HIGH-END SCOPES
REVIEW
For this review, we surveyed an
F even dozen full-sized birding
scopes, sent to us by manufacturers
as their top-of-the-line scopes. All
were full-sized scopes, with objec-
tive lenses between 77mm and
88mm, and all were of the angled-
eyepiece 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 mini-
MICHAEL PORTER (2)
mize chromatic aberration.
We had the scopes for more than
a month, enough time to become
MICHAEL AND
46 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
Team Iowa.
quite familiar with them and to test
and retest under varying condi-
tions. 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 spot-
ting scope? Indeed you can, and
more than half of those in our sur-
vey 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
THE BEST OFTHE BEST
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
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com
booster on the eyepieces and com-
pared them at double magnifica-
tion, 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 ref-
erence 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 objec-
tive lens undoubtedly contributed to
its high resolution score. The laws
of optics say a bigger lens theoreti-
cally can resolve finer detail.
Another factor may be the pure flu-
orite crystal element in the objec-
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 flu-
orite 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 magni-
fication to rank them. We believe
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 espe-
cially interested in
including the guest
judges’ opinions.
We asked our
judges to consider
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 high-
est 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 compet-
ing against the best, most expen-
sive optics in the world.
vid got the top score, closely fol-
lowed 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
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 wil-
low leaves. The visual field was
more completely filled and deliv-
ered 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
Best Ergonomics & Overall design
An elegant design is
more than just aesthet-
ics. It reveals a commit-
ment to detail and per-
fection that is likely to
be found deeper in the
workings of the scope.
A scope’s ergonomic
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.

design determines how

MICHAEL PORTER
sharpness, contrast,
brightness, field of well it gets along with
view, color fidelity, you—how user-friendly
and freedom from it is. In deciding among high-end swarovski 80mm
chromatic aberration. scopes, where the resolution and ATM-80 HD
But ultimately they image quality are already excel-
were trying to determine One day we watched an eastern lent, ergonomic issues can drive
the choice.
50x resolution score: 4.8

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 Tele-
kingbird 80 yards away in a willow
tree at the edge of a pond. The king-
bird repeatedly bashed a cicada
against a branch, softening it up for
ingestion. We looked through the
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
out or catch on anything, no corners
to collect dirt. It was the lightest-
weight scope in our survey. (The
main change from the older ATS to

48 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST 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
Best ValueS
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 excel-
lent, holding its own against $2,300
to $4,000 rivals. The Razor’s reso-
lution closely
approached all but
that of the 88mm
Kowa. In field of
view, at 60x it
matched the Zeiss
Diascope, and noth-
ing else bested these
two. The 85mm
objective lens and
50 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
with either eyepiece, so you get a In body shape and design, the Celestron Regal ($575)
choice. The eyepiece attaches by a Razor resembles the Kowa Promi- Among the four $1,000-and-under
locking bayonet mount. Its excellent nars, with similar dual focus knobs. scopes in our survey, the Celestron
tolerances make changing eyepieces It has excellent focus ergonomics, Regal deserves special mention. It
a pleasure. On every ergonomic easily as good as any other scope turned in an impressive perfor-
issue we observed, the Swarovski we tested. Vortex actually surpasses mance, gaining the highest resolu-
was tops. the all-metallic Kowas with respect tion, image quality, and ergonomics
The Leica is another example of to its surface, which is partially rub- scores of the four. It evidenced the
beautiful overall design that would berized in the central areas where widest field of view and the longest
rival the Swarovski if not for a cou- the hand is most likely to contact eye relief at 20x. It’s also the only
ple of flaws we didn’t expect to see the scope. one of this group with dual focus
in a $4,000 scope. The lens shade knobs. Most of our
didn’t rotate, with the result that the survey scopes are
sight was unusable on the angled available with one or
model scope. Also, on the scope we more alternative
were sent, the collar ring by which optional eyepieces.
the scope rotates was glitchy and Celestron, however,
stiff. We hope that these are only offers at least 30
early production issues. astronomical eye-
pieces with 1.25"
barrels of various
MICHAEL PORTER
magnification, field
of view, price, and
quality that will work with the
HD glass helped the Razor achieve
KOWA Prominar 883
Regal. By the way, it’s the least
its good resolution scores, and yet expensive scope in our survey.
the weight is a moderate 65.5 Great value!
Focus knob detail
ounces, right between the Kowa The Vortex’s 20–60x eyepiece
and the Leica. design mechanically resembles
Vortex Razor Swarovski’s: a bayonet mount with
a lock at the back of the scope, simi-
lar 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 superior-
quality products at budget prices, Celestron Regal
MICHAEL PORTER
they have a winner.
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
Ergonomics & Other Issues
The following are some ergonom-
ic 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-pro-
file 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 com-
fortable to rest a hand on the
Leica’s scope body, with the fin-
gers easily on the focus knobs,
and keep the fingers of the other
hand on the zoom mechanism,
52 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST
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.
Digiscoping with
an angled scope.
ready to zoom and focus. The
Swarovski’s barrel band design
was equally comfortable.
Focus speed is how quick-
ly you can go through the
scope’s focus range. The fastest
way to change focus is to drag a
JULIE ZICKEFOOSE
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. The Nikon EDG would have Vortex Razor. Next best was the
We used Michael’s hand to do won with a swipe score of 2, but Brunton’s somewhat shorter (and
the test, using the same tech- our judges found it to be too fast nonremovable) peep sight. The
nique on each scope. If you and too stiff, making it difficult other scopes had only raised
have longer fingers or a better to fine focus. They complained a sighting lines on the side of the
swiping technique, your results lot when trying to zero in on a prism housing or on the sunshade.
might be different. Michael’s resolution chart. Inexplicably, the Nikon EDG
hand fits a medium-size glove. had no sight at all. And in a hard-
Tops were the Kowa and Vor- to-fathom blunder, as noted
tex, with 3 swipes. Next best was should allow quick aiming of the above, Leica’s sighting mecha-
Sighting mechanisms
the Swarovski, with 4 swipes. scope so that you don’t miss the nism was unusable on an angled
The single focus knobs weren’t bird. We found the most effective scope. (Many bird watchers, par-
as fast, but single knobs need to sights to be the removable peep ticularly those interested in digis-
go slower in order to preserve sights on the Swarovski and the coping, prefer an angled scope.)
the ability to fine focus.
BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 53
Some Food It’s hard to put in words how
for thought
Summing Up

Armoring adds good these scopes are. Judges were

Armoring

weight and bulk to a astounded when they walked over

scope, but it provides
great advantages.
Considering the importance of aiming, Besides protecting
it’s hard to understand why the best brains the scope, a rubber-
in scope making haven’t come up with a ized surface feels
better, is hand friend-
better solution. Here’s a modest proposal.
For years, we have mounted red-dot ly in cold weather,
sights on our scopes. When you look and improves your
through a red-dot sight, you see an illumi- grip. With full
nated red dot overlying the image. You get armoring you can
Balance
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
Brunton Eterna
bird in the hand still beats one in
the bush.
A couple of caveats. Resolution
scores are objective, and we put a
Balance means that the lot of attention on getting them

instant, perfect acquisition of the bird,
even at 60 power. No wasted time zoom-
ing 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 mak-
ers could also sell an accessory bracket
that slides into the mounting point (similar
to a camera hot shoe) and takes a red-dot
even do without the scope is neither front-heavy nor right, but we realize that a manu-
inconvenience and back-heavy. The best scopes facturer might have sent us an off
expense of a case. Its have their center of gravity example of its scope. The image
innate silence also right above the point where quality scores were more subjec-
contributes to one’s they mount on the tripod. The tive. They represent a group aver-
birding stealth. Three Swarovski had the best balance age, and reasonable people could
scopes in our survey of all. Two others with excel- disagree about the fine distinc-
are fully armored: lent balance were Leica and the tions among scopes. However, we
the Leica, the 88mm Kowa. feel confident that everyone
Swarovski, and the would agree that the top six
Brunton. scopes in the chart were all very
Other scopes A tripod-base foot is handy. close in image quality.
Tripod-Base Foot

sight at the top. compromise by Some scopes had a tripod foot Are the top scopes worth their
Customers could buy their own red-dot armoring the areas shaped to fit directly into a price tags? If you’ve got the
sights, which are available in all shapes, around the prism standard Manfrotto quick- money, yes, of course! To be able
sizes, and prices, starting as low as $10. housing and the release tripod head, negating to see the vein detail in a cicada’s
Red-dot sights are not lasers and don’t focus knobs, where the need for a separate quick- wings, held in the bill of a kingbird
project any light on the bird. The dot is the hand has most release plate. This means one at 80 yards, is an experience worth
generated by a low-power LED. The tiny contact. They are less connection to come loose every penny you’d pay for it. a
lithium battery in ours lasts over a year in more hand friendly or worry about. Scopes with
normal use. than an all-metal this useful feature are the Kowa Michael and Diane Porter are
Minimal cost, large increase in the scope, while con- Prominars, Leica, Swarovski, avid bird watchers who operate the
functionality of the scope, happy cus- serving weight. Par- and Vortex Razor. website birdwatching.com.
tomers, and a chance to sell accessories. tially armored
What’s not to like? Are you listening, scopes include the
scope makers? Vortex Razor, Pen-
tax, and Nikon EDG.

54 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 55
High-End Scopes Review EVALUATING HIGH-END SCOPES

eyepiece (oz.)

Special Glass
Manufacturer

Magnification

Focus Design
FOV @ 1000

FOV @ 1000

Weight with
Focus Speed

Length (in.)
Close Focus
high power

yds at high
low power

Ergonomics
yds at low

Resolution
Eye Relief
Eye Relief
Objective
Name of

(mm) at
(mm) at

Quality
Eyecup

Image
power

power
Scope

Score
Score

Score
Price
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

Price: determined by
Single Knob—one market research at
LEGEND FOR SCOPES CHART number of finger-
Objective: diameter see the whole image. Smooth twist—
Focus Design: Focus Speed:

focus knob swipes from near to far. time of writing.

of the front lens, in Shown for lowest and twists up, without Dual Knobs—two Lower score is better.
millimeters highest magnification indents knobs, one for gross, measured at 50x.
of the eyepiece tested. Push-pull—slides
Resolution Score:

one for fine focus (per manufacturer’s Best is 5.

magnifying power of up and down
Special Glass:

Barrel Band— descriptions):

Magnification:

the eyepiece Fold down—fold- focus ring circles Score: judges’ scores,
ED or HD—extra
Eyecup:

Eye Relief: how far down rubber View): in feet, at

Image Quality

body of scope low-dispersion averaged. Best is 5.

FOV (Field of

back in millimeters Indents twist— 1,000 yards, at low- Close Focus: mini- XD or FL—extra
your eye can be from twists up, with est and highest mag- mum distance the judges’ scores, aver-
low-dispersion, with
the eyepiece and still indents nification.
Ergonomics Score:

scope will focus fluoride ions aged. Best is 5.

FC—fluorite crystal

56 birdwatchersdigest.com • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST BIRD WATCHER’S DIGEST • NOVEMBER/DECEMBER ’09 • birdwatchersdigest.com 57