Life after the ED82… (1 Viewer)

[J@se]

Hi everyone,

I bought a secondhand ED82a with zoom eyepiece approximately 5 years ago for £400 + £300 trade in for my old scope. Given the 82a was discontinued quite a few years ago it’s fair to say it’s reasonably old. However, it has and still does perform superbly. I’ve compared it in the field with various top end scopes and have seen little if any reason to trade up my Nikon for a £2500 new top scope.

So I suppose my question is whether a 12-15 year old scope is still as good as it gets or close enough? Has it been surpassed? My thoughts are it must have but like I say I haven’t seen much evidence. If I were looking to upgrade (the ed82 isn’t perfect) where might I look? And is the Monarch 82a an improvement enough to splash the cash?

All personal opinions are welcome!

 

[Ruff-Leg]

I haven't figured out how to copy BF links elegantly as some do, but if you check this review, your final question will be answered. My experience? Yes!

Monarch 82ED, a Perfect Ten

I recently spent a pleasant few hours evaluating a scope that exceeded my expectations in nearly every way. The Nikon Monarch 82ED has been around for over 2 years now, but it doesn’t seem to have made much of an impression in the market or been much reviewed or discussed in optics forums. A...

www.birdforum.net

 

[Ruff-Leg]

Came out elegantly!

 

[dipped]

If you have a good ED82A and are happy with the narrowish zoom the only reason for change would be to upgrade to a bigger objective eg 95/88 for brighter views and potentially greater resolution.

 

[Tringa45]

By all accounts, most Nikon Fieldscopes were either good or very good, and Kimmo Absetz held on to his ED82A for a long time before he eventually found an excellent example of an ATX95. I think he's still searching for a good ATX115!

 

[sillyak]

Optically, I don't think it is possible to upgrade in the same size class. They are seriously that good. Match, sure, but I have yet to try another scope of the same size that beats my 82a.

The newer scopes certainly have attractive features: bayonet eyepieces, zooms with large AFOV and lots of eye relief, Acra Swiss tripod feet etc.

It would be nice to have a zoom with the same AFOV as the fixed fieldscope eyepieces, but I have no issue with my fixed 38x, and I have the zoom if for some reason I feel the need for more mag.

 

[jring]

Hi,

if one has a cherry example, one should keep to it... finding another cherry is not very probable.
Maybe get the 27/40/50x or 40/60/75x wide field EPs - depending on which zoom you have... the zoom will be widest on its max magnification - probably 50 something degrees afov - so still not too constricting at that setting.

Joachim

 

[Hermann]

if one has a cherry example, one should keep to it... finding another cherry is not very probable.

The Fieldscopes were (and are) pretty good in that respect: We've got five 60mm Fieldscopes in the family, EDII, EDIIA, EDIII and EDIIIA. They're all pretty close in optical performance with very similar star tests.

Maybe get the 27/40/50x or 40/60/75x wide field EPs - depending on which zoom you have...

All the DS eyepieces work beautifully with the Fieldscopes. I've got the 16/24/40x and the 27/40/50x. Excellent eyepieces and very useful for digiscoping as well. Unfortunately all the older WA eyepieces are difficult to find nowadays. They are really, really nice as well.

the zoom will be widest on its max magnification - probably 50 something degrees afov - so still not too constricting at that setting.

Both zooms are over 60 degrees at their highest magnification, so not too bad at all. But 40 degrees at their lowest magnifications ... Plus they don't really work all that well if you wear glasses.

Hermann