birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST46 BIRDWATCHER’SDIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 47

F

M I C H A E L A N D D I A N E P O R T E R

For this review, we surveyed aneven dozen full-sized birdingscopes, sent to us by manufacturersas their top-of-the-line scopes. Allwere full-sized scopes, with objec-tive lenses between 77mm and88mm, and all were of the angled-eyepiece design. They all camewith zoom eyepieces: 10 scopeswith the usual 20–60x zoom andtwo—the Leica and Swarovski—with new, wide-angle, 25–50xzoom designs. All were waterproof,and all had fully multi-coatedoptics and special glass to mini-mize chromatic aberration.

We had the scopes for more thana month, enough time to become

quite familiar with them and to testand retest under varying condi-tions.We also invited a team ofIowa bird watchers, who weredelighted at the opportunity tocompare the best of the best, tocome for a test day to assist in theevaluations.

Perusing the prices, you maycatch yourself blinking. Can younow really spend $4,000 on a spot-ting scope? Indeed you can, andmore than half of those in our sur-vey cost more than $2,000. Therange of prices in the 12 scopes isfrom $575 to $3,995.

Here’s how we tested, whichscopes got the top scores, and why.M

ICH

AE

LP

OR

TE

R(2

)

Aprimary consideration of ascope is its resolution, the ability toshow fine detail.We tested all thescopes for resolution at a mid-rangedistance of 25 yards.We set theeyepieces to the highest power theyall had in common, which was 50x.Our target was a standard UnitedStatesAir Force resolution chart.We then mapped the observed rela-

tive scores to a scale in which thetop score was 5.

For scopes that got similarscores, we went further.We put a

booster on the eyepieces and com-pared them at double magnifica-tion, at 100x. Only then could wesee any differences in resolutionamong some of the top scopes.Asanother test, we placed a one-dollarbill next to the chart so we couldcompare text, graphics, and fineengraving details.

The Kowa Prominar 883 stoodout. Each time we tested, theKowa’s better resolution wasclearly visible even without abooster. It quickly became our ref-erence scope, the one we keptgoing back to while testing, to ruleout inconsistency due to eyefatigue or the effect of changinglight conditions. If the Kowa’sscore stayed the same, we knew wecould trust our eyes.

The Kowa’s larger 88mm objec-tive lens undoubtedly contributed toits high resolution score. The lawsof optics say a bigger lens theoreti-cally can resolve finer detail.Another factor may be the pure flu-orite crystal element in the objec-

HIGH-END SCOPESTHE BEST OFTHE BEST RE

VIEW

Best Resolution

KOWAProminar 88350x resolution score: 5.0

Team Iowa.

Best Ergonomics & Overall design

BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 49

tive lens, which largely eliminateschromatic aberration. It is not acoating, and it is not fluoride ionsin the glass. The lens element ismade from industrially grown flu-orite crystal.

It’s worth noting that the fivenext-highest scopes—Zeiss, Leica,Swarovski, Vortex, and the 77mmKowa—scored so closely to eachother that it required 100x magni-fication to rank them. We believe

that the resolution differencesbetween these scopes would notoften be discernible in the field.

The chart is arranged in orderby resolution score, with the high-est at the top. It’s important tonote that the lower-priced scopesat the bottom of the chart do nothave poor resolution. They do afine job for their price range,although they suffer from compet-ing against the best, most expen-sive optics in the world.

48 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRDWATCHER’SDIGEST

Best Overall Image Quality

Overall image quality, althoughit includes resolution, is more aholistic and subjective evaluation ofthe viewer’s experience. Multiplefactors interact. So we were espe-cially interested inincluding the guestjudges’opinions.

We asked ourjudges to considersharpness, contrast,brightness, field ofview, color fidelity,and freedom fromchromatic aberration.But ultimately theywere trying to determinewhich images looked best tothem overall. The score for eachscope is the average of all thejudges’ ratings.

