Zoom or Wide Angle??? (1 Viewer)

scampo · Jan 18, 2004

Being a land-locked Midlander, I have to admit to being pretty useless at identifying birds flying by at 1/2 mile and more distances.

I am always in awe of the experienced sea watchers at Titchwell and Cley who, when I am watching a genuine lbj, shout out helpfully: "Surf Scoter just ahead of those three mergansers"...

Bluetail · Jan 18, 2004

scampo said:
I am always in awe of the experienced sea watchers at Titchwell and Cley who, when I am watching a genuine lbj, shout out helpfully: "Surf Scoter just ahead of those three mergansers"...

Me too. My first ever seawatch was a St Ives classic. I was taken down there by a well-experienced old stager. He did all his scanning with bins. He'd spot a tiny dot coming into view round Godrevy lighthouse (about five miles up the coast) and shout "Pom!" or whatever. We'd all latch onto the bird until it passed under right our noses. He was always right! Said he did it on flight action.

Jason

KC Foggin · Jan 19, 2004

scampo said:
Go for the two, KC when you get your Nikon ED82 - the Nikon eyepieces are true beauties. In admittedly good winter light this morning the sharpness, clarity and brightness of view offered by both the 30xW and 25-75x zoom was genuinely a delight to see.

Uh... slight change of plans here Steve. I am now the owner of a Swaro ATS 80 HD. I am loving it to death too.

Dave Sherry · Jan 19, 2004

Bluetail said:
... He was always right! Said he did it on flight action.

Jason

My God! How good are these people? These birds are really specs at that distance.

Dave :eek!:

scampo · Jan 19, 2004

KCFoggin said:
Uh... slight change of plans here Steve. I am now the owner of a Swaro ATS 80 HD. I am loving it to death too.

I'm sure you like it a lot, K.C.; you must reserve your love for people!

(-:

Ah - to live a life where money is no object...

Swissboy · Jan 19, 2004

scampo said:
The wide angle fixed lens provides a much wider field of view that is also brighter owing to the smaller amount of glass the light travels through. Modern zooms such as the new Nikon, etc. are very bright however - owing to glass coating techniques, I suppose.

I think that many birders would get quite a surprise if they put a 30xW on their scopes having never looked through anything but a zoom. Must be a big market out there for the suppliers to exploit!

OK Steve, you sound like a optics rep! It is certainly true that the light has to go through more glass in a zoom lens, but to me that difference is not really very noticeable when I look through one of the top scopes. I guess our eyes compensate to a degree. Which means the benefit should be most noticeable in dim light. In fact, when I put on my 32x wideangle for the first time, I was rather disappointed. Of course, I had forgotten that it was 32x and not 20x, the power I usually start with when the zoom lens is attached.

Swissboy · Jan 19, 2004

Tim Allwood said:
Plus there's that horrible tunnelling effect

That tunnelling view sure is a problem. But it seems to be more so on the small scopes. At least, it bothers me much more on my small Nikon than on my large Leica scope. The insufficient eye relief adds to the problem as well. Thus, part of the difference may be due to a difference in the optics of the two brands.

I tested the Nikon 20-60x (on my ED III) which I got a few days ago, and I had considerable problems pointing the scope at the objects. I hope I'll get better with practice, but it is certainly easier with a wider field of view.

scampo · Jan 20, 2004

Swissboy said:
OK Steve, you sound like an optics rep... In fact, when I put on my 32x wideangle for the first time, I was rather disappointed. Of course, I had forgotten that it was 32x and not 20x, the power I usually start with when the zoom lens is attached.

Once a salesman always a salesman, I suppose, Robert. Before teaching English, I was in sales and marketing for far too long for it to leave my system!

Your experience with the 32x lens differs markedly from my own. When I put on the 30x wide at a dealers in Norfolk I was immediately sold on it - it gave such a wonderfully sharp and wide image.

The Nikon zoom does not produce as wide a field of view as the Swaro or Leica, but what it does give is an exceptionally bright, pin-sharp edge to edge image with no feeling, to me, of a "tunnelling" effect at all. When I use my son's Swaro 65 with its zoom, the visual effect produced is very similar except a touch wider. I certainly don't feel I am missing anything important with the Nikon and the gain in brightness is, to me, far more valuable. Needless to say, the Swaro 65 was near the top of my short list when I changed scopes (it's the same price as the Nikon over here) but I eventually went for the Nikon because it offers similar compactness of length but with far better light gathering ability - and a sometimes very useful top magnification of 75x.

I have been lucky to try several top-make zooms over the past year or two and I feel convinced that none of them is the ideal eyepiece for initial scanning, say at sea, on a shoreline or a lake's edge. For me, the wide angle is best for this assuming the binos are not powerful enough owing to distance. That said, for many years my scope was a Kowa with its wonderful 20xW so it's entirely possible that I have grown so accustomed to such a wide view, my brain will not let me adjust to the narrower field offered by a zoom.

But... when a zoom is needed - such as when I was looking at a pair of distant peregrines a few days ago - it really does come into its own at 75x.

