Quality of image - ATX 85 vs 95? (1 Viewer)

I made the huge mistake of peeking through the ATX 95 last week, and now my wee Apo Televid 62, which I previously thought perfect in every way, seems like it's got a cataract. So I'm considering an upgrade. I've seen many discussions about the on-paper differences between the ATX 85 and 95, but I think my priorities might be slightly different to many buyers. I have three eyepieces for the Televid: 16x WW, 26x WW, and 16-48x, and the eyepiece I get most mileage out of, by far, is the 16x. It's super-bright, super-wide, and to be honest I see as much detail through it as I do with either of the other two eyepieces. I love it! I have been blessed with pretty good eyesight for all of my life (so far) and, in my experience with the Leica eyepieces, magnification makes things bigger, but not necessarily clearer. So...

If anyone has experience of both the ATX85 and ATX95, I'd be very grateful for observations about the quality of the image at the lowest mag on both systems. Does the 95 show more, or just show bigger? Also, how would you describe the different images when both scopes are set to 60x?

I guess, in a nutshell, I'm less interested in what the 95 does over and above the 85; I'm more interested in which is the better of the two in the areas where they overlap. I care a little bit about size, but don't care at all about weight. Quality is the absolute priority, and magnification is secondary.

Thanks a lot for any comments!

Al

Is not the quality of the image a function of the eyepiece more than of the objective?
Perhaps the issue is just that Swaro has improved these faster than has Leica.

Just to further confuse the issue, it sticks in my mind that Steve Ingraham posted a revue of a Tele Vue 85
http://betterviewdesired.com/Tele-Vue-85-APO.php in which he stated:
The Tele Vue 85 goes beyond need. The 85 shows, at any distance and any power, right out to the limits of daylight viewing, all the detail, I am convinced, that there is to see.
Of course the unit weighs 12 pounds with tripod and is not waterproof, but it does offer quality.

Al Downie said:

I guess, in a nutshell, I'm less interested in what the 95 does over and above the 85; I'm more interested in which is the better of the two in the areas where they overlap. I care a little bit about size, but don't care at all about weight. Quality is the absolute priority, and magnification is secondary.

Thanks a lot for any comments!

Al

Click to expand...

They overlap at 30x and above so assuming equally good specimens the 95 will always be better as it will be brighter and show more resolution due to its larger objective.

I would pick the 95 if it was me. Everything being equal objective lens size matters.

http://www.lintuvaruste.fi/hinnasto/optiikkaarvostelu/optics_21_Swarovski_ATX_GB.shtml

" and the eyepiece I get most mileage out of, by far, is the 16x. It's super-bright, super-wide, and to be honest I see as much detail through it as I do with either of the other two eyepieces. I love it! I have been blessed with pretty good eyesight for all of my life (so far) and, in my experience with the Leica eyepieces, magnification makes things bigger, but not necessarily clearer. So..."

This makes me think that the Leica scope you have is not a very good sample.

dipped said:

They overlap at 30x and above so assuming equally good specimens the 95 will always be better as it will be brighter and show more resolution due to its larger objective.

Click to expand...

Absolutely right. However, the lowest magnifcation of the 95 is 30x. I personally prefer a lower starting magnification, ideally 20x, but 25x works as well. It's not the field of view I'm concerned about, it's the better depth of field (and the larger field of view) due to the lower magnification. I'm not sure what I'd do.

That aside, there must be some kind of problem with the Leica if the TO sees as much detail at 16x as at 26x. Even the zoom should be absolutely sharp to at least 40x. My Nikon EDIIIA definitely is, and with the zoom I still get more detail at 60x than at 40x. Sounds like his Leica isn't really a very good specimen.

Hermann

mooreorless said:

This makes me think that the Leica scope you have is not a very good sample.

Click to expand...

Well.. maybe I've done my Leica a disservice by overstating the case!

What I should have said was: I'm blessed with very good eyesight and can see almost as much detail in the super-bright, super-wide 16x eyepiece as I can in the zoom at it's maximum magnification, because of the higher magnification's lower brightness and contrast, and it's increased sensitivity to even the slightest movement caused by touch or breeze. The 26x is a good compromise between the two and, yes, I'm sure I could probably discern more detail if I studied hard, but I still finding myself preferring the brightness and wide view of the 16x. That's really what I meant about quality of image over magnification.

When I looked through the ATX-95, as with all other scopes, I was aware of a marked drop in brightness & contrast as I cranked up the magnification. Given the value I place on the very bright, low-mag image, I'm wondering if the ATX-85 will be brighter/better at 25x than the ATX 95 is at 30x?

Al,
Sounds like you must have 20/10 eyesight or better. The 85 has a slightly larger EP 3.4 at 25x compared to the 95 3.2 at 30x. The one down side would be if you ever go somewhere where you need the extra magnification. 60x compared to 70x in the 95. Here is some reviews on the 95. People must of went for the 95 , there was supposed to be one review for the 85 but it was about binoculars.Good luck with what you do!! Steve
http://www.eagleoptics.com/spotting...gled-spotting-scope?tab=customer_reviews#tabs

A lot of my digiscoping is done in the back yard. With the 95mm at the minimum 30x it is sometimes hard to frame the whole bird. It's only a 5x difference but the 85mm at 25x is much more photo friendly at my back yard distance. (That being said, my avatar picture is with a 95mm, looking across a large meadow.)

the 85mm is a pretty darn good "compromise" if you just opt for one objective module.
It's more versatile than the 95mm I think.

But some birders can't get enough of brightness, contrast and magnification,
and the 95mm has its use cases,
no doubt, otherwise Swarovski wouldn't sell it...

Wonder what the sales figures for the different modules look like?
65mm+95mm seem to be a popular combination but
I think the 85mm sells pretty good to.

I don't have any figures, official or otherwise, but from talking to retailers and keeping my eyes open in the field, I'd estimate that in Finland the 95 outsells the 85 by at least 9/1.

But as an answer to Al's question, the jump from 16x to 30x is huge when it comes to field of view, depth of focus, and ease of finding your target. Of these, the last is not a problem once you learn to use the aiming devise for the angled scopes or adopt a cable tie sight. The jump is also pretty huge with respect to detail available. 30x in the ATX 95 is going to look about as good as the 16x in the Leica 62, and give you nearly twice as much detail.

In general I recommend the 95 over the 85, but since you strongly prefer lower magnifications, you really might be better of with the 85. If you get the 95, you will love it much of the time but certainly will also experience frustration over not being able to go to genuinely low magnifications. I'm a high magnification guy, and even I have at times missed the 25x my previous scope had.

Kimmo

Everything I've read on the big Swarovski 95mm indicates it has the most resolution of any current spotter in the world.
Just wish Kowa would offer a 95mm with their superb fluorite lens.
Don't know what Kowa's waiting for; it's way overdue !!!

Sagittarius said:

Everything I've read on the big Swarovski 95mm indicates it has the most resolution of any current spotter in the world.
Just wish Kowa would offer a 95mm with their superb fluorite lens.
Don't know what Kowa's waiting for; it's way overdue !!!

Click to expand...

maybe, but the scopes are getting to heavy….
but sure, it's time for a new Kowa,
beware, swaro…

kabsetz said:

I don't have any figures, official or otherwise, but from talking to retailers and keeping my eyes open in the field, I'd estimate that in Finland the 95 outsells the 85 by at least 9/1.

But as an answer to Al's question, the jump from 16x to 30x is huge when it comes to field of view, depth of focus, and ease of finding your target. Of these, the last is not a problem once you learn to use the aiming devise for the angled scopes or adopt a cable tie sight. The jump is also pretty huge with respect to detail available. 30x in the ATX 95 is going to look about as good as the 16x in the Leica 62, and give you nearly twice as much detail.

In general I recommend the 95 over the 85, but since you strongly prefer lower magnifications, you really might be better of with the 85. If you get the 95, you will love it much of the time but certainly will also experience frustration over not being able to go to genuinely low magnifications. I'm a high magnification guy, and even I have at times missed the 25x my previous scope had.

Kimmo

Click to expand...

Best sold is the 95, but increasingly people buy the 65 objective module with it for light weight travel purposes.
This surprised Swarovski at the beginning as they had put their money (read: production) on the 85.

So its 95 by far, followed 95 & 65 and last the 85 configuration.

Jan

Vespobuteo said:

maybe, but the scopes are getting to heavy….
but sure, it's time for a new Kowa,
beware, swaro…

Click to expand...

The weight of the scope could be compensated with lighter carbon fibre tripod and video head. I tested recently the FLM 58 FT ball head that could be adjusted as a video head, only 4.54 kg++