The new Leica 82mmAPOTele-

vid got the top score, closely fol-lowed by the Swarovski and theKowa 88mm. Here’s an experiencewe had that may illuminate why thiswas the case.

One day we watched an easternkingbird 80 yards away in a willowtree at the edge of a pond. The king-bird repeatedly bashed a cicadaagainst a branch, softening it up foringestion. We looked through the

88mm Kowa, admiring the birdand even the details of the veinsin the cicada’s transparent wings.And then we looked through the82mm Leica and its wide-anglezoom eyepiece. We were struckby the rich, beautiful image of thebird in its habitat, framed by wil-low leaves. The visual field wasmore completely filled and deliv-ered a more satisfying subjectiveexperience.

Note that the Swarovski’s 25–50xwide-angle zoomgives an experiencesimilar to the Leica’s. Leica edged

out the Swarovski in scoring becauseof its slightlywider field of view at50x and better eye relief.

With both of the new Leica andSwarovski eyepieces, the imagecircle, the picture frame, stays thesame size when you zoom in orout, compared with most zooms, inwhich it grows and shrinks. Youget better immersion in the imageat all magnifications.

But there is a tradeoff. With the25–50x eyepieces you lose the60x maximum magnification andits higher resolution.

Leica 82mm APO TelEVID50x resolution score: 4.8

An elegant design ismore than just aesthet-ics. It reveals a commit-ment to detail and per-fection that is likely tobe found deeper in theworkings of the scope.A scope’s ergonomicdesign determines howwell it gets along withyou—how user-friendlyit is. In deciding among high-endscopes, where the resolution andimage quality are already excel-lent, ergonomic issues can drivethe choice.

The 80mm SwarovskiATM-80HD scope won this category handsdown. It has a lovely, simple sweepof line. There are no knobs to stick

out or catch on anything, no cornersto collect dirt. It was the lightest-weight scope in our survey. (Themain change from the olderATS to

swarovski 80mmATM-80 HD50x resolution score: 4.8

MIC

HA

EL

PO

RT

ER

the newATM model is lighterweight.) It’s fully armored.Whenyou pick it up, it feels good, it fitswell in your hand, and nothingpokes you. It balances perfectly.

Along with the Vortex Razor, ithas the best aiming device: a peepsight that can easily be removed ifyou don’t want it. The focus is awide band around the barrel thatallows fast focus, but not so fastthat it makes fine focus difficult.One could even focus wearingheavy mittens.

TheATM-HD scope works bothwith Swarovski’s new, wide-angled25–50x zoom eyepiece and with theprevious 20–60x zoom from oldermodels. You can purchase the scope

with either eyepiece, so you get achoice. The eyepiece attaches by alocking bayonet mount. Its excellenttolerances make changing eyepiecesa pleasure. On every ergonomicissue we observed, the Swarovskiwas tops.

The Leica is another example ofbeautiful overall design that wouldrival the Swarovski if not for a cou-ple of flaws we didn’t expect to seein a $4,000 scope. The lens shadedidn’t rotate, with the result that thesight was unusable on the angledmodel scope.Also, on the scope wewere sent, the collar ring by whichthe scope rotates was glitchy andstiff.We hope that these are onlyearly production issues.

birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST50 BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 51

Best ValueS

Vortex Razor HD ($1,600)The Vortex Razor HD 85 stood outas the best value in a high-endscope. Its optical quality was excel-lent, holding its own against $2,300to $4,000 rivals. The Razor’s reso-lution closelyapproached all butthat of the 88mmKowa. In field ofview, at 60x itmatched the ZeissDiascope, and noth-ing else bested thesetwo. The 85mmobjective lens and

HD glass helped the Razor achieveits good resolution scores, and yetthe weight is a moderate 65.5ounces, right between the Kowaand the Leica.

In body shape and design, theRazor resembles the Kowa Promi-nars, with similar dual focus knobs.It has excellent focus ergonomics,easily as good as any other scopewe tested. Vortex actually surpassesthe all-metallic Kowas with respectto its surface, which is partially rub-berized in the central areas wherethe hand is most likely to contactthe scope.

