-
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.
Leica Ultravids (thread contains a variety of topics, optic reviews & other binos) (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Chas4045
- Start date
- Status
Thanks Scampo, I agree, that this text is very much biased against Nikon. From the pictures I have seen the new type sure looks very compact. I own the 60mmED III mainly as a travel scope while I use a 77mm Apo Leica when weight is not so important.
My Nikon did have a problem with the objective lens cap. It came off often during use and I finally lost it somwhere in the field. I have since replaced it by one from a Pentax 300mm tele lens. My main gripe with the handy little Nikon is the zoom lens. I still have the old version of the 20-45x that is not fully multi coated. Does anyone have any comparative experience with the various Nikon zooms? (Well, I am afraid this is the wrong thread, I may have to start one in the scope section.) I am debating about getting one of the newer ones. On the other hand, I once compared the old and the new Leica 20-60x zooms and I could not find any difference.
My Nikon did have a problem with the objective lens cap. It came off often during use and I finally lost it somwhere in the field. I have since replaced it by one from a Pentax 300mm tele lens. My main gripe with the handy little Nikon is the zoom lens. I still have the old version of the 20-45x that is not fully multi coated. Does anyone have any comparative experience with the various Nikon zooms? (Well, I am afraid this is the wrong thread, I may have to start one in the scope section.) I am debating about getting one of the newer ones. On the other hand, I once compared the old and the new Leica 20-60x zooms and I could not find any difference.
Edward woodwood
Member
dont read what those divs write people
I long ago stopped reading both popular non-sub birding mags
the optics reviews aren't worth the paper they're written on and don't get me started on the book reviews......
I don't have a Nikon scope (so could be considered objective) but I'm pretty sure the optics are damn fine if not the best!
I long ago stopped reading both popular non-sub birding mags
the optics reviews aren't worth the paper they're written on and don't get me started on the book reviews......
I don't have a Nikon scope (so could be considered objective) but I'm pretty sure the optics are damn fine if not the best!
william j clive
Well-known member
Birdwatching's anti-Nikon bias.
Succintly put by both Leif and Scampo.
I rest my case ;o)
Succintly put by both Leif and Scampo.
I rest my case ;o)
scampo
Steve Campsall
Swissboy said:
Robert
The Nikon MCII zoom eyepiece is a new design (Nikon say it was created for the ED82, on which it is 25-75x, but on your scope it would be 20-60x owing to its different focal length). Unlike the old lens it is waterproof and multicoated. The views through it are excellent but the field of view, like all zooms, is restricted compared to the 30xW I also use. My son uses a Swarovski 65ED and its zoom is probably the best there is yet in almost every respect the Nikon is clearly its equal - the only exception is that the Swaro zoom does have a slightly wider field of view; but then the Nikon goes up to 75x - you win some, you lose some.
Last edited:
Steve
That's an interesting combination you have, Nikon plus Swarovski to compare! So you think I would definitely upgrade my ED III with a new ocular lens. I was debating whether I should try to sell the Nikon and get one of the other small scopes assuming that they ought to be another generation ahead. Meanwhile, I discovered the Alula test (the first one I saw that had the Nikon scope included) which convinced me to explore another route by upgrading the ocular side only. I must say that in 1999 I had my Nikon along on a trip to Ecuador, and a friend had his Leica Apo 77 along. We tried to identify a raptor under very difficult light conditions (a mix of mist and looking against the light). And under those conditions I felt that my scope had performed poorly compared to the Leica. That was the reason I considered a change in the long run. (At the time Nikon was the only top end manufacturer of small scopes.)
And now there is the question of 20-60x vs the one that goes only to 45x (which I think is enough for a 60 mm objective diameter).
Robert/Swissboy
That's an interesting combination you have, Nikon plus Swarovski to compare! So you think I would definitely upgrade my ED III with a new ocular lens. I was debating whether I should try to sell the Nikon and get one of the other small scopes assuming that they ought to be another generation ahead. Meanwhile, I discovered the Alula test (the first one I saw that had the Nikon scope included) which convinced me to explore another route by upgrading the ocular side only. I must say that in 1999 I had my Nikon along on a trip to Ecuador, and a friend had his Leica Apo 77 along. We tried to identify a raptor under very difficult light conditions (a mix of mist and looking against the light). And under those conditions I felt that my scope had performed poorly compared to the Leica. That was the reason I considered a change in the long run. (At the time Nikon was the only top end manufacturer of small scopes.)
