Blank Template - Bird Watcher`s Digest

P.O. Box 110 • 149 Acme St.
Marietta, OH 45750
m
2009 e-book downloadable pdf
High-End
Scopes
Review
No portion of this document may be used without written
permission. Contact [email protected]
or call (800) 879-2473 for more information.
©2009 Bird Watcher’s Digest. The Bird Watcher’s Digest
logo, Bird Watcher’s Digest icons, and proprietary
content contained within this pdf document, are all
Copyright Bird Watcher’s Digest, Pardson, Inc.
All rights reserved.
From the November/December 2009 Issue, Volume 32, Number 2
HIGH-END
Team Iowa.
For this review, we surveyed an
even dozen full-sized birding
scopes, sent to us by manufacturers
as their top-of-the-line scopes. All
were full-sized scopes, with objective lenses between 77mm and
88mm, and all were of the angledeyepiece design. They all came
with zoom eyepieces: 10 scopes
with the usual 20–60x zoom and
two—the Leica and Swarovski—
with new, wide-angle, 25–50x
zoom designs. All were waterproof,
and all had fully multi-coated
optics and special glass to minimize chromatic aberration.
We had the scopes for more than
a month, enough time to become
MICHAEL PORTER (2)
F
46
MICHAEL
AND
quite familiar with them and to test
and retest under varying conditions. We also invited a team of
Iowa bird watchers, who were
delighted at the opportunity to
compare the best of the best, to
come for a test day to assist in the
evaluations.
Perusing the prices, you may
catch yourself blinking. Can you
now really spend $4,000 on a spotting scope? Indeed you can, and
more than half of those in our survey cost more than $2,000. The
range of prices in the 12 scopes is
from $575 to $3,995.
Here’s how we tested, which
scopes got the top scores, and why.
DIANE PORTER
birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
THE BEST OFTHE BEST
REVIEW
SCOPES
Best Resolution
A primary consideration of a
scope is its resolution, the ability to
show fine detail. We tested all the
scopes for resolution at a mid-range
distance of 25 yards. We set the
eyepieces to the highest power they
all had in common, which was 50x.
Our target was a standard United
States Air Force resolution chart.
We then mapped the observed rela-
KOWA Prominar 883
50x resolution score: 5.0
tive scores to a scale in which the
top score was 5.
For scopes that got similar
scores, we went further. We put a
booster on the eyepieces and compared them at double magnification, at 100x. Only then could we
see any differences in resolution
among some of the top scopes. As
another test, we placed a one-dollar
bill next to the chart so we could
compare text, graphics, and fine
engraving details.
The Kowa Prominar 883 stood
out. Each time we tested, the
Kowa’s better resolution was
clearly visible even without a
booster. It quickly became our reference scope, the one we kept
going back to while testing, to rule
out inconsistency due to eye
fatigue or the effect of changing
light conditions. If the Kowa’s
score stayed the same, we knew we
could trust our eyes.
The Kowa’s larger 88mm objective lens undoubtedly contributed to
its high resolution score. The laws
of optics say a bigger lens theoretically can resolve finer detail.
Another factor may be the pure fluorite crystal element in the objec-
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com
47
tive lens, which largely eliminates
chromatic aberration. It is not a
coating, and it is not fluoride ions
in the glass. The lens element is
made from industrially grown fluorite crystal.
It’s worth noting that the five
next-highest scopes—Zeiss, Leica,
Swarovski, Vortex, and the 77mm
Kowa—scored so closely to each
other that it required 100x magnification to rank them. We believe
that the resolution differences
between these scopes would not
often be discernible in the field.
The chart is arranged in order
by resolution score, with the highest at the top. It’s important to
note that the lower-priced scopes
at the bottom of the chart do not
have poor resolution. They do a
fine job for their price range,
although they suffer from competing against the best, most expensive optics in the world.
Best Overall Image Quality
Overall image quality, although
it includes resolution, is more a
holistic and subjective evaluation of
the viewer’s experience. Multiple
factors interact. So we were especially interested in
including the guest
judges’ opinions.
