Nikon Fieldscope 82 ED Eyepieces. (2 Viewers)

Thank you Steve for steering me to the wide angle 30x I am VERY pleased with it!

Thank you Mike for the correct ocular name. I will be getting a lot of use out of that term today.

I would attempt to describe the oculars this way. On some scopes I have tried such as the Swarovski, and Leica, possibly the Zeiss the ocular glass is convex and larger (wider) than the flat ocular glass on the Nikon. On the S & L scopes the zoom ocular is about 1 inch or more wide if I remember correctly. The convex shape bulges visibly out of the back of the eyepiece.

I found the convex oculars do suffer from all the limitations of other zooms such as a narrowing exit pupil as you zoom and less light as you zoom.

The large convex ocular seems to provide a more convenient initial viewing experience than the flat ocular as my eye approaches the ocular. Meaning as my eye approaches the ocular it appears to me that I can see the image when my eye is still slightly off center, a little sooner than I can as I approach the smaller flat ocular on the flat Nikon where my eye has to be pretty much in front of the ocular. Convex creates a less crowded in feeling (if you’re sensitive to that). I guess that provides about a 1/25 of a second advantage as my eye moves into position…

Is this a solution to a problem I do not have?

In real world performance and usage it does not matter to me once I am looking through the scope. The exit pupil of the image will be the same size on two scopes if the only difference is the same power convex and flat eyepiece (correct me if I am wrong). I am not sure what the science is behind this convex ocular. Possibly the light is being bent to the side and brought to the eye sooner when it is off center on a convex lens? I am seeing these convex ocular designs on binoculars too. If someone can explain the science I would be grateful. I am wondering if the convex ocular provides some other advantages I am unaware of. I am not trading in my scope or my eyepieces for fund this feature – I am just curious about what it offers.

Again correct me if I am wrong. This appears to be a design and convenience feature (that keeps me up nights wondering) not a performance improvement if you judge the image once your eye is looking through the scope. But I am curious about why it I am seeing this design on more optics?

I think you have a point. All old design zooms were of the "flat" and small type you describe but Leica, I think, led the way with a new much larger zoom eyepiece with the convex lens on top. Nikon haven't gone in this direction and still have some of the features of earlier zooms, yet with the sharpness and brightness of other zooms. Where it is still lacking is in field of view and eye relief which are not quite up to, say, the Leica or Swaro. Zeiss have risked going one stage further and provided a much wider field of view but at the expense of outer edge sharpness.

Anyone have experience with the 75x wide eyepiece? Better fov and clarity than with the zoom at that same mag?

Hi,
I own the 75x MC eyepiece. It's optically excellent, in my opinion, but I use it very seldom, as you can imagine.
I have only fixed MC-DS eyepieces so I can not be of assistance to tour query.
Eye relief is no doubt wider than in the zoom at 75x, but I can't tell you about the FOV.
Best

Thanks, Saxatilis Found here some more experiences ;-D What a treasure cove this community is!

Ries said:

Anyone have experience with the 75x wide eyepiece? Better fov and clarity than with the zoom at that same mag?

Click to expand...

I have all the DS eyepieces and the 25-75 zoom.
For awhile I used the 75X to view the Orion Nebula (Trapezium among other objects). I enjoyed the longer eye relief and wider FOV of the 75X.

However, I found it easier to view at night without my eyeglasses so I now use the 25-75 zoom almost exclusively at night.

Pileatus said:

...
If Nikon builds a worthy zoom I'll buy it along with another scope for my wife. ...

Click to expand...

Nikon will not produce more eps for the ED82. Purchase a Monarch 82ED with the 30-60 zoom to your wife... o

I have the 75x but I almost never use it except some astro applications. Not very practical for birding. The FOV may be a bit more than the zoom (can't remember exactly), but not nearly as much as when comparing lower powers. The optical quality of the zoom is as good or better than the fixed. No significant difference in brightness, which might be higher in the zoom (the fixed has quite a few elements for a fixed). The biggest practical difference is eye relief for glasses--it is much longer for the fixed 75x.

--AP

Hi all, I have an ED82 25-75x MC combination. Does anybody have experience of comparing this against the 25-56x eyepiece? I'm contemplating buying this as I don't often go up to full 75x zoom altho I use the zoom often in the field. I'm wondering if brightness, width of view and general impression of images would be improved? Many thanks.

