BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ClayTaylorTX" data-source="post: 1430797" data-attributes="member: 81704">Hello all - Now that my name has popped up on this thread, my attention was called to it.   I am neither defensive, upset, nor combative on this one.   I am happy to be working for Swarovski Optik, and our products can stand for themselves.   Jeff is correct in recommending you find the appropriate optics at a dealer.  Just like you can test drive a Mercedes, BMW and a Lexus, birders can compare the top scopes and buy what is right for them, not necessarily what Jeff Bouton or Clay Taylor espouse.Ok, to address a few of the points that have been raised in this thread - 1) I posted a photo comparison from the Bird Fair taken through the new Swarovski 25-50xW eyepiece here on this forum <a href="http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=121741" target="_blank">http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=121741</a>showing the added FOV and magnification when compared to the 20-60xS eyepiece.   I did not have the opportunity to try any high-quality photos at that time.   Since then I have taken many gigs of images, and the eyepiece is great.   At this time, we are still on track for receiving the first production 25-50xW eyepieces here in the US by late April.2) The Swarovski ATM / STM bodies are magnesium, and the change was simply an evolution in the scope line.   The change from machining aluminum bodies to magnesium bodies requires new machinery and added cost, but the specifications are all the same.  Changing the optical path is an entirely different matter.3) The new eyepiece was NOT designed primarily for digiscopers, although we will benefit greatly.  I had previously requested a 15-30xW or 15-45xW eyepiece for digiscoping, but was told those designs were not good fits for the scope and prism design.   Its design was to address the needs of birders that are frustrated with the narrow FOVs of most zoom eyepieces, but want the power flexibility of a zoom eyepiece while in the field.   Doubtless, the designers at Leica saw the same need.4) The new Swarovski Optik 25-50xW eyepiece has a linear progression to the AFOV, which is the size of the black circle.   See the photo example above.25x = 60 degree AFOV30x = 62 (compared to our 30xSW eyepiece at 66)35x = 6440x = 6645x = 68 (compared to our 45xSW at 66)50x = 705) The new 25-50xW eyepiece is exactly the same size as the 20-60xS, and thus accepts the DCA adapter perfectly.   I accidently left my 25-50xW on a trade show scope and didn't notice until I looked through my scope and realized my mistake.   Ooops....6) Theoretical image resolution is a linear function to true aperture (beware of lesser optical systems with internal aperture stops) - an 88mm scope will theoretically have 10% greater resolution than an 80mm scope.   Henry, you stated "the Kowa has resolution right at the theoretical limit for 88mm".   I would be interested to hear how you arrived at these figures.   If the Kowa was indeed 10% better than the Swarovski and 8% better then the Leica 82, and at a lower price than both!!!, Swarovski Optik and Leica would be selling NO scopes right now.   Thus,7) If scope resolution was the be-all and end-all of scope design, why are we not all carrying 90mm Questars, 100mm Optolyths or 100mm Pentax scopes?   Because size, weight, and ergonomics are often given greater importance by consumers than simple resolution numbers.   That is one of the reasons Swarovski Optik had stuck with an 80mm design, now lighter by using magnesium, and already waterproof and rubber-armored.   No need to buy a case for it unless you desire one.8) Photographically, the increase from a 65mm scope to an 80mm scope is slightly more than 1/2 f/stop (a 51.5% increase).  Meaning that a scene requiring an exposure with the 65 mm scope of 1/500 sec will now get 1/750 sec with an 80mm scope at the same magnification.  Going from an 80mm scope to an 88mm scope gains you 21% more light, or 1/5th of an f/stop.   So the 88mm scope in the same situation would give you a shutter speed of 1/850 sec.   Is that gain enough to justify the increased size and weight?9) Zoom eyepiece resolution, especially going up to 60x, is totally dependant on the atmospheric conditions.   A few years ago I took my ATS 80 HD with 20-60xS to a star party with the Tucson, Arizona Amateur Astronomy Association (I don't remember if that is their correct name) out in the middle of the desert.  The skies were amazingly clear.   There were 5 " and 6" refractors and a few reflector scopes up to about 14" diameter.   A number of the telescopes were hand-built, so optically these guys Knew Their Stuff.   They were astonished that a zoom eyepiece could resolve double stars and planetary details like Cassini's Division so well.   I have no doubt that a comparable Leica or Kowa eyepiece would have performed very well under the same conditions.   Too often the failure to resolve details at 60x is due to heat haze, airbourne dust, moisture, and wind, NOT the fault of the scope or eyepiece.10) At a recent US bird festival, Stephan Ingraham of Zeiss remarked that improving the performance of our optics takes increasing amounts of technology, research, and MONEY.   Just like F1 teams spend millions just to coax a few more horsepower out of their engines, or a fraction more cornering acceleration, the days of "Oh My God" optics at a relatively low cost are gone.   Our optical improvements in the future will not come cheap.Ok, I ran out of fingers and do not want to take my shoes off and start using my toes.   Ten points is enough for now.Good birding and digiscoping,Clay TaylorCorpus Christi, TXSwarovski Optik N.A.<a href="http://www.birdwatchersdigest.net/cd1000/" target="_blank">http://www.birdwatchersdigest.net/cd1000/</a></blockquote>

Verification