Jane Turner · Jan 20, 2004

for me its easy...wide angle every time. With a wide bright image my eyes can do the resolving of fine detail... but I mostly use my scope for seawatching or on a shoulder pod for birds in flight...so field of view is the most important factor

scampo · Jan 20, 2004

It's odd, Jane - I switched scopes partly because of my son having a zoom on his scope - and I thought how useful it would be (and I couldn't get a zoom for my Kowa) - and yet now I still find myself still using the wide angle a good deal.

Swissboy · Jan 20, 2004

scampo said:
The Nikon zoom does not produce as wide a field of view as the Swaro or Leica, but what it does give is an exceptionally bright, pin-sharp edge to edge image with no feeling, to me, of a "tunnelling" effect at all.

That said, for many years my scope was a Kowa with its wonderful 20xW so it's entirely possible that I have grown so accustomed to such a wide view, my brain will not let me adjust to the narrower field offered by a zoom.

But... when a zoom is needed - such as when I was looking at a pair of distant peregrines a few days ago - it really does come into its own at 75x.

My first eyepiece for my Leica was a 20x wide angle. I still have it, but it has probably not seen more use than about once, after I received my zoom. That is going to be different with the 32x, but overall, it is still mostly the zoom that is on. I would not have been able to identify the five Bewick's swans this past weekend without that zoom. Had to go up to about 55x.

As for the new Nikon zoom on the small scope, I fully agree with your quality assessment, Steve! We had a flock of siskins on a downed birch tree, gorging themselves with birch seeds. And that Nikon zoom really gave that pin-sharp picture you keep telling us all. It was truly delightful. But I did have trouble aiming my (straight) scope at a particular bird because of that rather narrow field of view.

simple · Jan 20, 2004

hey loads of votes for the wide angle lenses but 20-60x zoom every time for me, zooms have come along way and if you have a zoom that can close focus on 60x thats awesome for getting in amongst feather tracts and stuff

scampo · Jan 20, 2004

Point taken about the zoom... I won't mention it again, Robert. You'll have to read some of my other postings (-:

I had a 20x for quite a few years and was quite happy with it, but the 30x has always proved the best compromise.

I haven't seen a siskin yet this year - Sempach is a bit far for twitching, but I'll give it some deep thought. I'd rarely use my scope for a bird like that, though.

scampo · Jan 20, 2004

simple said:
hey loads of votes for the wide angle lenses but 20-60x zoom every time for me, zooms have come along way and if you have a zoom that can close focus on 60x thats awesome for getting in amongst feather tracts and stuff

You're right about the improved quality - but try a 30x wide for size sometime and see what you think.

Swissboy · Jan 20, 2004

scampo said:
Point taken about the zoom... I won't mention it again, Robert. You'll have to read some of my other postings (-:

I had a 20x for quite a few years and was quite happy with it, but the 30x has always proved the best compromise.

I haven't seen a siskin yet this year - Sempach is a bit far for twitching, but I'll give it some deep thought. I'd rarely use my scope for a bird like that, though.

In this case, the observations were about a two hours' drive from Sempach, on the lake of Constance. We don't have any really exciting areas nearby. :C

As for the "point taken", it was not meant that way! So don't go to the other extreme.

pduxon · Jan 20, 2004

I've currently got the 32 wide angle on my ES80 and its certainly a little brighter than the zoom. Not really sure what I prefer, both have there uses.

scampo · Jan 20, 2004

Swissboy said:
...As for the "point taken", it was not meant that way! So don't go to the other extreme.

No - I shall never mention again what an incredibly bright, clear, sharp edge-to-edge view the Nikon eyepieces give. Promise. Scout's honour.

BTW anywhere in Switzerland must surely offer more birds than central England, I should think! The raptors in the mountains - wow.

scampo · Jan 20, 2004

pduxon said:
I've currently got the 32 wide angle on my ES80 and its certainly a little brighter than the zoom. Not really sure what I prefer, both have there uses.

Must be a far wider view, though, Pete? The ES80 + 32x wide is famed for its qualities.

Dave Sherry · Jan 21, 2004

Thanks very much everybody for your replies. There is lots for me to think about here and I certainly will do some trying out first, but I think a good second hand 30x ww might just enter the Sherrington birding bag! I take the point that a zoom has its uses, and I have been very happy with the one I have (up to a couple of weeks ago anyway). But I surely will not be part-exchanging it.

Thanks again,

Dave.

Swissboy · Jan 21, 2004

scampo said:
BTW anywhere in Switzerland must surely offer more birds than central England, I should think! The raptors in the mountains - wow.

Unfortunately, raptors don't really come in greater number here than most places. The newly reintroduced bearded vulture, however, is sure worth a visit to the alps! But most of the time, a scope is a must! [I know, this species is still mostly called lammergeier in the English usage. This name (in German) implies that this vulture eats lambs, i.e. hunts them. Therefore, we try to get rid of the German name (and English name as well) which might again threaten the survival of this magnificient bird.]

Zoom or Wide Angle??? (1 Viewer)

Steve Campsall

Senior Moment

Very, very long time member

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Sempach, Switzerland

Sempach, Switzerland

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Sempach, Switzerland

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Steve Campsall

Sempach, Switzerland

Quacked up Member

Steve Campsall

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Sempach, Switzerland

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread