

Some tripod heads will also flip over to an angle of up to 90 degrees, so the tripod allows this if the scope doesn't.

Jane Turner · Aug 16, 2004

I much prefer a straight scope... but then again I usually use my scope on a shoulder pod and I never sit in hides scanning with a scope.

scampo · Aug 16, 2004

John Butler said:
"I am tall, 6'1", if that makes a difference".

Hi Milo.

Like you I am 6'-1" tall and in my work as a bird tour guide I have used both straight and angled scopes and without doubt I would go for a straight scope every time for the reasons below.

1. I have found that quick locating of a target is much easier (quicker) with a "straight".

2. As stated by others, you get more protection from rain.

3. I have found that there is far less neck strain standing upright than if you were bending the neck at an angle.

4. I accept the arguement that an "angled" scope MAY be a bit more stable in windy conditions, but if you have a good solid tripod this effect should be minimal.

5. Height can be of vital importance in birdwatching. What if the bird you are trying to target is on the other side of a 5'-6" wall or fence? With my height I can rack the scope up to my eye height (just over 5'-8") and see over the wall/hedge and locate my target. With an "angled" scope the maximum height I can get is about 5'-1", which would give me a pretty good view of the wall/hedge, but not the target. No contest.

Regards from Donana.

John.

Well, it must be that these things need trying out but...

- I have found that with the narrower field of view zooms that most scopes have, it can be harder to locate a bird with an angled scope, but the Zeiss zoom has such a wide fov, this presents no problem. I have never found a problem rapidly locating a bird with the Zeiss.

- In the rain, it must be true that a straight through is better protected; this is a consideration, for sure, if you bird frequently in inclement weather.

- I have to use an angled scope because of neck problems (like Jason). Since switching from a straight to an angled, I never experience the awful neck ache and other problems that I used to do.

- Looking up into a high tree with a straight through is very difficult as even a large tripod is limited in the height to which it can extended. I was looking for hawfinch and lesser spotted woodpeckers in the spring, for example, and that would have been very difficult, I should think, with a straight through scope.

- The angled can easily be swivelled round so you look "straight through" as it were, so looking over a high wall is surely the same as with a straight through?

Gaukur · Aug 16, 2004

After seriously considering getting a straight scope last year, I decided on angled Zeiss 85T* FL, never regretting it. I am 6'1" tall like some others!! Having angled rather than straigth allows you to use tripod in much lower position (or better still use a lighter tripod). For viewing upwards I think it is definitely better than straight. Downsides are of course when looking downwards, but you rarely have to looks so much downward to have problems with angled scope. Also the angled Zeiss can easily be rotated within the Zeiss "stay-on" case. When looking from a car window on a window pod (as I often do) I rotate the eyepiece of the scope and get views close to 180° that would be very awkward with straight scope!

postcardcv · Aug 16, 2004

I switched from straight through to angled about two years ago (after about 12 years of straight through). After a month or so getting teh hang of it I was v. pleased - I have found it very easy to locate birds still - even in flight and the scope is much more comfortable to use for prolonged periods. Activities such as raptor watching used to be a painful experience now it's a pleasure.
I am often out with other birders and find the angled scope easier to 'share'. I have also found it puts the eyepiece at a much more comfortable height for digiscoping, and my results have improved (though so has my camera).
But as other have said it comes down to personal preference - I have a coupl eof friends who still swear by straight throughs, and a few who have converted to angled....

roger hill · Aug 16, 2004

hi Milo
I have read all of the arguments for both angled and straight and have to say that they are both very strong. So my advice to you is to read over all of the mail and pull out the valid points and weigh them up.
I am only 5'-6" and after using both, have settled on straight. For the following reasons.

1) If i'm not at the front of the queue,i need every bit of heighht i can get.

2) Rainfall protection

3) Just as important. Sun light accross the exit lens.

4) Kevin Mac made an important point whan he said that having your other eye looking in the same direction gives you that split second advantage when it comes to relocating a bird that maybe constantly on the move through trees.

The choice is ultimately yours, so i hope you make the right one. The good thing is that whichever viewing angle you opt for you will adapt your birding style to accomodate it.

Scholekster · Aug 16, 2004

Milo,
I'm 6' 7" tall so automatically went for an angled with a high tripod without centre column. I tend not to use a hide clamp, as I digiscope and cannot get enough stability from a hide clamp. My tripod will adjust so that I can get it low to the ground if needed. I suppose it's what you're comfortable with. Can you try out both, ask other birders to have a look through their scopes, and see what you prefer,

ctr

Milo · Aug 17, 2004

Thanks to Everyone!

I hope that everyone comes back to read a thread on which they commented because I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to all. What a great group of people! I am overwhelmed by the huge number of thoughtful responses I received. I realize it is hard to give advice especially when a huge percentage of the answer lies in personal preference, but all your responses were very insightful.

Based on my first experience with scopes of both kinds last Saturday when I was among the birders watching the Red-Footed Falcon on MV and also based largely on your comments, I am going to go with the straight view model. I think this will be the best one for me.

All my best,
Milo

Straight or Angled Eyepiece Scope for Birding? (1 Viewer)

Member

Very, very long time member

Moderator

Well-known member

Active member

Registered User

Steve Campsall

Senior Moment

Registered Member

Senior Moment

Well-known member

Just sleeping

Well-known member

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Super Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread