New MM4 50 vs part-used Nikon ED50 (1 Viewer)

[mbb]

I think the Opticron 50s were not available when I last looked at them, but happy to see them back in the pipeline. I suspect these are tougher. I like their clamshell design; seems strong. I have not looked through one, and will be ordering to compare and will report back. If it's as good or better than the ED50, I'll keep it and sell the ED50.

If you do get your hands on the Opticron mm3/4 50 HD and can compare it to your Nikon 50ED, I‘ll be very much looking forward to your findings!
(I would also love to compare them, but that doesn’t seem possible here in Belgium.)

 

[b-lilja]

Will post - I get the Opticron in early July.

 

[mbb]

Thank you! Looking forward to it
I'm really in doubt between the mm3/4 50mm and 60mm too. It is meant to complement my 82mm Kite and 65mm ATX for travelling light, also woth a lighter tripod, but I found out the 50mm is not stocked at the shops in the Netherlands (no Opticron resellers in Belgium where I live) and the 60mm seems to be only 100g heavier according to Opticron's website. And I'm even wondering if the little increase in length of the 60mm couldn't actually be a benefit for use on a light tripod, due to potentially being better balanced.
If I didn't have an excellent (though heavier) 65mm I guess the 60mm might make more sense, but now I'm in doubt. And I have no place to test it first :-(

 

[mbb]

I had a second hand Nikon 50mm 'scope - didn’t like it.
Changed to an MM4 50mm, I felt it was a definite improvement.
Looked through an MM4 60mm at Bird Fair and traded the 50 for a 60mm.
Now I have an 80mm Swarovski ATS and an Opticron MM4 60mm.

I seem to say this all the time but, honestly, try to find a shop where you can look at/through these little 'scopes.

I now have 3 friends who own the MM4 60mm.
They also have "full size" ‘scopes but have invested in the Opticron equipment as they’re ageing (all 70+) and find carrying the smaller 'scopes long distance easier (despite using mule packs)

Hi Mike,
Could you share your experience about the 50mm versus the 60mm, having compared them directly ánd own(ed) them both?
(Wondering both about the optics as well as about the weight and size difference.)

 

[Peregrine Took]

I didn't compare the 50mm to the 60mm when I got my 60mm, but it strikes me that the major benefit of the 60mm will be light capture. At those times of day when birdwatching can be most rewarding, you'll get an extra half hour or so of watching at each end of the day, especially in winter, when I'm guessing good birdwatching light will be in limited supply.

Personally, I think if I'd have got the 50, I would be left wondering whether I should have gone bigger. Whereas, since buying mine, I haven't even given the 50mm a second thought.
.

 

[wllmspd]

The time you can view will depend on the magnifications. If the focal ratios are the same then the exit pupil (brightness) will be the same across the magnification ranges… the smaller scope resulting in lower magnifications.

Peter

 

[Peregrine Took]

The time you can view will depend on the magnifications. If the focal ratios are the same then the exit pupil (brightness) will be the same across the magnification ranges… the smaller scope resulting in lower magnifications.

Peter

Really? I thought that with a like-for-like EP, a larger object lens would increase light capture. That seems to be the way bins work.

 

[Ries]

I didn't compare the 50mm to the 60mm when I got my 60mm, but it strikes me that the major benefit of the 60mm will be light capture.
.

With Opticron's sdl zooms there's also the benefit of higher mags on the 60mm, 15-45x vs 12-36x on the 50mm. Imo that gives just that edge for longer range viewing.

 

[Hermann]

I'm really in doubt between the mm3/4 50mm and 60mm too. It is meant to complement my 82mm Kite and 65mm ATX for travelling light ... [snip]
If I didn't have an excellent (though heavier) 65mm I guess the 60mm might make more sense, but now I'm in doubt.

In your situation I'd definitely go for the 50mm. Keep it as light as possible if you already have bigger scopes. After all, it's meant to be a lightweight alternative to your bigger scopes whenever you want to/need to keep the weight (and size) down as much as possible.

