Will K
Too well-known member
Thanks!
I’m sure there’ll be some usable tripods around for me to borrow, but I’ll be bringing my Gitzo and the Razor anyway, just for comparison.
-
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.
Spotting Scope Research: Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Will K
- Start date
I’m sure there’ll be some usable tripods around for me to borrow, but I’ll be bringing my Gitzo and the Razor anyway, just for comparison.
Will K
Too well-known member
Very true.
In the event that my budget stretches to another tripod, I wonder what folk think would be an ideal setup for my intended use. I picture myself using the new scope in a variety of contexts: comfortable indoor locations, getting a good look at what birds are in the trees over the road from my house (no wind), going down my local birding spots (moderate wind), and marching into the hills for a ramble (high wind). For plane travel, however, I might keep my Razor 85mm and Gitzo Traveller Series 1 combo. So I'm imagining something more bulky and stable for the new scope, if it ends up being 95-115mm.
Would a Mountaineer Series 4 with a two-way head be about right to cover all the bases, perhaps? Or should I be looking at a Systematic?
And yes, I know that other brands can provide greater cost-benefit ratio, and that Gitzo is not the be-all-and-end-all, but they certainly make my favourite tripods of all those I have tried so far. I'm quite taken with their build quality and aesthetics. If I can afford another one, I'll get one.
WRL
Well-known member
Will,
You are not new to using a scope and and a tripod, as I understand. You certainly know what happens even in "moderate", unfortunately often gusty, wind at high magnifications: vibration. Unusable view. This will not change to the better dramatically with your "intended" setup, I am afraid. Real improvements are only possible using very solid (i.e. heavy) tripods together with a solid head (look at surveyors' tripods, they need it steady).
As an example, my experience with a Kowa 883 on a Gitzo Systematic 3 (three sections), a Berlebach Pegasus head standing on a dyke in moderate to gusty winds at 60x: vibration. My countermeasure is firmly putting both my hands on the objective and the eyepiece ends of the scope. This helps.
I have a quite heavy Berlebach UNI tripod a well. It is much, much better than the Gitzo in terms of wind induced vibrations. This is possible the most you can do tripodwise, but I don't want to carry it around for long.
So, in the end, I am sure you will/have to compromise due to your different application cases (home, outside, walking ...). Nobody can honestly tell you what to buy exactly, I think.
Werner
Will K
Too well-known member
Thanks, Werner!
Actually, I still feel as though I'm a very inexperienced beginner in this world of optics. 12 months ago, or thereabouts, I didn't own any binoculars at all. I've also not even heard of Berlebach, but I'll see if I can track down some of their models and check them out.
I totally understand that there is no perfect tripod, just like there is no perfect scope. Compromise is inescapable, even when we think are are doing all we can to avoid it. I'm certainly not looking for anyone to flat-out tell me what to buy, but it is always useful to read other's experiences, especially when they widen and enrich my own knowledge and opinions. Thanks again!
Actually, I still feel as though I'm a very inexperienced beginner in this world of optics. 12 months ago, or thereabouts, I didn't own any binoculars at all. I've also not even heard of Berlebach, but I'll see if I can track down some of their models and check them out.
I totally understand that there is no perfect tripod, just like there is no perfect scope. Compromise is inescapable, even when we think are are doing all we can to avoid it. I'm certainly not looking for anyone to flat-out tell me what to buy, but it is always useful to read other's experiences, especially when they widen and enrich my own knowledge and opinions. Thanks again!
KaterinBortle9
Active member
As Werner said, putting both hands in front and eyepiece ends of the scope does mitigate vibrations due to strong winds to an acceptable view. However, I use a small gitzo ball head on a traveller series 2 tripod at 48x for the portability with my 60mm monarch.
Will, I mount my scope to the side of my ball head as a improvised gimbal, as the benefits outweighs the problems for me. A properly horizontally balanced scope on a gimbal configuration frees up my hands. I can any time let go both of my hands and the scope stays on target. No more scope flopping. Scope handling becomes very hands-on, possibly error-free, effortless and intuitive. I like touching my scope and don't mind others to touch it. Folks with premium brands may not like this though. There are multiple problems associated with using a ball head this way, but will gladly elaborate on my experiences if you desire.
If your camera plate attached to your razor scope is long enough to balance it horizontally, you should try the gimbal configuration with your ball head out in the field. Your gitzo ball head panning is smooth enough make it work satisfactorily. Some of the problems you encountered when using the ball head the normal way will poof away, but minor issues will pop into existence. Its free test under real world condition, so do try it and let us know your thoughts!
Will K
Too well-known member
Thanks for the suggestion!
I currently use a head which has this capacity (a small notch in the side of the mounting). It does provide a nice smooth action, pretty much like a dedicated two-way head, so its a nice option to have. But I'm not certain if I completely trust it to take the weight of my scope. The head is rated for 6kg, but I still feel as though I wouldn't want to chance it out in the field. I can imagine the whole tripod tipping over if it is carelessly knocked or caught unexpectedly. Its only a 1545T, of course. I'd be extremely weary of doing that with a heavier 95-115 scope, too, even on a more stable tripod.
Please do feel free to share your experience with using scopes this way. And what do you think of the Monarch thus far?
KaterinBortle9
Active member
I believe I have the same ball head as yours without the friction adjustment knob and is rated 11kg max load. My 60mm scope weighs about 1.6kg, but is smaller in size than the razor 85mm. Been using the scope mounted sideways on the gitzo ball head nearly a year and half, holds up well. Strangely, the 1545T was not recommended when I tested it in my local store and the store attendant (also a bird photographer) is willing to sell me his, if I was interested.
To be safe, you could try side mount configuration for a short duration ~20mins to have a feel of how a gimbal operates and switch back to the normal mode.
Issues when side mounted:
1) Centre of mass of the scope is no longer in line with the central column which probably will cause jerky panning with lower quality ball. Not immediately noticeable, but very obvious when you try to do fine panning when scope is at rest. My Sirui ball heads from small to large, all had this issue. No issue with my current small gitzo ball head-once you overcome the scope's inertia, it rotates smoothly. Of course your tripod have to be more or less level.
2) Tilt is not as smooth as a proper gimbal due to friction in the notch at the side, but the advantage is that the scope more readily stays pointed to your stationary target, and you can immediately hands off the scope to use your binos when you are alerted to some other bird/animal.
3) This is not an issue if your tripod have screws to tighten the head you use or maybe you mount scope to the right of the ball head. The traveller series 1 and 2 tripod does not have tightening screws for the head. If you mount your scope sideways to the left, the head will tend to unscrew itself due to the turning moment of the scope being off axis from the central column when you carry it over your shoulder. I mount it left side because I prefer the positions of the pan and ball locking knobs, and the upright position of the rotating collar knob on the scope. Had to use purple loctite on both ends of the stainless steel screw connecting the ball head and the center column (probably a no-no).
4) Lose a few centimeters of useable height.
5) Require a camera plate of suitable length to balance the scope horizontally.
6) Use of a video/anti rotation pin if your scope leg is only single screw. I also purple loctite the plate screw to the scope leg for the added security.
This configuration is obviously not for everyone, just my personal preference with a small sized scope (but heavy) to keep the mounting head compact and light. Using a good fluid head without a handle, as Hermann shared, is a viable alternative, but I currently prefer the simplicity of a ball head without the size and weight of a proper gimbal or with the Wimberley sidekick.
I've only look through an ATS 65mm at an owl across a body of water once before I got the monarch so I can't compare to the premium brands. Not financially well-off to spend that much too, hence a reluctance to try out fellow bird watcher's swarovskis to avoid "optics infection".
The 82mm monarch probably isn't too overweight compared to a 80 or 85mm scope due to the excellent oversized prism, but the 60mm probably is overweight at ~1.25kg for the scope body only and is back heavy. Nick90's and henry link's reviews of the 60 and 82 monarch led to my purchase of the monarch 60mm. If a zoom eyepiece is preferred, skip the 20-60x eyepiece and get the 30-60W wide angle zoom if possible. A fixed 38W 75° AFOV wide angle eyepiece with long eye relief is also available. Views are pleasant even at my 48x limit, CA is there as you look towards the edge but non intrusive and since no roof edge along optical path, no prism line visible. Occasional night sky viewing does not show any discernable optical defects with the 30-60W and 38W eyepieces, though the 20-60 showed sagittal(?) astigmatism at the lower magnification range. 16.1-15.3mm ER of the 20-60 eyepiece is not good for spectacle wearers (especially the intermediate magnification range) but the seemingly short 15.2-14.2mm ER of the 30-60W eyepiece is actually useable and better than the 20-60. Rubber armor is only present at the prism section and I prefer the minimal use of it, others might not. The scope body is solid and very well made, though I suspect there are some bubbles in the glass due to consistent round blobs which can be seen on defocused stars when doing star tests. Internal reflections seems well controlled since it is black around the exit pupil, but lens glare is there when pointing near the sun. Also, reflections due to bright sky behind/above off the eyepieces is a bit annoying, but can be mitigated by wearing a sunhat.
The relatively small sized monarch 60mm performs well and fits my type of casual usage in nature parks, reserves, coastal sightseeing and the occasional night sky watching, despite the listed short comings. Does the performance of the oversized prism justify the extra weight? I don't know. Frankly, I don't really care much now. I treat it as a workout and use it till it falls apart.
As a side note, there is this video comparison between the votex razor hd 27-60 and the monarch 82 30-60W on youtube, but your first discussion about the razor discounted the monarch, thus I did not comment there. ICYMI (you can auto translate to english):
To be safe, you could try side mount configuration for a short duration ~20mins to have a feel of how a gimbal operates and switch back to the normal mode.
Issues when side mounted:
1) Centre of mass of the scope is no longer in line with the central column which probably will cause jerky panning with lower quality ball. Not immediately noticeable, but very obvious when you try to do fine panning when scope is at rest. My Sirui ball heads from small to large, all had this issue. No issue with my current small gitzo ball head-once you overcome the scope's inertia, it rotates smoothly. Of course your tripod have to be more or less level.
2) Tilt is not as smooth as a proper gimbal due to friction in the notch at the side, but the advantage is that the scope more readily stays pointed to your stationary target, and you can immediately hands off the scope to use your binos when you are alerted to some other bird/animal.
3) This is not an issue if your tripod have screws to tighten the head you use or maybe you mount scope to the right of the ball head. The traveller series 1 and 2 tripod does not have tightening screws for the head. If you mount your scope sideways to the left, the head will tend to unscrew itself due to the turning moment of the scope being off axis from the central column when you carry it over your shoulder. I mount it left side because I prefer the positions of the pan and ball locking knobs, and the upright position of the rotating collar knob on the scope. Had to use purple loctite on both ends of the stainless steel screw connecting the ball head and the center column (probably a no-no).
4) Lose a few centimeters of useable height.
5) Require a camera plate of suitable length to balance the scope horizontally.
6) Use of a video/anti rotation pin if your scope leg is only single screw. I also purple loctite the plate screw to the scope leg for the added security.
This configuration is obviously not for everyone, just my personal preference with a small sized scope (but heavy) to keep the mounting head compact and light. Using a good fluid head without a handle, as Hermann shared, is a viable alternative, but I currently prefer the simplicity of a ball head without the size and weight of a proper gimbal or with the Wimberley sidekick.
I've only look through an ATS 65mm at an owl across a body of water once before I got the monarch so I can't compare to the premium brands. Not financially well-off to spend that much too, hence a reluctance to try out fellow bird watcher's swarovskis to avoid "optics infection".
The 82mm monarch probably isn't too overweight compared to a 80 or 85mm scope due to the excellent oversized prism, but the 60mm probably is overweight at ~1.25kg for the scope body only and is back heavy. Nick90's and henry link's reviews of the 60 and 82 monarch led to my purchase of the monarch 60mm. If a zoom eyepiece is preferred, skip the 20-60x eyepiece and get the 30-60W wide angle zoom if possible. A fixed 38W 75° AFOV wide angle eyepiece with long eye relief is also available. Views are pleasant even at my 48x limit, CA is there as you look towards the edge but non intrusive and since no roof edge along optical path, no prism line visible. Occasional night sky viewing does not show any discernable optical defects with the 30-60W and 38W eyepieces, though the 20-60 showed sagittal(?) astigmatism at the lower magnification range. 16.1-15.3mm ER of the 20-60 eyepiece is not good for spectacle wearers (especially the intermediate magnification range) but the seemingly short 15.2-14.2mm ER of the 30-60W eyepiece is actually useable and better than the 20-60. Rubber armor is only present at the prism section and I prefer the minimal use of it, others might not. The scope body is solid and very well made, though I suspect there are some bubbles in the glass due to consistent round blobs which can be seen on defocused stars when doing star tests. Internal reflections seems well controlled since it is black around the exit pupil, but lens glare is there when pointing near the sun. Also, reflections due to bright sky behind/above off the eyepieces is a bit annoying, but can be mitigated by wearing a sunhat.
The relatively small sized monarch 60mm performs well and fits my type of casual usage in nature parks, reserves, coastal sightseeing and the occasional night sky watching, despite the listed short comings. Does the performance of the oversized prism justify the extra weight? I don't know. Frankly, I don't really care much now. I treat it as a workout and use it till it falls apart.
As a side note, there is this video comparison between the votex razor hd 27-60 and the monarch 82 30-60W on youtube, but your first discussion about the razor discounted the monarch, thus I did not comment there. ICYMI (you can auto translate to english):
SUPPRESSOR
Well-known member
Gitzo, though undoubtedly good, is IMO overpriced and more stability can be obtained for a similar outlay.
Some of the Chinese manufactures of tripods and heads are well sorted. I have an Articise AS95C tripod + Benro S6 Pro video head solid as you could wish for.
Peter.
Will K
Too well-known member
henry link
Well-known member
I'm not exactly surprised the maker of the video found the optics of the Monarch "better" than the Razor, but we can't know whether either scope was operating as it should without the basic tests he didn't do.
Will K
Too well-known member
That's an interesting comparison he makes in the video, and the results are kind of what I'd expect: very similar, overall, but the Monarch wins on glass and the Razor wins on weight. The other features he mentions, such as warranty, FOV, etc. still make me glad that I went with the Razor as an 'entry level' choice, myself. But he's wrong to suggest that these scopes are top of the line; most of the scopes I've listed in post #1 will beat them, optically, I would imagine, in one way or another.
Speaking of which, Henry, I attempted my first 'star test' with the Razor this evening. I'm working on putting the results together and figuring out what they mean by Googling common results, as you suggested in another thread. I'll share the results here if I can make heads or tails of them!
Speaking of which, Henry, I attempted my first 'star test' with the Razor this evening. I'm working on putting the results together and figuring out what they mean by Googling common results, as you suggested in another thread. I'll share the results here if I can make heads or tails of them!
Will K
Too well-known member
Here are the results: My First Star Test
Will K
Too well-known member
Well, I found some, finally!
Here's my comparison between the ATX 95 and Harpia 95: ATX 95 vs Harpia 95 - A Personal Comparison
Here's my comparison between the ATX 95 and Harpia 95: ATX 95 vs Harpia 95 - A Personal Comparison
The Leica Apo-Televid with 25-50x zoom eyepiece, eyepiece & objective covers weighed a total of 1.99kg when I tested it for Linnut magazine in 2009. This is from my own weight measurement. So low weight is not one of its strengths. My review translated into english is available here:
Good luck with your search!
Good luck with your search!
Will K
Too well-known member
That's an interesting review of the Leica. Thanks!
I was surprised to see that the AFOV could go as high as 80 degrees, in your measurement. That sounds great, and I'm very curious to see it for myself.
I actually had a very brief look through a Kowa 99 today, and I was rather impressed. The view and build quality was, to my eyes, actually superior to the Harpia and ATX models I tested the other day.
That, combined with your (and others') positive option of the Kowa, make the think its time I had a closer look at what Kowa has to offer!
I was surprised to see that the AFOV could go as high as 80 degrees, in your measurement. That sounds great, and I'm very curious to see it for myself.
I actually had a very brief look through a Kowa 99 today, and I was rather impressed. The view and build quality was, to my eyes, actually superior to the Harpia and ATX models I tested the other day.
That, combined with your (and others') positive option of the Kowa, make the think its time I had a closer look at what Kowa has to offer!