TheVortex’s 20–60x eyepiecedesign mechanically resemblesSwarovski’s: a bayonet mount witha lock at the back of the scope, simi-lar twist-up eyecup, and the samekind of useful, removable peep sightat the right base of the eyepiece.

The Razor is Vortex’s first forayinto the high-end scope market. Iftheir strategy is producing superior-quality products at budget prices,they have a winner.

Celestron Regal ($575)Among the four $1,000-and-underscopes in our survey, the CelestronRegal deserves special mention. Itturned in an impressive perfor-mance, gaining the highest resolu-tion, image quality, and ergonomicsscores of the four. It evidenced thewidest field of view and the longesteye relief at 20x. It’s also the onlyone of this group with dual focus

knobs. Most of oursurvey scopes areavailable with one ormore alternativeoptional eyepieces.Celestron, however,offers at least 30astronomical eye-pieces with 1.25"barrels of variousmagnification, fieldof view, price, and

quality that will work with theRegal. By the way, it’s the leastexpensive scope in our survey.Great value!

Celestron Regal50x resolution score: 3.0

Vortex Razor

KOWA Prominar 883Focus knob detail

MIC

HA

EL

PO

RT

ER

MIC

HA

EL

PO

RT

ER

Ergonomics & Other Issues

Pentax PF-80ED ($1,179) Ifyou want go up a notch in qualitywhile still keeping cost down, youmight want to consider the PentaxPF-80ED, especially if size andweight are not major concerns. The

Pentax has very good optical andmechanical quality, ranking abovethe Celestron but at a price farbelow the top scopes in the survey.There are 12 Pentax eyepieces thatwork with this scope. In its pricerange, it is an excellent value.

The following are some ergonom-ic issues we consider important.

Focus mechanisms came inthree flavors: dual focus knobs,single focus knobs, and barrelbands. The two best focusingsolutions were Leica’s low-pro-file dual focus knobs andSwarovski’s wide barrel band.

Dual focus knobs let youfocus more quickly using the fastfocus knob and make slower,more precise adjustments usingthe fine focus knob. All of thedual focus mechanisms workedwell. The best design wasLeica’s, which sheltered bothdual knobs in a sleek andergonomic way. The shape of thedesign and the fully armoredcoating made it particularly com-fortable to rest a hand on theLeica’s scope body, with the fin-gers easily on the focus knobs,and keep the fingers of the otherhand on the zoom mechanism,

birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST52 BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 53

ready to zoom and focus. TheSwarovski’s barrel band designwas equally comfortable.

Focus speed is how quick-ly you can go through thescope’s focus range. The fastestway to change focus is to drag afinger across the focus knob.The finger-swipe test numbersin the chart represent how manyfinger-swipes it took to gothrough the whole focus range.We used Michael’s hand to dothe test, using the same tech-nique on each scope. If youhave longer fingers or a betterswiping technique, your resultsmight be different. Michael’shand fits a medium-size glove.

Tops were the Kowa and Vor-tex, with 3 swipes. Next best wasthe Swarovski, with 4 swipes.The single focus knobs weren’tas fast, but single knobs need togo slower in order to preservethe ability to fine focus.

The Nikon EDG would havewon with a swipe score of 2, butour judges found it to be too fastand too stiff, making it difficultto fine focus. They complained alot when trying to zero in on aresolution chart.

Sighting mechanismsshould allow quick aiming of thescope so that you don’t miss thebird. We found the most effectivesights to be the removable peepsights on the Swarovski and the

Vortex Razor. Next best was theBrunton’s somewhat shorter (andnonremovable) peep sight. Theother scopes had only raisedsighting lines on the side of theprism housing or on the sunshade.

Inexplicably, the Nikon EDGhad no sight at all. And in a hard-to-fathom blunder, as notedabove, Leica’s sighting mecha-nism was unusable on an angledscope. (Many bird watchers, par-ticularly those interested in digis-coping, prefer an angled scope.)