Hi J@se ,l to have a 82ed angled Nikon scope ,l use a fixed 30w for 95% of my birding and the 25x75 only when needing the extra magnification is needed and more importantly when conditions allow .l'm guessing you haven't bought the other zoom and cannot offer a comparison,but would recommend you looked for a fixed mc30w or mc38 these are scarce but well worth the effort ,the 82ed is a great scope and l am hanging on to mine,a good 82ed are up there with the best . Regards dave

J@se said:

Hi all, I have an ED82 25-75x MC combination. Does anybody have experience of comparing this against the 25-56x eyepiece? I'm contemplating buying this as I don't often go up to full 75x zoom altho I use the zoom often in the field. I'm wondering if brightness, width of view and general impression of images would be improved? Many thanks.

Click to expand...

In my old ED78 I had the 25-56x and upgraded for the 25-75x. Optically is the same ep with more zoom range i.e. you will not gain anything downgrading.
If you still want to try the 25-56x, I have 3 to sell - send me a pm.

Thanks for your inputs dave and David I appreciate your thoughts. Sounds like I should probably stick with my current set up which provides a very satisfactory experience anyway and if the chance arises and I try the 30x or 38x we'll see where that goes although I do like the flexibility of a zoom. Cheers, Jason

J@se said:

...if the chance arises and I try the 30x or 38x we'll see where that goes although I do like the flexibility of a zoom...

Click to expand...

As noted above, you gain nothing with the shorter range zoom. Yes, you should try the 30x. The DS version is widely available on eBay new in box or used. Compared to the zoom it is no brighter, but FOV are eye-relief are huge. Quality of viewing experience is, for most users, a massive step up.

--AP

J@se said:

I have an ED82 25-75x MC combination. Does anybody have experience of comparing this against the 25-56x eyepiece? I'm contemplating buying this as I don't often go up to full 75x zoom altho I use the zoom often in the field. I'm wondering if brightness, width of view and general impression of images would be improved?

Click to expand...

I've got both eyepieces, both the 25-75x (one each of both versions) and the 25-56x (two eyepieces as well, including the multicoated version).

On my scopes the 25-75x is *definitely* better. With the 25-56x the image quality at magnifications above ~40-45x isn't really up to scratch by today's standards. The 25-75x remains sharp up to 75x - if the scope isn't a lemon.

I'd definitely stick to the 25-75x. I only keep the 25-56x because it's a neat, small and light eyepiece that fits the ED50 pretty well.

Hermann

Thanks Alexis and Hermann great to read your thoughts much appreciated, I popped out yesterday evening with the sole purpose of cranking up the zoom and was happy with the results as I always have been, it gives pin sharp views. Cheers

Isn't there a difference in eyerelief, if I look at pictures like the ones below

Ries said:

Isn't there a difference in eyerelief, if I look at pictures like the ones below

Click to expand...

I'd say that the eye relief of the two zooms is fairly similar. It varies across the zoom range and is shortest at intermediate settings. The 25-56 zoom has a folding eyecup whereas the 25-75 has a twist type.

--AP

In the higher mags, is there a noticeable difference in brightness between the 82 and 78 or is that just marginal? Are the coatings different or just the 4mm and waterproofing?

Ries said:

In the higher mags, is there a noticeable difference in brightness between the 82 and 78 or is that just marginal? Are the coatings different or just the 4mm and waterproofing?

Click to expand...

Yes, at the very limits of magnification or low light, the 82 mm scope is technically very slightly brighter because of its larger aperture and maybe slightly better coatings, but the difference is so small I have never chosen to use my 82ED over my 78ED because of it. I say "maybe" slightly better coatings because they _should_ be better, but in normal use (daylight, moderate magnifications) I don't see any real difference in transmission. I have seen some binocular models improve noticeably with newer coatings, so I expected to see a difference when I first got the 82ED, but I don't.

Besides the trivial difference in aperture and (ostensibly) waterproofing, the potentially more salient differences between these scopes are (1) in how they handle as a result of the tripod foot being behind the focus collar in the 78 versus in front of it in the 82 (matter of taste as to which you prefer), (2) how they balance on a tripod (78 is nose-heavy, 82 is balanced at foot), (3) the the existence of an extendable lens hood in the 82ED, and (4) availability (or likely inclusion) of a stay-on case for the 82.

All in all, I prefer my 78ED and use it most because I like the tripod foot position for how my hand reaches the focus (like on a long tele lens), I have no issues with balance because I use a long sliding plate, and I don't like stay-on cases. I do sometimes wish it had an extendable hood.

--AP

Alexis

at is a very informative post, thanks a lot! The 78 (angled) is easier and cheaper to find, although I don't mind a bit of disbalance having the focus collar closer/faster would suit me better although the 82 placement I would easily get used to. The slightly better brightness (for cloudy seabird watching) and extendable lens hood (sunny weather) also nudge me slightly towards the 82... But I wouldn't see me losing that much on the 78 either! I'm just a bit of a mag nut so would want find a 25-75 ep for it...

Sound comparing this, thanks for your help!

Richard