What to upgrade from Opticron MM4 60 : Leica, Swaro, Kowa? (1 Viewer)

[LucaPCP]

Today I went birding with others, and I had an occasion to compare my Opticron MM4 60 with other scopes, including Swarovski around 65mm opening. My Opticron was struggling at 40x; those Swarovski were crystal clear at well over 50x. The contrast was better, and so was the angle of view.

If I were to consider an upgrade from my Opticron, what would you advise? I am considering:

• The Swarovski ATS-65.
• The Kowa TSN-66A.
• The Leica Apo-Televid 65mm.

The Leica seems very nice: it is the lightest, at 1.1 Kg (vs 1.5 Kg for Kowa and 1.4 Kg for Swaro). But nobody seems to use it here? I also cannot find where to get it with a case. It does not seem to be an easy to obtain scope.

The Swaro comes with either 20-60 and 25-50 eyepieces; I guess the advantage of the 25-50 one is that it is much more wide angle? This seems to be a scope in wide use.

The Kowa seems also very nice, and I heard very good things here on the forum, but is perhaps the heaviest of the three.

Do you have any advice of which one to upgrade to? How do these scopes compare?

Any advice would be appreciated!

 

[lmans66]

If you are upgrading size... stick with the Opticron as that is the point of that scope. Otherwise, do what others do and look for features you like and want. How important is size?

 

[LucaPCP]

I want contrast, sharpness, wide field of view in a scope that is still portable, that is, likely under 70mm diameter.

 

[Boogieshrew]

What about the MM77? Almost in the 80mm class but still very light. And you can use the fixed HDF e/ps to get lovely wide fovs.

I own MM4 and have owned the Swarovski ATS 65 and currently own ATS80. There's really very little between them except weight. And light gathering for the 80mm which is why I use it in winter if not carrying it far.

Any gain in magnification is usually countered by heat haze and the like. Doe to this I can seldom see more in the Swarovski at 60x compared to the MM4 at 45x. I can ID and enjoy any bird with the MM4.

I guess what I'm saying is, the differences are only noticeable when comparing these scopes side by side.

 

[Peregrine Took]

• The Swarovski ATS-65.
• The Kowa TSN-66A.
• The Leica Apo-Televid 65mm.

Seems like you need to scratch an itch (which I understand), but what eyepiece are you using with your Opticron?

And at what magnification did the other scopes beat the Opticron for field of view?

I've had the Swaro (HD), but without knowing what eyepiece you are currently using, it's hard to say what improvement, if any, you'll get from any of those other scopes.
.

 

[wllmspd]

Wide fields are hard to get with zooms, but the range of fixed wide fields isn’t great. I see a lot of ats60 about, I’d quite like to try an ultra wide astro eyepiece in one (with asuitable adapter), to see how they perform. I understand your itch, but the mm60 is so small and easy to carry for rapid deployment… beats people with ats65 in scopacs with ease. I’d probably go up to an 80mm, but then the lightness and convenience is gone. I agree that at the top end magnification the mm60 view does lack the contrast it does at low power.

Peter

 

[Tringa45]

Weights would be comparable. That quoted for the Leica is without eyepiece and the general concensus seems to be that it is optically not quite as good as the ATS65 or Kowa 66A.
Apart from a small price difference, the deciding factor might be the viewing comfort. My ATM65 HD (optically the same as current ATS65) is equipped with the discontinued 30x W and I have no experience with the 25-50x zoom. There have however been some reports of difficulties with it.
I have the 25-60x TE-11WZ on my Kowa 883 and it is a very good and comfortable eyepiece, but as Boogieshrew stated above, you would seldom want more than 45x terrestrially in a 65 mm scope .

John

 

[dalat]

• The Swarovski ATS-65.
• The Kowa TSN-66A.
• The Leica Apo-Televid 65mm.

All fine scopes.

I actually liked the Leica (80 mm version) a bit better than the Swaro, when I compared them. Best is to check them yourself, things like your preference for the focus mechanism may be the decisive factor.

 

[LucaPCP]

Seems like you need to scratch an itch (which I understand), but what eyepiece are you using with your Opticron?

And at what magnification did the other scopes beat the Opticron for field of view?

I've had the Swaro (HD), but without knowing what eyepiece you are currently using, it's hard to say what improvement, if any, you'll get from any of those other scopes.
.

You may be right about the itch!

But, I was at 45x, the other scopes were at 50x, focusing on tiny little plovers, in a cold morning without heat shimmer. The contrast and clarity of the other scopes was superior. I agree that with heat shimmer, and around 30x, the scopes are more comparable.
My impression of the MM4 60 is that it is good until about 40x.
My eyepiece is the 15-45 SDLv3, the "high end" zoom of the Opticrons.
I also have a fixed ocular that would give me wide field, higher contrast, and 22x, but it was insufficient for the day.

 

[Peregrine Took]

Not sure if you've considered this, but the 60mm has no hood - and that can make a huge difference to contrast and perceived sharpness if the sun is anywhere near the front element, even when it's way outside the field of view. The lack of a hood was, for me, the most irritating thing about an otherwise excellent scope.
.

 

[Boogieshrew]

Not sure if you've considered this, but the 60mm has no hood - and that can make a huge difference to contrast and perceived sharpness if the sun is anywhere near the front element, even when it's way outside the field of view. The lack of a hood was, for me, the most irritating thing about an otherwise excellent scope.
.

Good point

 

[Hermann]

Not sure if you've considered this, but the 60mm has no hood - and that can make a huge difference to contrast and perceived sharpness if the sun is anywhere near the front element, even when it's way outside the field of view. The lack of a hood was, for me, the most irritating thing about an otherwise excellent scope.
.