Digiscoping withan angled scope.

JULI

EZ

ICK

EF

OO

SE

Some Foodfor thought

Considering the importance of aiming,it’s hard to understand why the best brainsin scope making haven’t come up with abetter solution. Here’s a modest proposal.

For years, we have mounted red-dotsights on our scopes. When you lookthrough a red-dot sight, you see an illumi-nated red dot overlying the image. You getinstant, perfect acquisition of the bird,even at 60 power. No wasted time zoom-ing out and zooming in. It makes thescope many times more useful. The reddot sights we use are small and weigh lessthan 2 ounces.

Why not build a mounting point for ared-dot sight into the scope’s sunshade?The cost would be minuscule. Scope mak-ers could also sell an accessory bracketthat slides into the mounting point (similarto a camera hot shoe) and takes a red-dotsight at the top.

Customers could buy their own red-dotsights, which are available in all shapes,sizes, and prices, starting as low as $10.Red-dot sights are not lasers and don’tproject any light on the bird. The dot isgenerated by a low-power LED. The tinylithium battery in ours lasts over a year innormal use.

Minimal cost, large increase in thefunctionality of the scope, happy cus-tomers, and a chance to sell accessories.What’s not to like? Are you listening,scope makers?

BalanceBalance means that the

scope is neither front-heavy norback-heavy. The best scopeshave their center of gravityright above the point wherethey mount on the tripod. TheSwarovski had the best balanceof all. Two others with excel-lent balance were Leica and the88mm Kowa.

Tripod-Base FootA tripod-base foot is handy.

Some scopes had a tripod footshaped to fit directly into astandard Manfrotto quick-release tripod head, negatingthe need for a separate quick-release plate. This means oneless connection to come looseor worry about. Scopes withthis useful feature are the KowaProminars, Leica, Swarovski,and Vortex Razor.

Summing UpIt’s hard to put in words how

good these scopes are. Judges wereastounded when they walked overto the 25-yard test target and foundthat they couldn’t see details closeup as well as they could throughthe scope.With optics this good,one has to reconsider whether abird in the hand still beats one inthe bush.

A couple of caveats. Resolutionscores are objective, and we put alot of attention on getting themright, but we realize that a manu-facturer might have sent us an offexample of its scope. The imagequality scores were more subjec-tive. They represent a group aver-age, and reasonable people coulddisagree about the fine distinc-tions among scopes. However, wefeel confident that everyonewould agree that the top sixscopes in the chart were all veryclose in image quality.

Are the top scopes worth theirprice tags? If you’ve got themoney, yes, of course! To be ableto see the vein detail in a cicada’swings, held in the bill of a kingbirdat 80 yards, is an experience worthevery penny you’d pay for it. a

Michael and Diane Porter areavid bird watchers who operate thewebsite birdwatching.com.

birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST54 BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 55

Brunton Eterna

ArmoringArmoring adds

weight and bulk to ascope, but it providesgreat advantages.Besides protectingthe scope, a rubber-ized surface feelsbetter, is hand friend-ly in cold weather,and improves yourgrip. With fullarmoring you caneven do without theinconvenience andexpense of a case. Itsinnate silence alsocontributes to one’sbirding stealth. Threescopes in our surveyare fully armored:the Leica, theSwarovski, and theBrunton.

Other scopescompromise byarmoring the areasaround the prismhousing and thefocus knobs, wherethe hand has mostcontact. They aremore hand friendlythan an all-metalscope, while con-serving weight. Par-tially armoredscopes include theVortex Razor, Pen-tax, and Nikon EDG.

