-
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.
Monarch 82ED, a Perfect Ten (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter henry link
- Start date
That's a great combo, and one I use most of the time. If you're interested, a PhoneSkope digiscoping adapter fits really well on that eyepiece. Here's what that look like.
Everything has arrived and I've been able to do some limited observation from my balcony.
Image quality is very good, super sharp almost all the way to the edges, no CA in the center. I can see pigeons move their heads at 1500m, make out crows at 4500m and see plane turbines at 30 km + as they come in to land. Construction quality, lens caps and eyepiece are all very satisfactory.
The only gripe I found was that the image has a slight purple tint to it. I get used to it quickly but when I look at something with the naked eye and then through the scope, it's noticable.
I will continue testing from my balcony and test it in the field with waders, geese, etc. this weekend, when I'll also be able to perform star tests (though the weather forecast doesn't suggest favourable conditions).
I'm very happy with my purchase and it's quite unlikely that I'll be returning the scope.
Image quality is very good, super sharp almost all the way to the edges, no CA in the center. I can see pigeons move their heads at 1500m, make out crows at 4500m and see plane turbines at 30 km + as they come in to land. Construction quality, lens caps and eyepiece are all very satisfactory.
The only gripe I found was that the image has a slight purple tint to it. I get used to it quickly but when I look at something with the naked eye and then through the scope, it's noticable.
I will continue testing from my balcony and test it in the field with waders, geese, etc. this weekend, when I'll also be able to perform star tests (though the weather forecast doesn't suggest favourable conditions).
I'm very happy with my purchase and it's quite unlikely that I'll be returning the scope.
I've been able to use the scope in the field today and was amazed once again. It was cloudy so there wasn't that much light but the air was super still, which allowed for nice viewing.
I was able to spot my first Peregrine Falcon slaying its prey. As it sat on the ground at 800m distance, I was able to comfortably identify it at 60x.
One thing that I noticed with the scope was that when I focus in front or behind an object, the very center of the image stayed in focus as I turn the focus away, so that when everything is out of focus, a little spot in the center is in focus, looking sort of hazy, as seen on the attached image.
Does anyone know if this is some sort of optical defect? I didn't find any stains on the outer lens elements.
Thanks
I was able to spot my first Peregrine Falcon slaying its prey. As it sat on the ground at 800m distance, I was able to comfortably identify it at 60x.
One thing that I noticed with the scope was that when I focus in front or behind an object, the very center of the image stayed in focus as I turn the focus away, so that when everything is out of focus, a little spot in the center is in focus, looking sort of hazy, as seen on the attached image.
Does anyone know if this is some sort of optical defect? I didn't find any stains on the outer lens elements.
Thanks
Attachments
BoldenEagle
Well-known member
I had a chance to look through Nikon Monarch 82ED A scope equipped with a 30-60x zoom eyepiece. I had my Kowa 883 next to it so I was able to compare them directly. The first impression in daylight was very sharp, contrasty and bright image; subjectively at least as sharp as Kowa but perhaps with even better contrast. In the evening I looked the Moon with these scopes and the story was the same; at 60x magnification performance was equal as regarding seeing the smallest details on the Moon surface but I would still say that the Nikon had some more contrast. Note that I had the 1.6x extender in my Kowa during the moon viewing but the zoom was set to 60x for a fair comparison. I would like to have seen this Nikon sample with more magnification than 60x as it obviously would go a lot higher without image quality dropping too much and the compare it to the Kowa.
I did a star test using artificial star at a distance about 10 meters and what I was able to see at just 60x magnification, Nikon showed evenly luminated concentric rings on the other side and just a few rings less at the other side of the focus point. There was clearly some astigmatism but not too disturbing amount. So compared to my Kowa, SA was better corrected in Nikon and it also didn't have the vertical prism line as my Kowa but it had slightly more astigmatism.
So overall one good or very good sample of Nikon Monarch 82ED A, as to be expected based on this thread.
Regards, Juhani
I did a star test using artificial star at a distance about 10 meters and what I was able to see at just 60x magnification, Nikon showed evenly luminated concentric rings on the other side and just a few rings less at the other side of the focus point. There was clearly some astigmatism but not too disturbing amount. So compared to my Kowa, SA was better corrected in Nikon and it also didn't have the vertical prism line as my Kowa but it had slightly more astigmatism.
So overall one good or very good sample of Nikon Monarch 82ED A, as to be expected based on this thread.
