Advice on Scope Comparison (1 Viewer)

Leif · Sep 20, 2005

I agree that you really must try for yourself.

I tried the Zeiss zoom and couldn't cope with the distortion at 20x. But I own the Leica + zoom, and dislike the narrow tunnel like view at 20-30x, and would rather have the Zeiss with the distorted and soft edges at 20x. Something mediocre is better than nothing!!!! However I happened to prefer the image quality of the Leica to that from the other scopes (more natural to my eyes), so despite the zoom, I went for it. Oh yes, and it was the cheapest by about £150 at that time. (I have 200 years of Yorkshire heritage.)

One plus point for the Zeiss and Swaro is the ability to use (some) 1.25" astro. eyepieces if you buy the adaptor. So you could do a bit of planet spotting. The Leica can't use astro. eyepieces unless you machine the eyepiece housing and an adaptor yourself.

Leif

scampo · Sep 20, 2005

postcardcv said:
I know you love that Zeiss - but it's not quite as simple a wider fov. I spent a lot of time testing the Zeiss with the zoom and found that the soft edges constantly distracted me from the lovely sharp image in the centre. I was determined to like the Zeiss (after all the good things I'd heard about it), but could not get one with it - I wasn't struck by the wide fov, but by the overall lack of sharpness.

It really is down to personal choice, I'd be very happy with either the Swaro of the Leica, but not so happy with the Zeiss or the Kowa, but I know they are all good scopes.

As for bins with a wide fov, I use 7x42s which to have an excellent fov and stunning edge to edge sharpness. If someone offered me bins with a wider fov that wasn't sharp to the edges I would not swap, but that's just me...

If you do look at the Kowa try the zoom as well as the 30x, it's a good (and very popular) eyepeice, fov isn't everything.

I can't argue with that and would not want to at all - good points all. Yet, in practical usage the other week looking at pec sands at Eyebrook Reservoir, there were three of us at one point using the Zeiss, an older Swaro and a newer Kowa - all with zooms. Now, in those conditions there was no doubt whatever that the extra fov certainly helped in locating those birds and in tracking them in flight. And, as for sharpness, more of the Zeiss view is pin sharp than the other scopes. What Zeiss, I presume, decided to do, is to include a good deal of extra field of view which, although not pin sharp (as is the rest of the Zeiss view - indeed it has been shown to be the sharpest of all) does allow a very good "view" in terms of locating and following birds.

I agree that the Zeiss is not perfect, but what is fundamentally wrong with any and all scopes, zooms most of all, is their narrow field of view. The narrowness all scopes offer limits their usefulness enormously. I can't think of a greater negative than this single issue in terms of practical usage. And yet this is where Zeiss took a brave decision and went for the widest view practically obtainable in any available zoom. I applaud them - their market research showed them what is most needed and they went for it. Let's hope they find a way around the edge issues in a future eyepiece. Who knows? But for now - they deserve praise.

scampo · Sep 20, 2005

iporali said:
Steve,

Thanks again for the comments - it has been a while since we argued about scopes

A lovely response, Ilkka!

I still feel that fov is the single biggest practial weakness of all scopes and applaud Zeiss for taking the bull by the horns and giving us a brilliant zoom/scope combi. They take the flack from some but not those of us in the know, eh...?

(-;

pduxon · Sep 20, 2005

scampo said:
I still feel that fov is the single biggest practial weakness of all scopes

totally agree with you Steve.

Some people prefer the extra FOV and will take the less than perfect edge image others find it distracting and would rather compromise the other way.

I still think that the originator of this thread should try the Nikon ED82 alongside the Swaro, Leica, Zeiss and Kowa. It is by all accounts a fine scope (even Steve agrees!!) and I might add I don't own it so I don't ahve any reason to push it!

scampo · Sep 20, 2005

pduxon said:
totally agree with you Steve.

Some people prefer the extra FOV and will take the less than perfect edge image others find it distracting and would rather compromise the other way.