56 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST56 BIRDWATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 57

Kowa TSN-883 Prominar 88 20–60x 17.0 16.5 indents twist 115 55 Dual Knobs 16.4 3.0 64.5 15.5 FC $2905 5.0 4.8 4.6

Leica 82mm APO Televid 82 25–50x 19.0 19.0 indents twist 123 84 Dual Knobs 12.5 7.0 67.9 15.2 FL $3995 4.8 5.0 4.8

Swarovski ATM-80 HD 80 25–50x 17.0 17.0 smooth twist 126 81 Barrel Band 16.0 4.0 56.1 15.4 HD $3338 4.8 4.9 5.0

Zeiss Diascope 85 T* FL 85 20–60x 16.0 16.0 push-pull 129 60 Dual Knobs 16.3 9.0 61.2 15.6 FL $2500 4.8 4.6 4.4

Kowa TSN-773 Prominar 77 20–60x 17.0 16.5 indents twist 115 55 Dual Knobs 16.4 3.0 58.5 14.6 XD $2365 4.7 4.5 4.5

Vortex Razor HD 85 20–60x 20.0 18.0 smooth twist 117 60 Dual Knobs 16.4 3.0 65.5 15.0 HD $1600 4.6 4.5 4.7

Nikon EDG Fieldscope 85 20–60x 18.4 16.5 indents twist 115 58 Barrel Band 16.4 2.0 85.5 17.6 ED $3300 4.0 4.1 2.5

Pentax PF-80EDA 80 20–60x 22.0 18.0 smooth twist 93 49 Single Knob 19.0 8.0 73.1 19.1 ED $1179 3.6 4.0 4.0

Celestron Regal 80F-ED 80 20–60x 20.0 16.0 smooth twist 112 56 Dual Knobs 20.0 9.5 76.2 18.7 ED $575 3.0 3.5 3.9

Alpen 854 Rainier 80 20–60x 17.0 17.0 indents twist 96 54 Single Knob 17.8 8.5 56.9 17.4 HD $821 2.9 3.1 3.5

Brunton Eterna ED 80 20–60x 17.0 17.0 indents twist 98 53 Single Knob 17.8 8.5 68.5 17.5 ED $1000 2.8 3.0 3.7

Bushnell Elite ED 80 20–60x 18.0 18.0 fold down 98 50 Single Knob 17.8 8.5 60.4 17.4 ED $679 2.8 3.0 3.3

Man

ufac

turer

Nameof

Scop

e

Objec

tive

Mag

nific

ation

FOV

@10

00yd

sat

low

power

Focu

sDe

sign

EyeRe

lief

(mm)at

low

power

Eyec

up

EyeRe

lief

(mm)at

high

power

Clos

eFo

cus

Imag

eQua

lity

Score

Focu

sSp

eed

Weigh

twith

eyep

iece

(oz.)

Leng

th(in

.)

Spec

ialG

lass

Price

Reso

lutio

nScore

High-End Scopes Review EVALUATING HIGH-END SCOPES

LEGEND FOR SCOPES CHART

FOV

@10

00yd

sat

high

power

Ergo

nomics

Score

Objective: diameterof the front lens, inmillimetersMagnification:magnifying power ofthe eyepieceEye Relief: how farback in millimetersyour eye can be fromthe eyepiece and still

see the whole image.Shown for lowest andhighest magnificationof the eyepiece tested.Eyecup:

Fold down—fold-down rubberIndents twist—twists up, withindents

Smooth twist—twists up, withoutindentsPush-pull—slidesup and down

FOV (Field ofView): in feet, at1,000 yards, at low-est and highest mag-nification.

Focus Design:Single Knob—onefocus knobDual Knobs—twoknobs, one for gross,one for fine focusBarrel Band—focus ring circlesbody of scope

Close Focus: mini-mum distance thescope will focus

Focus Speed:number of finger-swipes from near to far.Lower score is better.Special Glass:(per manufacturer’sdescriptions):

ED or HD—extralow-dispersionXD or FL—extralow-dispersion, withfluoride ionsFC—fluorite crystal

Price: determined bymarket research attime of writing.Resolution Score:measured at 50x.Best is 5.Image QualityScore: judges’ scores,averaged. Best is 5.Ergonomics Score:judges’ scores, aver-aged. Best is 5.