We asked our
judges to consider
sharpness, contrast,
brightness, field of
view, color fidelity,
and freedom from
chromatic aberration.
But ultimately they
were trying to determine
which images looked best to
them overall. The score for each
scope is the average of all the
judges’ ratings.
The new Leica 82mm APO Tele48
vid got the top score, closely followed by the Swarovski and the
Kowa 88mm. Here’s an experience
we had that may illuminate why this
was the case.
Leica 82mm APO TelEVID
50x resolution score: 4.8
One day we watched an eastern
kingbird 80 yards away in a willow
tree at the edge of a pond. The kingbird repeatedly bashed a cicada
against a branch, softening it up for
ingestion. We looked through the
birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
88mm Kowa, admiring the bird
and even the details of the veins
in the cicada’s transparent wings.
And then we looked through the
82mm Leica and its wide-angle
zoom eyepiece. We were struck
by the rich, beautiful image of the
bird in its habitat, framed by willow leaves. The visual field was
more completely filled and delivered a more satisfying subjective
experience.
Note that the Swarovski’s 25–50x
wide-angle zoom gives an experience
similar to the Leica’s. Leica edged
out the Swarovski in scoring because
of its slightly wider field of view at
50x and better eye relief.
With both of the new Leica and
Swarovski eyepieces, the image
circle, the picture frame, stays the
same size when you zoom in or
out, compared with most zooms, in
which it grows and shrinks. You
get better immersion in the image
at all magnifications.
But there is a tradeoff. With the
25–50x eyepieces you lose the
60x maximum magnification and
its higher resolution.
An elegant design is
more than just aesthetics. It reveals a commitment to detail and perfection that is likely to
be found deeper in the
workings of the scope.
A scope’s ergonomic
design determines how
well it gets along with
you—how user-friendly
it is. In deciding among high-end
scopes, where the resolution and
image quality are already excellent, ergonomic issues can drive
the choice.
The 80mm Swarovski ATM-80
HD scope won this category hands
down. It has a lovely, simple sweep
of line. There are no knobs to stick
MICHAEL PORTER
Best Ergonomics & Overall design
swarovski 80mm
ATM-80 HD
50x resolution score: 4.8
out or catch on anything, no corners
to collect dirt. It was the lightestweight scope in our survey. (The
main change from the older ATS to
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com
49
the new ATM model is lighter
weight.) It’s fully armored. When
you pick it up, it feels good, it fits
well in your hand, and nothing
pokes you. It balances perfectly.
Along with the Vortex Razor, it
has the best aiming device: a peep
sight that can easily be removed if
you don’t want it. The focus is a
wide band around the barrel that
allows fast focus, but not so fast
that it makes fine focus difficult.
One could even focus wearing
heavy mittens.
The ATM-HD scope works both
with Swarovski’s new, wide-angled
25–50x zoom eyepiece and with the
previous 20–60x zoom from older
models. You can purchase the scope
with either eyepiece, so you get a
choice. The eyepiece attaches by a
locking bayonet mount. Its excellent
tolerances make changing eyepieces
a pleasure. On every ergonomic
issue we observed, the Swarovski
was tops.
The Leica is another example of
beautiful overall design that would
rival the Swarovski if not for a couple of flaws we didn’t expect to see
in a $4,000 scope. The lens shade
didn’t rotate, with the result that the
sight was unusable on the angled
model scope. Also, on the scope we
were sent, the collar ring by which
the scope rotates was glitchy and
stiff. We hope that these are only
early production issues.
Best ValueS
50
HD glass helped the Razor achieve
its good resolution scores, and yet
the weight is a moderate 65.5
ounces, right between the Kowa
and the Leica.
Vortex Razor
birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
MICHAEL PORTER
Vortex Razor HD ($1,600)
The Vortex Razor HD 85 stood out
as the best value in a high-end
scope. Its optical quality was excellent, holding its own against $2,300
to $4,000 rivals. The Razor’s resolution closely
approached all but
that of the 88mm
Kowa. In field of
view, at 60x it
matched the Zeiss
Diascope, and nothing else bested these
two. The 85mm
objective lens and
MICHAEL PORTER
In body shape and design, the
Razor resembles the Kowa Prominars, with similar dual focus knobs.
It has excellent focus ergonomics,
easily as good as any other scope
we tested. Vortex actually surpasses
the all-metallic Kowas with respect
to its surface, which is partially rubberized in the central areas where
the hand is most likely to contact
the scope.
KOWA Prominar 883
Focus knob detail
The Vortex’s 20–60x eyepiece
design mechanically resembles
Swarovski’s: a bayonet mount with
a lock at the back of the scope, similar twist-up eyecup, and the same
kind of useful, removable peep sight
at the right base of the eyepiece.
The Razor is Vortex’s first foray
into the high-end scope market. If
their strategy is producing superiorquality products at budget prices,
they have a winner.
Celestron Regal ($575)
Among the four $1,000-and-under
scopes in our survey, the Celestron
Regal deserves special mention. It
turned in an impressive performance, gaining the highest resolution, image quality, and ergonomics
scores of the four. It evidenced the
widest field of view and the longest
eye relief at 20x. It’s also the only
one of this group with dual focus
knobs. Most of our
survey scopes are
available with one or
more alternative
optional eyepieces.
Celestron, however,
offers at least 30
astronomical eyepieces with 1.25"
barrels of various
magnification, field
of view, price, and
quality that will work with the
Regal. By the way, it’s the least
expensive scope in our survey.
Great value!
Celestron Regal
50x resolution score: 3.0
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com
51
Pentax PF-80ED ($1,179) If
you want go up a notch in quality
while still keeping cost down, you
might want to consider the Pentax
PF-80ED, especially if size and
weight are not major concerns. The
Pentax has very good optical and
mechanical quality, ranking above
the Celestron but at a price far
below the top scopes in the survey.
There are 12 Pentax eyepieces that
work with this scope. In its price
range, it is an excellent value.
Ergonomics & Other Issues
The following are some ergonomic issues we consider important.
Focus mechanisms came in
three flavors: dual focus knobs,
single focus knobs, and barrel
bands. The two best focusing
solutions were Leica’s low-profile dual focus knobs and
Swarovski’s wide barrel band.
Dual focus knobs let you
focus more quickly using the fast
focus knob and make slower,
more precise adjustments using
the fine focus knob. All of the
dual focus mechanisms worked
well. The best design was
Leica’s, which sheltered both
dual knobs in a sleek and
ergonomic way. The shape of the
design and the fully armored
coating made it particularly comfortable to rest a hand on the
Leica’s scope body, with the fingers easily on the focus knobs,
and keep the fingers of the other
hand on the zoom mechanism,
52
ready to zoom and focus. The
Swarovski’s barrel band design
was equally comfortable.
Focus speed is how quickly you can go through the
scope’s focus range. The fastest
way to change focus is to drag a
finger across the focus knob.
The finger-swipe test numbers
in the chart represent how many
finger-swipes it took to go
through the whole focus range.
We used Michael’s hand to do
the test, using the same technique on each scope. If you
have longer fingers or a better
swiping technique, your results
might be different. Michael’s
hand fits a medium-size glove.
Tops were the Kowa and Vortex, with 3 swipes. Next best was
the Swarovski, with 4 swipes.
The single focus knobs weren’t
as fast, but single knobs need to
go slower in order to preserve
the ability to fine focus.
birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
JULIE ZICKEFOOSE
Digiscoping with
an angled scope.
The Nikon EDG would have
won with a swipe score of 2, but
our judges found it to be too fast
and too stiff, making it difficult
to fine focus. They complained a
lot when trying to zero in on a
resolution chart.
Sighting mechanisms
should allow quick aiming of the
scope so that you don’t miss the
bird. We found the most effective
sights to be the removable peep
sights on the Swarovski and the
Vortex Razor. Next best was the
Brunton’s somewhat shorter (and
nonremovable) peep sight. The
other scopes had only raised
sighting lines on the side of the
prism housing or on the sunshade.
Inexplicably, the Nikon EDG
had no sight at all. And in a hardto-fathom blunder, as noted
above, Leica’s sighting mechanism was unusable on an angled
scope. (Many bird watchers, particularly those interested in digiscoping, prefer an angled scope.)
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com
53
Some Food
for thought
Considering the importance of aiming,
it’s hard to understand why the best brains
in scope making haven’t come up with a
better solution. Here’s a modest proposal.
For years, we have mounted red-dot
sights on our scopes. When you look
through a red-dot sight, you see an illuminated red dot overlying the image. You get
instant, perfect acquisition of the bird,
even at 60 power. No wasted time zooming out and zooming in. It makes the
scope many times more useful. The red
dot sights we use are small and weigh less
than 2 ounces.
Why not build a mounting point for a
red-dot sight into the scope’s sunshade?
The cost would be minuscule. Scope makers could also sell an accessory bracket
that slides into the mounting point (similar
to a camera hot shoe) and takes a red-dot
sight at the top.
Customers could buy their own red-dot
sights, which are available in all shapes,
sizes, and prices, starting as low as $10.
Red-dot sights are not lasers and don’t
project any light on the bird. The dot is
generated by a low-power LED. The tiny
lithium battery in ours lasts over a year in
normal use.
Minimal cost, large increase in the
functionality of the scope, happy customers, and a chance to sell accessories.
What’s not to like? Are you listening,
scope makers?
54
Armoring
Armoring adds
weight and bulk to a
scope, but it provides
great advantages.
Besides protecting
the scope, a rubberized surface feels
better, is hand friendly in cold weather,
and improves your
grip. With full
armoring you can
even do without the
inconvenience and
expense of a case. Its
innate silence also
contributes to one’s
birding stealth. Three
scopes in our survey
are fully armored:
the Leica, the
Swarovski, and the
Brunton.
Other scopes
compromise by
armoring the areas
around the prism
housing and the
focus knobs, where
the hand has most
contact. They are
more hand friendly
than an all-metal
scope, while conserving weight. Partially armored
scopes include the
Vortex Razor, Pentax, and Nikon EDG.
birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
Brunton Eterna
Balance
Balance means that the
scope is neither front-heavy nor
back-heavy. The best scopes
have their center of gravity
right above the point where
they mount on the tripod. The
Swarovski had the best balance
of all. Two others with excellent balance were Leica and the
88mm Kowa.
Tripod-Base Foot
A tripod-base foot is handy.
Some scopes had a tripod foot
shaped to fit directly into a
standard Manfrotto quickrelease tripod head, negating
the need for a separate quickrelease plate. This means one
less connection to come loose
or worry about. Scopes with
this useful feature are the Kowa
Prominars, Leica, Swarovski,
and Vortex Razor.
Summing Up
It’s hard to put in words how
good these scopes are. Judges were
astounded when they walked over
to the 25-yard test target and found
that they couldn’t see details close
up as well as they could through
the scope. With optics this good,
one has to reconsider whether a
bird in the hand still beats one in
the bush.
A couple of caveats. Resolution
scores are objective, and we put a
lot of attention on getting them
right, but we realize that a manufacturer might have sent us an off
example of its scope. The image
quality scores were more subjective. They represent a group average, and reasonable people could
disagree about the fine distinctions among scopes. However, we
feel confident that everyone
would agree that the top six
scopes in the chart were all very
close in image quality.
Are the top scopes worth their
price tags? If you’ve got the
money, yes, of course! To be able
to see the vein detail in a cicada’s
wings, held in the bill of a kingbird
at 80 yards, is an experience worth
every penny you’d pay for it. a
Michael and Diane Porter are
avid bird watchers who operate the
website birdwatching.com.
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com
55
Eye Relief
(mm) at
low power
Eye Relief
(mm) at
high power
Eyecup
TSN-883 Prominar
88
20–60x
17.0
16.5
indents twist
115
Leica
82mm APO Televid
82
25–50x
19.0
19.0
indents twist
123
Swarovski
ATM-80 HD
80
25–50x
17.0
17.0
smooth twist
126
Zeiss
Diascope 85 T* FL
85
20–60x
16.0
16.0
push-pull
129
Kowa
TSN-773 Prominar
77
20–60x
17.0
16.5
indents twist
115
Vortex
Razor HD
85
20–60x
20.0
18.0
smooth twist
117
Nikon
EDG Fieldscope
85
20–60x
18.4
16.5
indents twist
115
Pentax
PF-80EDA
80
20–60x
22.0
18.0
smooth twist
93
Celestron
Regal 80F-ED
80
20–60x
20.0
16.0
smooth twist
112
Alpen
854 Rainier
80
20–60x
17.0
17.0
indents twist
96
Brunton
Eterna ED
80
20–60x
17.0
17.0
indents twist
98
Bushnell
Elite ED
80
20–60x
18.0
18.0
fold down
98
FOV @ 1000
yds at low
power
Magnification
Kowa
Name of
Scope
Objective
Manufacturer
High-End Scopes
LEGEND FOR SCOPES CHART
Objective: diameter
of the front lens, in
millimeters
magnifying power of
the eyepiece
Eye Relief: how far
back in millimeters
your eye can be from
the eyepiece and still
Magnification:
56
see the whole image.
Shown for lowest and
highest magnification
of the eyepiece tested.
Fold down—folddown rubber
Indents twist—
twists up, with
indents
Eyecup:
Smooth twist—
twists up, without
indents
Push-pull—slides
up and down
FOV (Field of
View): in feet,
at
1,000 yards, at lowest and highest magnification.
birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
EVALUATING HIGH-END SCOPES
Price
Resolution
Score
Image
Quality
Score
Ergonomics
Score
$2905
5.0
4.8
4.6
84
Dual Knobs 12.5 7.0
67.9 15.2
FL
$3995
4.8
5.0
4.8
81
Barrel Band 16.0 4.0
56.1 15.4
HD
$3338
4.8
4.9
5.0
60
Dual Knobs 16.3 9.0
61.2 15.6
FL
$2500
4.8
4.6
4.4
55
Dual Knobs 16.4 3.0
58.5 14.6
XD
$2365
4.7
4.5
4.5
60
Dual Knobs 16.4 3.0
65.5 15.0
HD
$1600
4.6
4.5
4.7
58
Barrel Band 16.4 2.0
85.5 17.6
ED
$3300
4.0
4.1
2.5
49
Single Knob 19.0 8.0
73.1 19.1
ED
$1179
3.6
4.0
4.0
56
Dual Knobs 20.0 9.5
76.2 18.7
ED
$575
3.0
3.5
3.9
54
Single Knob 17.8 8.5
56.9 17.4
HD
$821
2.9
3.1
3.5
53
Single Knob 17.8 8.5
68.5 17.5
ED
$1000
2.8
3.0
3.7
50
Single Knob 17.8 8.5
60.4 17.4
ED
$679
2.8
3.0
3.3
Single Knob—one
focus knob
Dual Knobs—two
knobs, one for gross,
one for fine focus
Barrel Band—
focus ring circles
body of scope
Close Focus: minimum distance the
scope will focus
Focus Design:
Length (in.)
FC
Focus Speed
64.5 15.5
Close Focus
Dual Knobs 16.4 3.0
Focus Design
55
FOV @ 1000
yds at high
power
Special Glass
Weight with
eyepiece (oz.)
Review
number of fingerswipes from near to far.
Lower score is better.
Focus Speed:
(per manufacturer’s
descriptions):
ED or HD—extra
low-dispersion
XD or FL—extra
low-dispersion, with
fluoride ions
FC—fluorite crystal
Special Glass:
Price: determined by
market research at
time of writing.
measured at 50x.
Best is 5.
Resolution Score:
Image Quality
Score: judges’ scores,
averaged. Best is 5.
judges’ scores, averaged. Best is 5.
Ergonomics Score:
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com
57
P.O. Box 110 • 149 Acme Street • Marietta, Ohio 45750
740-373-5285 • 800-879-2473 • fax 740-373-8443
birdwatchersdigest.com