I still think that the originator of this thread should try the Nikon ED82 alongside the Swaro, Leica, Zeiss and Kowa. It is by all accounts a fine scope (even Steve agrees!!) and I might add I don't own it so I don't ahve any reason to push it!

I always think of that single (but major) practical issue whenever I read people saying things like "utterly brilliant" to describe any scope. No, they're not because they can't be. And if we then add in the frequently present haze... well.

What is always an unfailing delight when using a bright and wide modern scope (Zeiss, Nikon, Leica or whatever...) is when the light is just right (often late afternoon I find) and the image just screams, "Wow!" even if it's a humble lapwing in the view! And, I do think the Nikon has the biggest "Wow!" factor by a small margin (whatever I've said about the Zeiss) because it's colours are so unbelievably faithful to nature.

Leif · Sep 20, 2005

pduxon said:
totally agree with you Steve.

Some people prefer the extra FOV and will take the less than perfect edge image others find it distracting and would rather compromise the other way.

I still think that the originator of this thread should try the Nikon ED82 alongside the Swaro, Leica, Zeiss and Kowa. It is by all accounts a fine scope (even Steve agrees!!) and I might add I don't own it so I don't ahve any reason to push it!

Yes I too think he should try the Nikon. The ones I tried were sharp, with high contrast, in a compact package. But isn't the zoom 25-75x? And there's no eyepiece below 25x? That sounds like a limitation to me.

Leif

nez · Sep 21, 2005

Hi there DCS13

My first choice for digiscoping would be a swarovski ats hd 80 scope conected to a nikon coolpix 4500 absolutely brilliant.My second choice would be the opticron ga ed 80 scope connected to a contax U4r again this scope produces amazing results and at half the cost.I have not tried leica,kowa or zeiss i can imagine all theese are good combinations.

Regards Nez.

pduxon · Sep 21, 2005

Leif said:
Yes I too think he should try the Nikon. The ones I tried were sharp, with high contrast, in a compact package. But isn't the zoom 25-75x? And there's no eyepiece below 25x? That sounds like a limitation to me.

Leif

true. there is a special digiscoping lens which is 25x.

I've seen some good photos taken with the 25x on the old ED78

dcs13 · Sep 23, 2005

Geez--Lots of feedback (which is great, btw). Of course, now two more scopes have been suggested!

Unfortunately, I'm not in a situation to test the scopes side-by-side. I haven't found many places in Maryland (US) that even carry one of these scopes-- much less all of them. I may have an opportunity to check out the Zeiss, but I may be "blind" on the rest. My best hope is that the place I order from has a good return policy.

I was hoping to have a scope next week before I leave for vacation. Perhaps it might be best to put off buying-- or maybe purchase a scope blindly, and test it for a week while I'm away.

postcardcv · Sep 23, 2005

dcs13 said:
Unfortunately, I'm not in a situation to test the scopes side-by-side. I haven't found many places in Maryland (US) that even carry one of these scopes-- much less all of them. I may have an opportunity to check out the Zeiss, but I may be "blind" on the rest. My best hope is that the place I order from has a good return policy.

I you have the opportunity to test the Zeiss then make sure you do. As has been mentioned the only (possible) problem with the Zeiss is the soft edges, but this does in turn give a very wide FOV. If you try the Zeiss and are not put off by the soft edges then buy one, none of the others have such a wide FOV on the zoom. If you like the Zeiss, I doubt you'll be happy with the narrow FOV on any of the others.

If you don't get on with the Zeiss then I'd recommend the Leica, though that is purely my personal preference and I'd never recommend 'buying blind' unless you really have no other choice.

BillboHants · Sep 27, 2005

Swarovsky STS80 HD + 45 (ww)

POP said:
DCs dont mess about get a really great scope the Swarvoski ATS 80HD,with the zoom lens also 20wa and 45 wa unbeatable.
( but really try before buy)
Purch. kit 2 weeks ago, over moon, chanced buying 45 (ww) now, with 30x or 20x poss. for digi. Takes while to get used to 45x, used to Nikon 30wx eyepiece, 60mm Nikon ED Scope 10 years. Used new kit 4 hours solid sea-watch. on Sun. so-so weather, a pleasure to use no trouble with eyes at all, good views Gannets over Solent along IoW, picked up and did'nt lose movement of Skuas all the way up middle of Solent. Can seem you're turning focus wheel for ever, seems very accurate, a gull very slightly infront was spot-on, others only a fraction away were very slightly out. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, go for the top glass, as light went, superb performance kicked in. Watched Barn Owl over distant reeds till 8.30pm no prob. Don't use glasses, but not sure if I prefer eyepiece out or in, with the Contax camera it seems better out. I would recom. the heaviest hernia inducing tripod you can carry, I've got 2 gall. bottle of water hanging underneath, and rock solid stability just starting to get there. Get used to plate, fallen off twice, armour excel. no damage luckily. As a very impatiant digiscoper used Contax camera yesterday to get excellent plummage shots of 2 Peregrins on crane at the old Vosper shipyard. at last lens living up to reputation. I just don't get angled scopes, my neck don't like em anyway. Bank Manager not happy, but I can see him coming a very long way off now. Lastly by the way I don't work for the Swarov company, and as yet have not received my invite to their sup-dupa music stars meet the supermodels charity event coming soon in Monty Carlo. Can't spare Kate any of my horse tranquilisers anyway. Bill Marjeram

scampo · Sep 27, 2005

BillboHants said:
POP said:

DCs dont mess about get a really great scope the Swarvoski ATS 80HD,with the zoom lens also 20wa and 45 wa unbeatable.
( but really try before buy)
Purch. kit 2 weeks ago, over moon, chanced buying 45 (ww) now, with 30x or 20x poss. for digi. Takes while to get used to 45x, used to Nikon 30wx eyepiece, 60mm Nikon ED Scope 10 years. Used new kit 4 hours solid sea-watch. on Sun. so-so weather, a pleasure to use no trouble with eyes at all, good views Gannets over Solent along IoW, picked up and did'nt lose movement of Skuas all the way up middle of Solent. Can seem you're turning focus wheel for ever, seems very accurate, a gull very slightly infront was spot-on, others only a fraction away were very slightly out. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, go for the top glass, as light went, superb performance kicked in. Watched Barn Owl over distant reeds till 8.30pm no prob. Don't use glasses, but not sure if I prefer eyepiece out or in, with the Contax camera it seems better out. I would recom. the heaviest hernia inducing tripod you can carry, I've got 2 gall. bottle of water hanging underneath, and rock solid stability just starting to get there. Get used to plate, fallen off twice, armour excel. no damage luckily. As a very impatiant digiscoper used Contax camera yesterday to get excellent plummage shots of 2 Peregrins on crane at the old Vosper shipyard. at last lens living up to reputation. I just don't get angled scopes, my neck don't like em anyway. Bank Manager not happy, but I can see him coming a very long way off now. Lastly by the way I don't work for the Swarov company, and as yet have not received my invite to their sup-dupa music stars meet the supermodels charity event coming soon in Monty Carlo. Can't spare Kate any of my horse tranquilisers anyway. Bill Marjeram

Click to expand...

Good advice if you're the birder who drives to within a yard of where you're using the scope, maybe. But if you like a walk and a cooler planet ((-... I have the Zeiss 85 + 055/RC2 and really, it's light for its objective size but it's too heavy for lugging far in any kind of comfort. But its zoom - wow.

postcardcv · Sep 28, 2005

scampo said:
Good advice if you're the birder who drives to within a yard of where you're using the scope, maybe. But if you like a walk and a cooler planet ((-... I have the Zeiss 85 + 055/RC2 and really, it's light for its objective size but it's too heavy for lugging far in any kind of comfort. But its zoom - wow.