And now there is the question of 20-60x vs the one that goes only to 45x (which I think is enough for a 60 mm objective diameter).
Robert/Swissboy
Edward woodwood
Member
and at the end of the day how much difference does it make if you got new Swarovski's or old Zeiss? A massive Leica or a small Nikon.....will you find more birds or ID more birds? Seems to be coming a bit of an obsession.
People will begin to talk: big scope....small......
some of the best birders use old kit, sometimes very old kit!
People will begin to talk: big scope....small......
some of the best birders use old kit, sometimes very old kit!
Jane Turner
Well-known member
I think there is some difference... I have trouble using my old bins...which are dotted about the house.... perhaps its just a habituation thing in that with a few hours use I'd redjust to the slight milkiness and rolling edges of my old Dialyts.
As I said somewhere else.... today...I think its scopes that have changed most. I still have my old Heutle and its really only useful for repelling scallies at the gate
........Big scope....small..... turning circle
As I said somewhere else.... today...I think its scopes that have changed most. I still have my old Heutle and its really only useful for repelling scallies at the gate
........Big scope....small..... turning circle
A very interesting thread but it's now well past 100 posts, this makes it very unwieldly for many people to navigate. Any chance of winding it up over the next few days....Please start a new thread if you wish.
Regards,
Andy.
Regards,
Andy.
Tim Allwood said:
You are certainly correct on this one, but then we all have our special emphasis within the hobby. Or maybe more correctly, a hobby within the hobby. I could list more of these for myself, and they are less costly than the one we are discussing here.
scampo
Steve Campsall
Tim Allwood said:and at the end of the day how much difference does it make if you got new Swarovski's or old Zeiss? A massive Leica or a small Nikon.....will you find more birds or ID more birds? Seems to be coming a bit of an obsession.
People will begin to talk: big scope....small......
some of the best birders use old kit, sometimes very old kit!
"Obsessed"? I can see why you make such a comment but I think you'll agree that you're being too general and maybe even unfair. I used "old" kit for decades until this year when owing to having some money left to me in my mother's will, I bought some new kit as an enduring reminder of her. In the same way, my son bought his first scope - the Swarovski.
Robert's thoughts are entirely sensible and valid - the old Nikon zoom did not perform well even though the EDIII is still a superb small scope. The new 20-60x / 25-75x zoom is a different design and might be the best option for him.
And when you talk of "old kit", the most frequent I see about is Kowa's TSN 1 - 4, and that was mightily expensive when it was first purchased. Who now uses a draw tube Optolyth, I wonder - once the bee's knees? I haven't seen one in years.
Last edited:
Edward woodwood
Member
yes, I'm usually general and often unfair Scampo - no complaints there! o
I've got nice newish Nikon bins that perform as well as any Leicas and Swaro's but I still find myself taking out my old Zeiss 7 x 42 dialyts these days. The field of view, light gathering, construction and resolution are just incredible. They've been all over the world, deserts, mountains, rainforest with not a single problem
And recent talk of Optolyth Alpins and Zeiss Jenoptem 8 x 30s made me think. These are seriosly old kit but still perform well enough and strangely are lighter than todays bins!
I've got nice newish Nikon bins that perform as well as any Leicas and Swaro's but I still find myself taking out my old Zeiss 7 x 42 dialyts these days. The field of view, light gathering, construction and resolution are just incredible. They've been all over the world, deserts, mountains, rainforest with not a single problem
And recent talk of Optolyth Alpins and Zeiss Jenoptem 8 x 30s made me think. These are seriosly old kit but still perform well enough and strangely are lighter than todays bins!
Edward woodwood
Member
scampo said:
Why, BB of course Scampo! and Birding World is pretty damn fine at times too, once you get past the recent sightings stuff.
...and the New Musical Express and Private Eye on a religous basis
If you're after entertainment though the UK 400 club mag is worth a punt
and marginally better than HELLO!
scampo
Steve Campsall
Tim Allwood said:Why, BB of course Scampo! and Birding World is pretty damn fine at times too, once you get past the recent sightings stuff.
...and the New Musical Express and Private Eye on a religous basis
If you're after entertainment though the UK 400 club mag is worth a punt
NME died a while back, didn't it, Tim? I notice an NME "annual" in the shops, though. Melody Maker was far superior
Edward woodwood
Member
Scampo!
that's almost a heresy!
BB is British Birds
NME is still going strong
that's almost a heresy!
BB is British Birds
NME is still going strong
- Status
Similar threads