Does the 60mm have filter threads? If it does, get a cheap metal hood. Problem solved.

Hermann

 

[Peregrine Took]

Does the 60mm have filter threads? If it does, get a cheap metal hood. Problem solved.

Hermann

The threads are concentric and conical, so you can't screw anything into them. Bizarre.
.
.

 

[wllmspd]

I’ll look to make myself one, should be an easy job, I made one for the 127mm Mak.

Peter

 

[Tim S]

Weights would be comparable. That quoted for the Leica is without eyepiece and the general concensus seems to be that it is optically not quite as good as the ATS65 or Kowa 66A.
Apart from a small price difference, the deciding factor might be the viewing comfort. My ATM65 HD (optically the same as current ATS65) is equipped with the discontinued 30x W and I have no experience with the 25-50x zoom. There have however been some reports of difficulties with it.
I have the 25-60x TE-11WZ on my Kowa 883 and it is a very good and comfortable eyepiece, but as Boogieshrew stated above, you would seldom want more than 45x terrestrially in a 65 mm scope .

John

I have the Leica 65, in my opinion it is better than the ATS 65 and comparable to the 66A Kowa. Have had the Swaro and took a long time looking through the Kowa at the Birdfair recently. As an aside my scope had blown over recently (for the second time) onto a concrete floor, deranging the eyecup. This was replaced FOC by Leica, rest of the scope was fine, very robust.

 

[Peregrine Took]

I’ll look to make myself one, should be an easy job, I made one for the 127mm Mak.

Peter

Sounds like you know what you're doing, but if it helps...

I bought an unbranded plastic telephoto lens hood (about 72mm) and reamed the threaded end, little-by-little, until it made an interference fit over the front of the 60mm. It worked well, leaving no impression on the rubber of the scope when removed.

And it looked better than a painted washing up bottle, or similar DIY job.... which would have offended me on such a nice scope.

.

 

[wllmspd]

I’ll probably make it a little oversized and use duct tape to get the snug fit. I like to make it so I can reverse it and store it over the scope front, but I’ve got a cable-tie sight (invaluable), which will probably stop me doing this :-( (unless I design a cutout for it…. ) I’ll probably flock the inside for max contrast.

Peter

 

[Peregrine Took]

I’ll probably make it a little oversized and use duct tape to get the snug fit. I like to make it so I can reverse it and store it over the scope front, but I’ve got a cable-tie sight (invaluable), which will probably stop me doing this :-( (unless I design a cutout for it…. ) I’ll probably flock the inside for max contrast.

Peter

You can reverse-store it the way I described - it's also an interference fit when reversed - wish I'd taken a picture. It's your call, but I wouldn't want duct tape on a scope, especially in hot weather... too Heath Robinson for my liking.
.

 

[Tringa45]

I have the Leica 65, in my opinion it is better than the ATS 65 and comparable to the 66A Kowa. Have had the Swaro and took a long time looking through the Kowa at the Birdfair recently. As an aside my scope had blown over recently (for the second time) onto a concrete floor, deranging the eyecup. This was replaced FOC by Leica, rest of the scope was fine, very robust.

Have you actually conducted side by side comparisons or even measurements?
Perhaps your ATS65 was a non-HD version, which was also offered up to 2009 and also for the ATM/STM scopes with magnesium bodies from 2009 zo 2012.
Current ATS65 are all HD.
I measured the resolution of my ATM65 HD at 1,78 arcseconds, which is the Dawes' limit and had to boost the magnification to 130x to do so.
If you can see deficiencies in a premium scope in still air at normal magnifications, then it's a lemon and Swarovski is not known for large sample variation.

 

[CMB]

Today I went birding with others, and I had an occasion to compare my Opticron MM4 60 with other scopes, including Swarovski around 65mm opening. My Opticron was struggling at 40x; those Swarovski were crystal clear at well over 50x. The contrast was better, and so was the angle of view.

If I were to consider an upgrade from my Opticron, what would you advise? I am considering:

• The Swarovski ATS-65.
• The Kowa TSN-66A.
• The Leica Apo-Televid 65mm.

The Leica seems very nice: it is the lightest, at 1.1 Kg (vs 1.5 Kg for Kowa and 1.4 Kg for Swaro). But nobody seems to use it here? I also cannot find where to get it with a case. It does not seem to be an easy to obtain scope.

The Swaro comes with either 20-60 and 25-50 eyepieces; I guess the advantage of the 25-50 one is that it is much more wide angle? This seems to be a scope in wide use.

The Kowa seems also very nice, and I heard very good things here on the forum, but is perhaps the heaviest of the three.

Do you have any advice of which one to upgrade to? How do these scopes compare?

Any advice would be appreciated!

Have you considered keeping the Opticron MM4, and adding a new scope in the 80-88mm range? This would expand your tools and opportunities.

We have an Opticron MM4 60mm with the SDLv3, and also a Kowa TSN-883. Each provides different features that we find beneficial under different circumstances.

The Opticron is about 1/3 the cost of the Swarovski, Kowa, and Leica. Yes the Alpha scopes outperform it at the higher end of magnification. The Opticron gets darker above 40x (as expected) compared to an Alpha scope with better coatings. This can make it seem as if the Opticron is not as crisp.

The Opticron has an advantage over those scopes in terms of lighter weight, smaller overall size, and a lower magnification power available on the zoom. There are times 20x and 25X is still too much magnification.

If you are able to, consider keeping the Opticron MM4 60mm and adding an 80-88mm scope.