• 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.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

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

mbb

Well-known member
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.)
 

mbb

Well-known member
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

Well-known member
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

Well-known member
United Kingdom
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

Well-known member
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

Well-known member
United Kingdom
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

Well-known member
Netherlands
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

Well-known member
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

Emeritus President at Burnage Rugby Club
Supporter
England
Aa the weight difference between the 50mm and 60mm is approximately 100g I wouldn't consider that to be significant
 

wllmspd

Well-known member
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

Well-known member
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.
 

Peregrine Took

Well-known member
United Kingdom
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

Well-known member
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

Well-known member
United Kingdom
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.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top