-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Swaro or Skua stay on case? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter DMKSlater
- Start date
Hi Dave, I´ll get shot down for this, but my answer is - "neither". One of the finest features of the Swaro scope is the handling. Put a case on and you lose this. It interferes with the focusser, makes it difficult to rotate the eyepiece if you need to, and the dangly-bits flap about in the wind, destabilising the scope. It´s waterproof anyway, and built like a tank. If you need to protect it while travelling, you can put it in a padded bag.
DocSarvis
Well-known member
I too would like to find a source for either a genuine Swarovski or a Skua brand stay on case for my Swarovski ST80HD scope. Mine was one of the first imported into the US and the only stay on case available at the time was one made by/for Eagle Optics from whom I purchased the scope new. FWIW, the Eagle Optics case has endured all those years of birding without so much as a rip or broken zipper but after 16 plus years is starting to age. Any assistance in finding a new case is appreciated. The scope itself is still a wonderful instrument that competes favorably with any modern alpha scope save maybe the Kowa. The best part? Mine's paid for 16 years ago!:t:
Doc
Doc
DMKSlater
Well-known member
Try www.warehouseexpress.com for skua cases. Dont know if it would fit the old style though... sorry!
forent
Well-known member
Since I use a screw-in UV filter on the front of my Nikon ED82A I have no need for a lens cap at all. Optimum protection and one piece less to fiddle with. If you choose a high-quality multi-coated UV or protection filter ( e.g. B+W or Heliopan) you won't experience even the slightest degradation in image quality.
Just a thought.
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
Disagree totally! Had a very expensive Hoya for my Swaro 65 HD many years ago and without doubt it affected the focusing and depth of field. I was able to ask someone from Tyrol who said that the quality of a filter would have to match that of the swaro objective and also a compatible focal length to equal the performance of the scope. I took the filter off way before that though. Skua cases - haven't been made for quite a while afaik, certainly unlikely to find a new one for the old grey bodied AT80HD.
forent
Well-known member
Sorry to hear about your problems. I tested my Nikon very carefully with and without the (darn expensive) qB+W MRC UV filter and could not find any difference.
forent
Well-known member
Addendum:
Focal length - maybe that's the clue. As far as I remember Hoya (an excellent optical brand BTW) sold "ghostless" filters years ago with a concave surface to avoid double images caused by reflections. Regular filters (of high quality!) are absolutely plane, their focal lenght is Infinity. Possibly the focal lenght of the ghostless filters was finite and affected the optical formula of the scope.
A while ago I spoke with a Zeiss representative who recommended the absolutely neutral B+W MRC 007 Clear filters for their scopes. (And why should they cut filter threads into their scopes if one could not use good filters - no cheap glass shard - without severe problems.)
Last edited:
Would that be the 67mm for the Diascope 65? Thanks