Hermann

 

[Mike Crawley]

Aa the weight difference between the 50mm and 60mm is approximately 100g I wouldn't consider that to be significant

 

[wllmspd]

The apparent brightness is related to the exit pupil (aperture divided by magnification), though in the day your eye pupil is often smaller and thus effectively aperture limits your optics. As it gets darker you pupil gets bigger and hence you want to have as large an exit pupil as you can to fill it. Astro binoculars tend to have exit pupils of 5-7mm, daytime ones 3-5mm. Spotting scopes, given their higher magnifications have smaller exit pupils, which doesn’t matter unless it gets dull. Larger apertures normally have longer focal lengths as faster optics are harder to make, so the focal ratios tend to be similar. You’ll note that for different apertures the magnification range an eyepiece provides is different (though manufacturers don’t publish focal lengths often).

Peter

 

[mbb]

Aa the weight difference between the 50mm and 60mm is approximately 100g I wouldn't consider that to be significant

Pete Gamby was very helpful in checking the specs as 100g seemed very small as a difference. It appeared the 60mm was a little bit heavier: MM4 60 scope is actually 779g resulting in a difference of 160g. Still a very small difference though. :-s
The size for storing it in a backpack, cycling bag with other stuff etc. seem to be a bigger difference.

 

[b-lilja]

mmb, I posted my comparison on the Tiny Scopes thread. Bottom line, I'll be sending the Opticron back.

 

[Peregrine Took]

mmb, I posted my comparison on the Tiny Scopes thread. Bottom line, I'll be sending the Opticron back.

You mention reinforcing the Nikon seals with epoxy (because they are prone to falling apart).

It was this recurring theme that decided me in favour of Opticron, but after the first flush of ownership, I do wonder if I should have just bought an inexpensive 50mm-ish scope (maybe a Hawke 9-27 x 56) that can be hand-held, as I find I prefer carrying and using my Zeiss binoculars in most situations.

(This is just me talking to myself - I don't think it will help anyone making their own decision.)
.

 

[b-lilja]

Hi Peregrine,

I am not talking about seals - talking about the vertical seam that is where the two halves of the scope body connect. The screws aren't robust enough and the scope is prone to splitting in half here.

 

[Peregrine Took]

Hi Peregrine,

I am not talking about seals - talking about the vertical seam that is where the two halves of the scope body connect. The screws aren't robust enough and the scope is prone to splitting in half here.

Sorry, I understood that. Having read your review and switched threads I then used the wrong word - seals instead of seams. Thanks for the clarification... hope I didn't mislead anyone.

 

[Ries]

I'm right now comparing an Ed50 with mcii zoom to a mm4 60 Ed with SDLv2 and that's quite interesting. Because they don't differ that much in optical quality. Besides the slightly increased brightness of the 60mm, the Opticron is a little bit sharper, colours seem somewhat more natural there vs a tiny bit warmer/more saturated on the tiny Nikon. For the rest differences are even more marginal. Edge sharpness is a bit less on the Ed50, fov a little bit larger on the mm4.... The fast focus of the Opticron is a fast, light and bit too precise to me; I get ultimate focus with the coarse one easily.

The main difference is the eye placement and ease of view; the small eye relief of the Nikon zoom ep really shows in a comparison like this. And of course size is very different. I know the mm4 50mm is about as tiny as the Nikon, the 60mm is quite a bit larger.

I'm wondering if the advantages of the larger aperture/brightness, better build quality, waterproofing and way better ease of view on the zoom really do compensate the disadvantage of larger pack size... Great scopes, both.

 

[Peregrine Took]

I'm wondering if the advantages of the larger aperture, better build quality, waterproofing and way better ease of view on the zoom really do compensate the disadvantage of larger pack size... Great scopes, both.

Those things, plus a wider FOV and better edge sharpness (amplified by an objective lens that is 10mm larger) would make me choose the Opticron over a lighter pack size. Otherwise, I'd probably be buying a Kowa TSN-501 rather than the Nikon - it's fully waterproof, costs less and is a tiny bit lighter (its fixed EP might not appeal to everyone).
.

 

[Ries]

Yeah, I strongly tend to the same conclusion. A bit of size and weight extra is no problem to me (yet), easy and enjoyable viewing experience tops that.