Spotting Scope Research: Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica (1 Viewer)

[Will K]

Hi all,

I'm embarking on a rather epic research project, and would very much appreciate some guidance from our optics experts!

My aim is to exhaustively test a selection of the top-end full size spotting scopes which are on the market today in order to determine which one is the ideal scope for me.

Last year, I discovered an unsuspected passion for optics. Although I've been very much enjoying using a Vortex Razor Gen II 85mm over the last few months, I now find myself thoroughly spoilt by a pair of NL Pure binos, and looking to identify a suitable 'upgrade' which will satisfy my need for a comparably amazing optical experience at higher magnification.

When the prospective costs for this 'upgrade' run close to 3-5K, I do not intend to purchase anything without being 100% sure that it is the ideal choice for me. That means a lot of in-person testing and comparisons, in addition to online research. Unfortunately, this will not be as easy as selecting a pair of binoculars, since many of the scopes which I intend to examine are modular, with separate eyepieces and magnification extenders. The current shortlist is:

• Leica APO Televid 82, with 1.8 extender
• Zeiss Harpia 95
• Swarovski ATX 95/115, with 1.7 extender

From what I have seen so far, retailers who stock such scopes are not always willing to let customers fetch and open multiple boxes from their stockrooms in order to allow them to test the equipment, let alone set up several different scopes next to each other for the purposes of comparison! I really don't like making a nuisance of myself when asking for help in optics shops, but that's sometimes what it feels like, unfortunately. What I really want is to line these three scopes up side by side and spend an hour or so really putting them through their paces, but I have little hope that any optics retailer in my area will be willing to assist (I can go into more detail about that later, after I've made a few calls next week).

This will be a huge financial investment for me, and I will probably make the purchase to celebrate getting my next university teaching job (whenever that happens). The optics community on BirdForum has been a great source of information, support and validation for me since I started my new hobby. All my friends and family think I was crazy to buy an NL Pure, at least. I don't know what they'll say if I spend a couple more grand on something like a 115 ATX and, inevitably, a Gitzo Mountaineer or Systematic. I guess we will see.

What would be useful at the moment is some assistance with completing a little comparative specs chart I have been drafting, comparing the major features of a number of similar scopes to help me visualise the lay of the land. The chart includes not only the three scopes I am keen to test, but also a few extra scopes that I also find interesting. As we know, not all specs provided by manufacturers are universally standardised, and many are just plain misleading. If anyone can help me complete the sections in yellow, so that I can have an authoritative chart, that would be very helpful. And, of course, testimonials, suggestions and corrections from scope users and experts are always welcome.

[Chart continually updated following feedback. Scopes added: Nikon Monarch, Kowa TSN 99]

 

[Bill Atwood]

Angled Meopta S2 is 1.8kg and 16 inches long with 20x-70x eyepiece (no caps).

 

[Bill Atwood]

ATX 95 is 2.15 kg and 16.8 inches long. Can't remember if I took this data with caps or not.

 

[Will K]

Great, thanks Bill!

I'll add the data to my copy of the chart.

 

[wllmspd]

Why no Nikon monarch 82? Very well regarded and can be adapted to astro eyepieces.

Peter

 

[Will K]

Why no Nikon monarch 82?

No good reason, really. Nikon does not particularly appeal to me, and neither do Kowa and Meopta. (The S2 has constant FOV across the zoom range, which is an interesting feature. But the AFOV is greater in the Harpia. And I’m sure Kowa glass is fantastic!)

The design of some scopes just doesn’t hold my attention. I hope it’s not snobbery on my part. I don’t want to be someone who assumes that only certain optics (Swaro, Zeiss and Leica) are the only ones really worth talking about. I really like Vortex, for example.

I guess it’s a kind of an intuitive thing, up to a point, but I will admit that I would like to own something made by Zeiss and Leica. Just because I’ve not had anything from them before. That does play a part in my selection.

If I am indeed an optics snob, then I try to be a good natured one 😁 There’s a scope/bino that is best for everyone (sometimes many), and it doesn’t have to be an alpha.

That said, I’ll definitely take a look at a Monarch if the opportunity arises!

 

[Will K]

Here are a few more random thoughts:

• I really like the fact that the Harpia can apparently provide 72 degrees AFOV at 23x. That sounds amazing!
• If I get the ATX 95, I'll probably always be thinking of what I'm missing with the 115.
• If I get the ATX 115, I'll probably be wondering how much more portable a 95 might have been.
• I'm surprised by how much AFOV Leica are claiming for the Televid 82. I normally find Leica optics a little constricting in that respect.
• I'm very, very interested to see what 90x looks like in the boosted Leica, and 119x in the boosted ATX. To sit in a hide and see birds etc. at nearly 120x through world-class viewing optics which are specifically machined for this purpose would be an absolute dream, I'm sure.

 

[Hermann]

The design of some scopes just doesn’t hold my attention. I hope it’s not snobbery on my part.

You don't know what you're missing.

Hermann

 

[Will K]

You don't know what you're missing.

You're right. I live to learn, and would be very happy to take a look at them I might even update the chart to include Monarch specs, so that I can make a more informed decision.

 

[Mike Crawley]

Here are a few more random thoughts:

• If I get the ATX 115, I'll probably be wondering how much more portable a 95 might have been.

I see a guy at my local RSPB reserve almost every time I’m there and he has an ATX115 plus a huge tripod. He happily wanders the reserve for most of the day with the 'scope plus tripod perched across his shoulder and doesn't appear struggle with the weight despite being a fairly short, slender individual.
I have looked through it both with and without the extender and it is a superb piece of kit.

 

[Hermann]

• I'm very, very interested to see what 90x looks like in the boosted Leica, and 119x in the boosted ATX. To sit in a hide and see birds etc. at nearly 120x through world-class viewing optics which are specifically machined for this purpose would be an absolute dream, I'm sure.

But you know that the seeing is very, very rarely good enough to use 60x in terrestrial viewing, let alone 120x?

BTW, König/Köhler ³1959 (p. 201f) wrote that even in favourable conditions the maximum in terrestrial viewing is 40x. I'd go a bit further than that, with modern optics I'd draw the line at ~70-80x. However, last year I used 75x (the highest native magnification of the ED82) perhaps once or twice, for a few minutes.

Hermann

 

[MiddleRiver]

But you know that the seeing is very, very rarely good enough to use 60x in terrestrial viewing, let alone 120x?

BTW, König/Köhler ³1959 (p. 201f) wrote that even in favourable conditions the maximum in terrestrial viewing is 40x. I'd go a bit further than that, with modern optics I'd draw the line at ~70-80x. However, last year I used 75x (the highest native magnification of the ED82) perhaps once or twice, for a few minutes.

Hermann

Very interesting observation!

 

[Will K]

with modern optics I'd draw the line at ~70-80x.

Thanks, Hermann. That's good to know.

I like experimenting with empty magnification, and have even gone as high as 720x with my Razor and NL. The results were pretty crummy, of course, and I'm sure that any image over 70x or 80x would certainly be on its way to similar levels of deterioration.

That said, I'm still curious to see for myself the results which might be provided by the Televid or ATX boosters. But the ability to compare experiences with other users here is very helpful. I might indeed find that an ATX 115 image at 119x is not going to do it for me. We will see!

 

[Will K]

I've updated the chart in post #1 to include the Monarch, and the stats provided by Bill. Might add a Kowa, too.

Unfortunately, I'm finding the Nikon website very hard to navigate (when I click on the specs sheet icon, nothing happens), so the data is incomplete at the moment. Maybe I'll try again later, but I'd rather ask users to confirm the correct info anyway.

 

[Mike Crawley]

A difficult to quantify variable - how good (or otherwis) is the after sales service.

 

[Will K]

A difficult to quantify variable - how good (or otherwis) is the after sales service.

Yes, and how prone various scopes are to faults that require servicing, too.

 

[Mono]

I know people on here talk about the sample variation in Kowa scopes but when ever I'm at an optics event and try the top end scopes side by side the image quality of the Kowa always blows me away.

 

[Will K]

I guess I am right in assuming that the TSN 99 is Kowa's premium model - i.e., their top performer for brightness, clarity, etc. That will be the Kowa model I add to the list, if any.

 

[Will K]

Kowa TSN 99 data added to post #1. This looks like a contender, too!

 

[Bill Atwood]

Kowa TSN 99 data added to post #1. This looks like a contender, too!

Kowa data missing eyepiece weight (0.37kg).