Thanks for that. I have borrowed my dads Swaro EL 42 quite a bit, I believe many have complained about rolling ball effect on those, but I find a very crisp and usable image when panning. So perhaps no issues there... I use contact lenses when birding, but in future may start to use glasses more often, so sufficient ER would be handy. Personally, I also scan with bins first and then look closer with the scope. But, when scanning mudflats or when seabird watching I pan the scope rather slowly, so rolling ball may not be so noticeable anyways in the case of it. I think I would rather have some slight distortion in the outside of the image, than having tunnel vision with the 20-70x, though the 70x would be pretty great at times.Hi,
there is a lot of distortion at the edge of the Meopta WA zoom due to a wider tfov, especially at high magnification... that's a deliberate design choice taken - whether it will bother you depends on your tolerance for rolling ball effect when panning sideways (also seen in binoculars).
It obviously also depends a lot on how you use your scope - if you, like me, tend to scan for birds with your binoculars and then aim the scope at that point with the cable tie trick, there is not a lot of panning going to happen...
PS: are you going to wear glasses when using your scope - if yes, the Meopta with 18mm ER is probably better suited than the Nikon with 14-15mm (both with the WA zoom).
PPS: another thing to ponder about is service - Meopta seems to try to get theirs to Swaro Level lately, Nikon can be hit and miss depending on where you are... Germany iirc not too bad.
Joachim, who does not care about rolling ball...
Finally, how do the optics compare in the two scopes? If I was to buy one of these scopes, I would likely go with the 30-60x, so the price points of the scope would be very similar. I'll do some more research... and though I'm sure I would be very pleased with either scope, I would very much like to make the best possible investment. Thanks again