Regards, Juhani
Hi, got my new Nikon 82eda today (body only) and equipped it with the Baader Hyperion Zoom MklV. Thanks to Henry Link and his great and clear advice everything felt safe and easy to do.
Unfortunately it was rather late in the day here in north Sweden and it also started to rain just as I was ready to try it out but I did manage to make som quick comparisons with my Celestron Regal ED2 80 mm. I’ve always thought that my Celestron scope was quite descent, especially with the BH zoom, when comparing it to scopes like the Vortex Razor 85 mm for instance, but now with the Celestron zoom back on it, it was far from the standard of the new Nikon which has inherited the BH zoom.
Despite the low light and rather poor viewing conditions I could,at max zoom of ~63X, get a sharp picture of a White tailed eagle sitting on a reef about two kilometers away. I could see the typical signs of a sub adult bird and the beek very well. I could even just about make out the eyes of the eagle. With the Celestron at its max of 60X I could still see the eagle and easily identify it due to its size and shape but details beyond that were hard to distinguish. The new scopes ability to gather more light than the Celestron was also significantly better.
I hope we get some better weather during the weekend so I can try the new scope out under better lighting conditions but from what I’ve seen so far I expect it to deliver at a very high standard.
Unfortunately it was rather late in the day here in north Sweden and it also started to rain just as I was ready to try it out but I did manage to make som quick comparisons with my Celestron Regal ED2 80 mm. I’ve always thought that my Celestron scope was quite descent, especially with the BH zoom, when comparing it to scopes like the Vortex Razor 85 mm for instance, but now with the Celestron zoom back on it, it was far from the standard of the new Nikon which has inherited the BH zoom.
Despite the low light and rather poor viewing conditions I could,at max zoom of ~63X, get a sharp picture of a White tailed eagle sitting on a reef about two kilometers away. I could see the typical signs of a sub adult bird and the beek very well. I could even just about make out the eyes of the eagle. With the Celestron at its max of 60X I could still see the eagle and easily identify it due to its size and shape but details beyond that were hard to distinguish. The new scopes ability to gather more light than the Celestron was also significantly better.
I hope we get some better weather during the weekend so I can try the new scope out under better lighting conditions but from what I’ve seen so far I expect it to deliver at a very high standard.
has530
Well-known member
I have a Monarch 82 A and Kowa 883 as well and have done some side by side comparisons and star testing and I have to say I am very impressed by the Nikon. Compared to the 883 it is actually better corrected for SA however the Kowa has better correction of CA. Both stay plenty sharp up past 100x when viewing Saturn and provide a nice contrasty view but the Nikon does show medium LCA off center at that magnification the Kowa does not at these magnifications. I suspect this is thanks to the fluorite crystal objective and the Nikon would outperform a 773 with it's glass objective.
With the Baader zoom the Nikon does show some modest field curvature and some LCA (most apparent at lowest magnifications), however the curvature is eliminated by the MEP-20-60 which also has lower CA. The MEP-38W provides a near perfect view with just a touch of CA at the very field edge. In the field center the two are practically indistinguishable with any eyepiece combo providing similar magnification. Very impressive indeed at just over half the price.
With the Baader zoom the Nikon does show some modest field curvature and some LCA (most apparent at lowest magnifications), however the curvature is eliminated by the MEP-20-60 which also has lower CA. The MEP-38W provides a near perfect view with just a touch of CA at the very field edge. In the field center the two are practically indistinguishable with any eyepiece combo providing similar magnification. Very impressive indeed at just over half the price.
Had excellent viewing conditions today, a clear crisp autumn day with 7 degrees Celsius and almost negligible heat haze. Was able to clearly see details on a radio tower about 45 km away with my Nikon Monarch 82 eda equipped with the Baader Hyperion MK IV zoom at max zoom ~63x. So would be no problem reaching focus at infinity with this zoom as there was still possible to push focus a lot further away.
The White tailed eagle I saw the other day was still in the vicinity sitting in the top of a pine tree about 3 km way. The view of the eagle was, to my eyes, pin sharp at 63x as also the pine branches.
Even though I don’t have a lot of experience with so called alfa scopes I find it hard to believe that they can be a lot better than the 82eda with the BH zoom. (I’ve only briefly looked through Swaros, Zeiss Harpia and Kowa 883. Of these I was quite amazed by the clarity, contrast and colours of the Kowa. The others I of course found sharper than my old Celestron Regal ED2 80 mm but otherwise not that much better than my Celestron scope with the BH zoom.)
If there is one thing that could be even better with my new setup it is sharpness at the edges of the image. It’s still a wide sweat spot, maybe 75% of the image circle. I find it being a little less sharp at the horizontal edges (~70%) than at the vertical edges (~80%) - if that makes sense. The sharpness fall off is like sided though as far as I can see without trying to make any precise measurements (don’t know if and how that can be done). Guess the loss of sharpness at the edges is a trade off for the wide view the BH zoom gives at higher magnification.
Haven’t really checked for colour fringing yet but as an avid wildlife photographer I’ve become quite sensitive to colour fringing so I suppose I would have noticed if it was disturbing in any way, especially today with high contrast scenes.
All in all I couldn’t be happier with my new setup and look forward to using it in the field for many years to come.
The White tailed eagle I saw the other day was still in the vicinity sitting in the top of a pine tree about 3 km way. The view of the eagle was, to my eyes, pin sharp at 63x as also the pine branches.
Even though I don’t have a lot of experience with so called alfa scopes I find it hard to believe that they can be a lot better than the 82eda with the BH zoom. (I’ve only briefly looked through Swaros, Zeiss Harpia and Kowa 883. Of these I was quite amazed by the clarity, contrast and colours of the Kowa. The others I of course found sharper than my old Celestron Regal ED2 80 mm but otherwise not that much better than my Celestron scope with the BH zoom.)
If there is one thing that could be even better with my new setup it is sharpness at the edges of the image. It’s still a wide sweat spot, maybe 75% of the image circle. I find it being a little less sharp at the horizontal edges (~70%) than at the vertical edges (~80%) - if that makes sense. The sharpness fall off is like sided though as far as I can see without trying to make any precise measurements (don’t know if and how that can be done). Guess the loss of sharpness at the edges is a trade off for the wide view the BH zoom gives at higher magnification.
Haven’t really checked for colour fringing yet but as an avid wildlife photographer I’ve become quite sensitive to colour fringing so I suppose I would have noticed if it was disturbing in any way, especially today with high contrast scenes.
All in all I couldn’t be happier with my new setup and look forward to using it in the field for many years to come.
Hermann
Well-known member
You said it, not me ☺️Actually, the Monarch 82ED A is an alpha scope ...
Hermann
I recently helped an old friend acquire his first scope, and was able to check out three samples of the Monarch 82 ED A.
There was both glitter points serving as artificial stars and a USAF glass slide target. First sample was excellent, with very little SA, almost no astigmatism, and very, very little coma. On line pairs, it reached resolution usually reserved for good to excellent samples of the Kowa 88 and up. The second sample was just slightly worse, with a bit of astigmatism, but still an excellent scope compared to average samples of all the alphas.
The third sample was truly superb, with essentially no detectable aberrations with the glitter points and line pairs super clear with fabulous contrast. One of the best images I have seen in a scope. Probably better than the cherry Fieldscope ED 82 A I had before my current Swaro. Sometime in the (not so near) future I will probably have a chance to compare this scope side-by-side with my ATX 95, as my friend bought it.
It would be nice if Nikon would provide a higher-mag eyepiece alternative for the scope. Of those who use astro eyepieces on the Monarch, which ones have you found best or most practical? My friend might become interested in the night sky now that he has a scope.
There was both glitter points serving as artificial stars and a USAF glass slide target. First sample was excellent, with very little SA, almost no astigmatism, and very, very little coma. On line pairs, it reached resolution usually reserved for good to excellent samples of the Kowa 88 and up. The second sample was just slightly worse, with a bit of astigmatism, but still an excellent scope compared to average samples of all the alphas.
The third sample was truly superb, with essentially no detectable aberrations with the glitter points and line pairs super clear with fabulous contrast. One of the best images I have seen in a scope. Probably better than the cherry Fieldscope ED 82 A I had before my current Swaro. Sometime in the (not so near) future I will probably have a chance to compare this scope side-by-side with my ATX 95, as my friend bought it.
It would be nice if Nikon would provide a higher-mag eyepiece alternative for the scope. Of those who use astro eyepieces on the Monarch, which ones have you found best or most practical? My friend might become interested in the night sky now that he has a scope.
henry link
Well-known member
Hi Kimmo.
Looks like you ran into a super cherry like the first Monarch 82 I saw. I could hardly believe my eye's when I star tested it. The "alpha" makers need to figure out what Nikon's secret sauce is.
As for using astro eyepieces, I mentioned back in post #252 that I had discovered that many of my astronomical eyepieces (fixed and zoom) rather mysteriously do not combine well with the Monarch scope, resulting in a serious degradation of the axial resolution and star test results compared to boosting the magnification of the Nikon or Baader zooms with the Zeiss tripler. I have no explanation for why that should be and I'm afraid I haven't done much to follow up investigating it. I'd be interested to hear some reports of astro eyepieces that don't degrade the star-test and resolution of the Monarch.
At this point, from my experience I can only recommend the Baader zoom as an alternative eyepiece to the Nikon zooms. The Baader MK IV is my favorite eyepiece to use with the Monarch due to its excellent correction of lateral color compared to the Nikon zooms.
Henry
Looks like you ran into a super cherry like the first Monarch 82 I saw. I could hardly believe my eye's when I star tested it. The "alpha" makers need to figure out what Nikon's secret sauce is.
As for using astro eyepieces, I mentioned back in post #252 that I had discovered that many of my astronomical eyepieces (fixed and zoom) rather mysteriously do not combine well with the Monarch scope, resulting in a serious degradation of the axial resolution and star test results compared to boosting the magnification of the Nikon or Baader zooms with the Zeiss tripler. I have no explanation for why that should be and I'm afraid I haven't done much to follow up investigating it. I'd be interested to hear some reports of astro eyepieces that don't degrade the star-test and resolution of the Monarch.
At this point, from my experience I can only recommend the Baader zoom as an alternative eyepiece to the Nikon zooms. The Baader MK IV is my favorite eyepiece to use with the Monarch due to its excellent correction of lateral color compared to the Nikon zooms.
Henry
Just a thought, Henry, but could this have something to do with the helical focusser.
It's very easy to correct focus with the 3x12 Zeiss Mono, but when I measured my scopes with a 3,5 mm Nagler the "fine" focusser on the 883 was over-sensitive and the helical focusser on the Swarovski ATM a proverbial pain.
John
It's very easy to correct focus with the 3x12 Zeiss Mono, but when I measured my scopes with a 3,5 mm Nagler the "fine" focusser on the 883 was over-sensitive and the helical focusser on the Swarovski ATM a proverbial pain.
John
henry link
Well-known member
Hi John,
I don't think the scope focuser was making things too difficult at the 80-120x range I was using. At the moment I can't easily repeat those resolution and star tests because so much of my optics testing stuff is in very deep storage at a storage warehouse (meaning I didn't do a very good job of labeling boxes of house contents.)
Henry
I don't think the scope focuser was making things too difficult at the 80-120x range I was using. At the moment I can't easily repeat those resolution and star tests because so much of my optics testing stuff is in very deep storage at a storage warehouse (meaning I didn't do a very good job of labeling boxes of house contents.)
Henry
henry link
Well-known member
It was Tropical Storm Debbie in August. Knocked one of our neighbor's big oak trees onto our house and rendered it uninhabitable probably until next May or June. Happily, no injuries to humans, cats, telescopes or binoculars.
Last edited:
I am looking for a spotting scope for birdwatching, but I have been wondering if the price of Swarowski and Zeiss is reasonable in relation to performance. Then I found this thread and started thinking about whether Nikon's 82 ED-A could be an option. One thing I have noticed is that the Nikon tube has a narrower field of view, whether you use Nikon's own eyepiece or even more so if you choose the Baader Hyperion Universal Zoom Mark IV. Those of you who have experience with the Nikon tube, do you find that the field of view is a limitation? I also wonder how the Nikon eyepiece works if you wear glasses. I saw in another forum a user who firmly advised against the Nikon tube if you wear glasses.
Hermann
Well-known member
Which scope do you mean? The "old" Fieldscope ED82 or the Monarch 82ED? The zoom eyepieces are quite different.
Hermann
4 The Birds1
Well-known member
There isn't a huge difference between the field of view of Nikon Monarch 82 vs Swarovski, provided you choose the Nikon 30-60x wide angle zoom eye piece. The standard 20-60 eye piece is a bit narrower alright
Nikon Monarch 82 with MEP 30-60 eye piece : 35-21 m / 1000 m
(with MEP 20-60 : 37-17 m/1000m)
Swarovski ATX 85 (magnification 25-60) : 41-23 m/1000 m
Swarovski ATX 95 (magnification 30-70) : 35-19 m/ 1000 m
Swarovski ATS 25-50 WA eyepiece 42-27 m/1000m
Swarovski ATS 20-60 x eyepiece 36-20 m/1000m
Zeiss Harpia is considerably wider at low mags, but you have to be prepared to pay the price of having a smaller exit pupil.
Harpia 95 , 23-70 x : 58.8 – 19.5 m/1000m
