• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Any reason to get scope not ED (1 Viewer)

dannat

Well-known member
Are there any compelling reasons to get a non-ED spotting scope...i was just looking at the minos md50..i like the lightweight, but i just wonder why you would bother.
 
Money is usually the most compelling reason to stay away from the ED scopes, weight differences are usually not significant AFAIK.

Niels
 
The MD50 has some other issues (not enough ER for the FOV). Compared to say the Nikon ED50 it's chalk and cheese.

ED glass in the objective reduces longitudinal chromatic aberration. They also come along with more modern eyepiece designs that reduce lateral CA. So the view is noticeably better (perceived as "sharper" with cleaner colors).

The more recent, "not-so-cheap", scopes tend to have slightly better though non-ED objective and EPs that control lateral CA better. Older/cheaper scopes with more convention crown glass doublets in the objective have noticeable CA. But with a more recent non-ED high end scope second-hand or closeout you might find a decent bargain.

The biggest problem I've found is once you've used ED scopes and bins it's very different to go back.

Ultimately it's the price/perceived-quality trade-off. Is it good enough for you?
 
I have seen many non-ED scopes while on birding tours in my place. Frankly speaking, identifying on 60x zoom eyepiece with non-ED scope is not pleasant on my eyes and I couldn't identify birds with it because of the bad CA while looking against grey sky or on the surface of a water ...
 
Frankly speaking, identifying on 60x zoom eyepiece with non-ED scope is not pleasant on my eyes and I couldn't identify birds with it because of the bad CA while looking against grey sky or on the surface of a water ...

I've had exactly the same experience & for that reason alone I would nowadays never consider a non-ID scope.
 
I'd rather have a premium, non-ED than a cheap ED. Case in point: I got rid of my Pentax 65ED for a Kowa TSN-2 and didn't regret it for a second. I used the Kowa for quite some time as it was so sharp it would effectively "focus out" a huge majority of any CA (except for digiscoping). That's at medium mags - I rarely go above 40x. You wouldn't want to go much above 30x on a 50mm anyway.

It's also good to have a "beater" if you're going to be traveling and need something small/light to have as a secondary activity.
 
I rarely go above 40x. You wouldn't want to go much above 30x on a 50mm anyway.

Hehehe my Nikon ED50 on max 40x zoom eyepiece is sharp and without CA except the FOV is narrow ;)

That's my main birding tool now while leading bird groups here because it is light and easy to carry. The big Nikon ED82 with DS30x eyepiece mainly for digiscoping :king:
 
Last edited:
I'd rather have a premium, non-ED than a cheap ED. Case in point: I got rid of my Pentax 65ED for a Kowa TSN-2 and didn't regret it for a second. I used the Kowa for quite some time as it was so sharp it would effectively "focus out" a huge majority of any CA (except for digiscoping). That's at medium mags - I rarely go above 40x. You wouldn't want to go much above 30x on a 50mm anyway.

It's also good to have a "beater" if you're going to be traveling and need something small/light to have as a secondary activity.

Thats one idea I was trying to get over in my post above: the "good" non-ED scopes tend to use different glass from "yer basic" crown and flint doublet objective glasses. They aren't extra-low dispersion but they are low dispersion crowns and better than "pretty ordinary" objectives. I've used one which whilst a good beginners scope you could choose your "color bias" by changing the focus.

That said the PF-65ED isn't a bad scope but the TSN-2 is a 77mm and was always considered a very good scope (a step up) when it was released. And even that scope was considered better by many by the non-ED Swaro ST-80. The PF65 also depends on what EP you had with it. A nice lanthanum EP (either astro or the XW series) makes a big difference to the view.

Finally current less expensive ED scopes are certainly in the quite good category. I suspect this is the next area for the Chinese optics makes to make an effort in improving their designs. The current ones (I've seen) aren't there yet.
 
I'd rather have a premium, non-ED than a cheap ED. Case in point: I got rid of my Pentax 65ED for a Kowa TSN-2 and didn't regret it for a second. I used the Kowa for quite some time as it was so sharp it would effectively "focus out" a huge majority of any CA (except for digiscoping). That's at medium mags - I rarely go above 40x. You wouldn't want to go much above 30x on a 50mm anyway.

It's also good to have a "beater" if you're going to be traveling and need something small/light to have as a secondary activity.

I think that all comes down to individual testing of the exact two scopes in question. I still feel good about my response above: would you turn down a switch to a TSN-4 except for the cost involved? If talking same size and manufacturer, then the main drawback of the ED version will be cost.

Niels
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top