Personally I don't think any of these big scopes are to much effort to carry (currently using an at80hd, had an APO77 before that). I always take mine out with me along with a Manfrotto tripod and happily carry it miles, I've never noticed teh weight to be a problem - unlike the camera kit on my back...

scampo · Sep 28, 2005

What... carrying several pounds several miles is not a problem. Argh... I must be getting old, then.

(-;

Even walking several miles with my bins lets my neck know about it.

tom24 · Sep 28, 2005

Hillwalkers have a formula re: weight of boots over a distance uphill = equivalent of carrying ??? Sorry i can't remember what it was, but it equates to far more than you'd think.That's why they care about every ounce/gram of all their kit AND it does matter re: scope/tripod weights if you want to enjoy your days out.I used to traipse about with heavy gear and just felt knackered,now try to keep everything light,partly 'cos i have to due to neck injury,but really the lighter the better.

scampo · Sep 28, 2005

tom24 said:
Hillwalkers have a formula re: weight of boots over a distance uphill = equivalent of carrying ??? Sorry i can't remember what it was, but it equates to far more than you'd think.That's why they care about every ounce/gram of all their kit AND it does matter re: scope/tripod weights if you want to enjoy your days out.I used to traipse about with heavy gear and just felt knackered,now try to keep everything light,partly 'cos i have to due to neck injury,but really the lighter the better.

I'm glad to read that, Tom (but sorry to hear about your neck - I can empathise). It is that five letter word "enjoy" that I most agree with. One reason birders and cars go so much together so very often just has to be the weight and bulk of their kit. I have been eyeing the tripod/scope backpack that InFocus sell... but at over £50-00 they need to have another look at what they consider a reasonable profit margin, I reckon!

tom24 · Sep 28, 2005

Yes the price of these scope-pacs (like sos cases ) is a wee bit over priced.Been thinking of trying to make something from an old rucsac.Presently i use an rspb bungee type tripod strap that i've shortened so that it all hangs from my shoulder quite nicely.I've even had someone approach me in a reserve shop 'cos he saw how compact my outfit/way it's carried looked comfy.

scampo · Sep 28, 2005

tom24 said:
Yes the price of these scope-pacs (like sos cases ) is a wee bit over priced.Been thinking of trying to make something from an old rucsac.Presently i use an rspb bungee type tripod strap that i've shortened so that it all hangs from my shoulder quite nicely.I've even had someone approach me in a reserve shop 'cos he saw how compact my outfit/way it's carried looked comfy.

I've been thinking of a bit of DIY myself! It must be possible.

tom24 · Sep 28, 2005

Must be and surely if you use two shoulder straps w/out a 'sail' between them it'll stand better in a wind.I've thought that the scopepacs would be susceptible to catching a breeze.Wonder if this has happened?

postcardcv · Sep 29, 2005

scampo said:
I have been eyeing the tripod/scope backpack that InFocus sell... but at over £50-00 they need to have another look at what they consider a reasonable profit margin, I reckon!

I don't know about In Focus, but I do know that these sell for a similar price all over and the profit magins are not very big. It's a very specific item, not being made in big quantities, so unit cost is high...

tom24 said:
I've thought that the scopepacs would be susceptible to catching a breeze.Wonder if this has happened?

Yes it has. They do indeed catch the wind and it would be recommend to hold onto your scope/tripod in windy conditions.

scampo said:
What... carrying several pounds several miles is not a problem. Argh... I must be getting old, then.

I don't know about that, perhaps I'm just foolish. On a normal birding trip I take bins, scope, tripod and camera kit (about 6kg on my back). Yes I certainly know I'm carrying it, but havng it with me enhances my enjoyment when out. I'd rather lug it about then leave it behind, even if I don't end up using it...

Advice on Scope Comparison (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Steve Campsall

Quacked up Member

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Camera Gear Nikon D300 with 300 2.8 AFS VR lens

Quacked up Member

Member

Super Moderator

Member

Steve Campsall

Super Moderator

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Super Moderator

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread