Paul Jarvis
Registered Member
Pyrtle
Now that you've tried the 883. How would you say it compared with your swaro?
Paul
Now that you've tried the 883. How would you say it compared with your swaro?
Paul
-
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.
New Kowa Scopes? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter royharv
- Start date
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
Paul Jarvis said:
Honestly I have to say that the optical image is better throughout the range of testing I did; and I would expect it to be, purely on light gathering ability and the design of the lens together with an improved coating.The upside of the Kowa image were the true colours (similar to Nikon ED82)/ crispness of the subject in the centre of image....I did find a slight fall of towards the edge of the image as the light faded around 1550 hrs, but this has never bothered me. Other factors were pretty equal to my Swaro'kit. I felt the focusing system was easy to use but a very slight bit of take up before it moved. I am now used to barrel focusing but occassionally overrun when focusing with my SW' - this didn't happen with the Kowa - the image just "punched in". Haven't had the correct condition for "c/a", flaring or colour fringing but I would expect it to be extremely low when looked for by an observer.
Still sticking with the Swarovski though.
Just a technical question. Kimmo Absetz said above that the new 88 mm Kowa has a 10% aperture advantage over the 80 mm Swarovski. Intuitively, however, the light-gathering ability of a lens is directly proportional to the area (and not the diameter) of that lens. This way we get (44 x 44)/(40 x 40) = 1.21 , i.e. the new Kowa is 21% brighter than Swaro (on the assumption of equal transmission). Which is right?
Heikki
Heikki
Hi Heikki,
And welcome to BF :t:
I think we have two different points here:
1) You are right: light gathering is proportional to the area. However, if the eye iris is smaller than the exit pupil (which it often is in the daylight), you do not always see this "increased" brightness.
2) Maximal theoretical resolution (diffraction limit) of the scope is directly proportional to the diameter of the objective lens. In this case a 88mm scope would resolve 10% more than a 80mm scope.
I assume with Kimmo's 10%, he was referring to how much a viewer with perfect visual acuity would approximately benefit (in terms of resolvable details) with a 88 mm scope compared to J. Meijerink's very good Kowa 823 sample (maximal usable power = 80x).
Best regards,
Ilkka
And welcome to BF :t:
I think we have two different points here:
1) You are right: light gathering is proportional to the area. However, if the eye iris is smaller than the exit pupil (which it often is in the daylight), you do not always see this "increased" brightness.
2) Maximal theoretical resolution (diffraction limit) of the scope is directly proportional to the diameter of the objective lens. In this case a 88mm scope would resolve 10% more than a 80mm scope.
I assume with Kimmo's 10%, he was referring to how much a viewer with perfect visual acuity would approximately benefit (in terms of resolvable details) with a 88 mm scope compared to J. Meijerink's very good Kowa 823 sample (maximal usable power = 80x).
Best regards,
Ilkka
OK, that makes things clear. Thanks Ilkka.
I am planning to buy a new scope but before deciding I am going to wait for Kimmo's forthcoming review in Alula. As it happens I have a friend who visits Japan often on business trips, so a new 883 could just be within my budget although the custom taxes mean a nasty +27% in addition to japanese prices.
Heikki
I am planning to buy a new scope but before deciding I am going to wait for Kimmo's forthcoming review in Alula. As it happens I have a friend who visits Japan often on business trips, so a new 883 could just be within my budget although the custom taxes mean a nasty +27% in addition to japanese prices.
Heikki
BirdWatcher
Well-known member
I just this morning ordered one of the new KOWA TSN-884 straight 88mm Prominar spotting scopes .. along with a KOWA 88mm 20x-60x Zoom Eyepiece
I found both items in stock online at Eagle Optics. They are selling the 884/883 scope body for $1,999 and the 88mm Zoom Eyepiece for $499
The KOWA stay-on, waterproof, zipper field case for this model will retail at $60 but I cannot find it in stock anywhere.
I eMailed Eagle Optics before ordering to confirm the items' current availability and they are, indeed, in stock (except for the field case)
Their Next Day Air shipping was reasonable at $38 or you can get free UPS Ground shipping
I already own a KOWA TSN-824 straight scope with 20-60x Zoom Eyepiece as well as a Swarovski ATS-80 HD angled scope with 20-60x Zoom Eyepiece, so it will be fun to compare these 3 scopes out in the field this weekend, especially now that hawkwatching courtship activity is picking up, the owls are nesting, red foxes are courtship hunting in pairs (parallel tracks), Northern Harriers are quartering/hunting in my meadow, American Kestrals are hunting from the overhead utility wires and poletops, and other wintertime nature activities are taking place.
I will also try my luck with DigiScoping using this new KOWA scope and some of my digital cameras.
While browsing online, I also found a few tripod accessories worth mentioning here...
I use a Bogen/Manfretto Wilderness Tracker Tripod with pan & tilt fluid head and Quick Release system.
An annoying problem with the Quick Release(QR) system is that the QR plates on your gear can loosen, causing wobbling. Bogen has come out with a solution, an attachment for your QR tripod which prevents the QR plates from loosening & wobbling. $52 at Eagle Optics.. check it out at their website or do a Google Search.
I also ordred a set of 3 sand/snow shoes for my tripod, which should make it easier to use the tripod here in the snow while hawkwatching.
And while I was shopping there, I also picked up 3 extra 1/4" screw QR plates to have handy.
After putting in some time trying out my new KOWA TSN-884 straight 88mm Prominar scope, I will let you know what I think.
Cannot wait to see the view - especially at 60x full zoom, see how much wider the field of view is using the wider diameter new eyepieces, try out the 2-knob coarse & fine internal focusing system, evaluate the improvement using the C3 coatings, see the brighter view from the larger diameter 88mm objective.
Also, the magnesium alloy body and a more compact shape at 13.5" long. Weight is 53.6oz which is close to what my longer, polycarbonate body KOWA TSN-824 scope weighs.
I'll find out tomorrow!
I found both items in stock online at Eagle Optics. They are selling the 884/883 scope body for $1,999 and the 88mm Zoom Eyepiece for $499
The KOWA stay-on, waterproof, zipper field case for this model will retail at $60 but I cannot find it in stock anywhere.
I eMailed Eagle Optics before ordering to confirm the items' current availability and they are, indeed, in stock (except for the field case)
Their Next Day Air shipping was reasonable at $38 or you can get free UPS Ground shipping
I already own a KOWA TSN-824 straight scope with 20-60x Zoom Eyepiece as well as a Swarovski ATS-80 HD angled scope with 20-60x Zoom Eyepiece, so it will be fun to compare these 3 scopes out in the field this weekend, especially now that hawkwatching courtship activity is picking up, the owls are nesting, red foxes are courtship hunting in pairs (parallel tracks), Northern Harriers are quartering/hunting in my meadow, American Kestrals are hunting from the overhead utility wires and poletops, and other wintertime nature activities are taking place.
I will also try my luck with DigiScoping using this new KOWA scope and some of my digital cameras.
While browsing online, I also found a few tripod accessories worth mentioning here...
I use a Bogen/Manfretto Wilderness Tracker Tripod with pan & tilt fluid head and Quick Release system.
An annoying problem with the Quick Release(QR) system is that the QR plates on your gear can loosen, causing wobbling. Bogen has come out with a solution, an attachment for your QR tripod which prevents the QR plates from loosening & wobbling. $52 at Eagle Optics.. check it out at their website or do a Google Search.
I also ordred a set of 3 sand/snow shoes for my tripod, which should make it easier to use the tripod here in the snow while hawkwatching.
And while I was shopping there, I also picked up 3 extra 1/4" screw QR plates to have handy.
After putting in some time trying out my new KOWA TSN-884 straight 88mm Prominar scope, I will let you know what I think.
Cannot wait to see the view - especially at 60x full zoom, see how much wider the field of view is using the wider diameter new eyepieces, try out the 2-knob coarse & fine internal focusing system, evaluate the improvement using the C3 coatings, see the brighter view from the larger diameter 88mm objective.
Also, the magnesium alloy body and a more compact shape at 13.5" long. Weight is 53.6oz which is close to what my longer, polycarbonate body KOWA TSN-824 scope weighs.
I'll find out tomorrow!
Paul Jarvis
Registered Member
I will look forward to hear what you think about the 884 compared to the other two and don't forget to post some digiscoped shots from it either.
regards
Paul
regards
Paul
Imaxfli,
You got it right about the model numbers. For Kowa, even last digits means straight body and odd the angled, while xx1/2 are achromat objectives and xx3/4 ED or Fluorite objectives.
For brief posts without quotes, use the Quick Reply window below the last post of a thread. That way you don't include unnecessary text masses, and don't have to delete anything.
Kimmo
You got it right about the model numbers. For Kowa, even last digits means straight body and odd the angled, while xx1/2 are achromat objectives and xx3/4 ED or Fluorite objectives.
For brief posts without quotes, use the Quick Reply window below the last post of a thread. That way you don't include unnecessary text masses, and don't have to delete anything.
Kimmo
John Cantelo
Well-known member
I'm always impressed by the level technical knowledge exhibited by posters to the BF optics fora (particularly Kimmo & Henry Link) and no less so in this debate. However, I am mildly amused by such a voluminous commentary about a scope that so many posters (however worthy) have no direct or at best only passing knowledge of in the field! Yes it does look the part and seems to walk the walk from my quick peek in Norfolk recently, BUT how I hunger from a detailed user report from someone who's actually used it, say, on a dirty dull day to watch harriers floating in to roost!
John
John
Steve Jones
Well-known member
....spot on. Thread now 93 posts long, and still with no real content posted to help would be buyers.John Cantelo said:
First impression 77mm Fluorite model
Despite the complaints above, I'll add my limited impressions here, as these are still better than nothing.
Well, today I finally had a chance to look through the much touted new Fluorite Kowa myself. It was the 77 mm model. The good thing was that it was standing in line with almost all the other top scopes, such as both APO Leicas, the smaller HD Swaro, the smaller Zeiss plus two new Nikon RA IIIs. The bad thing, however, was the cramped conditions with the scopes aimed through a large closed window. As I own a Leica APO77 myself, I was mostly interested to compare this model with the Kowa of the same objective diameter. Conveniently, the two were standing right next to each other. So I concentrated myself mostly on these two, giving the others only a rather cursory "glance". Also, from the set-up it was basically a comparison limited to objects not farther that about 15 meters. All the models had the zoom eyepiece mounted.
OK, Paul Jarvis raved about the Kowa, and I think I should say he is right at least to a very substantial degree! The Kowa is definitely brighter than all the others. And the same holds for the sharpness. Sure, there was nothing one would not have detected with the other scopes, but that special crispness of the view really struck me. The pictures of the other top scopes that I concentrated on, the Leica APO77 and to some degree the Swaro 65HD were lacking that special fire, e.g. in the sunlit snow , but they were also duller when looking at mosses and wood that were in the shade. (There were no birds around.) It was particularly in those fine structures of the mosses that the Kowa outdid the others. That should at least translate 1 : 1 to close birds.
However, there was also a downside on the Kowa. It seems to have an extremely narrow depth of field. Even at the lowest mag I always had to refocus to view the various parts of the picture. The Leica, and the Swaro, however, provided a much more even view. Not that extreme local sharpness, but also not that impression of a way out-of-focus surrounding. In conclusion, it will be interesting to hear from people with actual longer field experience whether the Kowa concept is worthwhile.
Despite the complaints above, I'll add my limited impressions here, as these are still better than nothing.
Well, today I finally had a chance to look through the much touted new Fluorite Kowa myself. It was the 77 mm model. The good thing was that it was standing in line with almost all the other top scopes, such as both APO Leicas, the smaller HD Swaro, the smaller Zeiss plus two new Nikon RA IIIs. The bad thing, however, was the cramped conditions with the scopes aimed through a large closed window. As I own a Leica APO77 myself, I was mostly interested to compare this model with the Kowa of the same objective diameter. Conveniently, the two were standing right next to each other. So I concentrated myself mostly on these two, giving the others only a rather cursory "glance". Also, from the set-up it was basically a comparison limited to objects not farther that about 15 meters. All the models had the zoom eyepiece mounted.
OK, Paul Jarvis raved about the Kowa, and I think I should say he is right at least to a very substantial degree! The Kowa is definitely brighter than all the others. And the same holds for the sharpness. Sure, there was nothing one would not have detected with the other scopes, but that special crispness of the view really struck me. The pictures of the other top scopes that I concentrated on, the Leica APO77 and to some degree the Swaro 65HD were lacking that special fire, e.g. in the sunlit snow , but they were also duller when looking at mosses and wood that were in the shade. (There were no birds around.) It was particularly in those fine structures of the mosses that the Kowa outdid the others. That should at least translate 1 : 1 to close birds.
However, there was also a downside on the Kowa. It seems to have an extremely narrow depth of field. Even at the lowest mag I always had to refocus to view the various parts of the picture. The Leica, and the Swaro, however, provided a much more even view. Not that extreme local sharpness, but also not that impression of a way out-of-focus surrounding. In conclusion, it will be interesting to hear from people with actual longer field experience whether the Kowa concept is worthwhile.
Steve Jones
Well-known member
Thanks for posting the info Robert. Interesting comparison, as an 'on the day review' but we don't get too much sunlit snow in the UK (where I live snow is a distant memory). I think John Cantelo's comment about performance in a dirty dull day is more in keeping with what we expect when birding here.
Your comments regarding Depth of Field don't surprise me, as it seems that no-one has yet perfected 'the perfect scope'. There always seems a trade off somewhere, as comparisons between scopes always seem to highlight that one will have great FOV, another good contrast, another will be lightweight, or good colour rendition etc. One day someone will really nail it (I think thats why this thread has been so active - the question of ' have Kowa done it'?).
Your comments regarding Depth of Field don't surprise me, as it seems that no-one has yet perfected 'the perfect scope'. There always seems a trade off somewhere, as comparisons between scopes always seem to highlight that one will have great FOV, another good contrast, another will be lightweight, or good colour rendition etc. One day someone will really nail it (I think thats why this thread has been so active - the question of ' have Kowa done it'?).
Swissboy said:
Robert,
I often read that these or that pieces of optics with the same specs differ in DOF. It is worth to know that DOF basically depends on magnification only. So if you noticed a difference in that respect it means there had to be differences in magnifiation. This wouln´t be really a surprise because magnification specs of the manufactorers are often the rounded result of focal length of the scope devided by focal length EP. By all means DOF cannot be a downside of the Kowa scope.
Steve
Robert L Jarvis
Robert L Jarvis
Steve no reports yet because quite simply the scope is in short supply and not readily available for definitive tests to be done. One of the problems associated with this is the lack of Kowa retail outlets unlike the other scopes. But it will come.
Paul Jarvis
Registered Member
In case anyone is waiting for an 884 they have 'nt left japan yet, they are the last model in production as I am aware from pyser-sgi. So its just a case of waiting patiently some how. They are being distributed on first come first serve base forfilling orders before stocking in shops.
Attention!
Jan Meijerink has just published his test results for the new Kowa scopes 773 ja 883. The text is in Dutch at http://www.tvwg.nl/
In short, his results seem to be that the optical quality of the new scopes is the best he has seen so far. On the other hand, the mechanical quality at -20 C is lower than e.g. Zeiss or Swarovski.
Heikki
Jan Meijerink has just published his test results for the new Kowa scopes 773 ja 883. The text is in Dutch at http://www.tvwg.nl/
In short, his results seem to be that the optical quality of the new scopes is the best he has seen so far. On the other hand, the mechanical quality at -20 C is lower than e.g. Zeiss or Swarovski.
Heikki
Last edited:
