Swaro Eyepiece recommendation?

[Timberjack]

A quick one for you guys...

Which eyepiece do most of you have with your ATS spotter? The 20-60 obviously has higher zoom than the 25-50, but the latter is called a wide angle lens... So I would think the 60 is going to be better for counting rings on a ram, but the wide angle is better for scanning a hillside for animals? Am I missing something here? Oh yeah, and why does the 25-50 cost so much more??

Thank guys,
TJ

[BlacktailStalker]

I have used the 20-60 for years, can't speak on the 25-50.
In my experiences the distortion in the sight picture from heat waves when it is hot and the moisture when it is wet makes much more than 40x at semi long to long distances useless. Most my glassing is in the 20x and I frequently adjust on objects of interest. I usually go over an area slowly at 20 looking for obvious features then again at a magnified zoom to look for 'pieces' twice as slow, depending on terrain.

[BiG Boar]

The 25-50 is much better glass. Plus the wider angle is better for seeing more animals because you're covering more ground. Most people have the 20 (like me). But talk to someone who knows their glass and they'll say 25.

[boxhitch]

20 x 60 here too , and lots of times wish it was 15 x , moving from 10 x binos to the 20 x can be a big jump in certain conditions. Maybe the wide angle would help with that , don't know.
Like BTS said , you don't often use 60 x , but when conditions are right and it works , you wish it was 80 x .
Guess I'm saying , maybe go with what 90% of hunters use , and go 20-60 x. I think the 25-50 would be better for birders use at closer ranges than open mountainsides.

Here is some real-world info http://www.birdwatching.com/optics.html

[300rum700]

My partner has the 25-50 and I have the 20-60, he sells optics and we always take mine and leave his at home. If they made a 75x I would buy that even with a 65 mm spotter.

[pescado]

Nice spotter TJ, well done. My hunting partner uses the 20-60 and it works well. If it were me I would go 25-50 WA lens because I like a wide angle view when I'm glassing. I run my fixed WA 30 more than I run my variable higher power, its not a Swaro spotter. Conditions have to be good to use your upper power ranges. 50x is plenty.

[Husky7mm]

You will spend much more time glassing with the lower power. On a different note I would recamend the angled as opposed to the straight. I have the straight and find it hard on the neck without the right setup.

[Jagermeister]

I had the choice, took the 20-60. I like the clarity of high power at long distance. And as far as FOV, it is only relevant if you are birding at high power at close distances in the range of <100'.

[Jagermeister]

Here's a comparison chart


STS-ATS 65 STS-ATS 80

Magnification 20-60X 25-50X 20-60X 25-50X

Exit Pupil Ø 3.3-1.1mm 2.6-1.3mm 4-1.3mm 3.2-1.6mm

Exit pupil distance 17mm 17mm 17mm 17mm

Twilight factor 36-62 40-56.5 40-69 44-63

FOV@1000yds 118-66 ft. 138-89 ft. 118-66 ft 138-89 ft

FOV deg. 2.1-1.1° 2.4-1.5° 2.1-1.1° 2.4-1.5°

SFOV deg. 40-65° 60-70° 40-65° 60-70°

Twilight factor
A number used to compare the effectiveness of binoculars or spotting scopes used in low light. The twilight factor is found by multiplying the size of the objective lens (in mm) by the magnification and then finding the square root of that result. The larger the twilight factor, the more detail you can see in low light. A twilight factor of 17 or better if usually required for reasonable low light use.

The number of elements in either the 20-60X or the 25-50X are equal at 9 elements. And the FOV numbers are the same for eye glass wearer.

This information was derived from the data sheet provided with my ATS 65HD

[Jagermeister]

What a piss off. What is posted is not really what I pasted. The first and second number sets are for the 65 and the third and fourth are for the 80.

[pescado]

I had the choice, took the 20-60. I like the clarity of high power at long distance. And as far as FOV, it is only relevant if you are birding at high power at close distances in the range of <100'.

Interesting Jagr. Totally the opposite than I would have thought. I think of FOV as being more advantages at greater ranges. Have to do some research tonight.

[Jagermeister]

STS/ATS 65 STS/ATS 80
FOV@1000yds 118-66 ft. / 138-89 ft. 118-66 ft / 138-89 ft
(20-60X)/(25-50X) (20-60X)/(25-50X)
Look at this portion of the chart. At 1000 yards and 20X, the FOV is 118' for both scopes with the 20-60x and 66' at 60X. With the same scopes and at the same distance and power at 25X renders an FOV of 138' and 89' at 50X.
Bear in mind the distance of 1000 yards. As the power is decreased, the FOV starts to expand.
At the respective low power of each eyepiece, you can see that the 25-50X eyepiece holds a 20' advantage in FOV over the 20-60X eyepiece and a 23' advantage at their repective higher powers. Not that much but it is at 1000 yards and it will be increasingly wider at closer distances.
Suppose that you're scoping a goat across the canyon. The distance is 1000 yards and it seems to be large enough to be a billy. You have the power cranked on your ATS65HD to 50X, (you have the 25-50X eyepiece) You have the goat centered in the lense. Your view 44½' to either side or under or over. That's only 11½' greater than the 20-60X eyepiece cranked to it's maximum power. The horn detail revealed at +10 power may be the determining factor in whether you continue the pursuit of this goat or not.

[srupp]

Hmm I have the 20x60..and the angled 65 love that setup

Cheers

Srupp

[325]

I have a Swaro spotter with the 20-60 as well. Mine is straight. No problem counting annuli if the sun is behind me. I rarely go over 40, as heat waves seem to distort the image too much. Heat waves can be a real PITA.

[eastkoot]

Have leica 20x60 and I am thinking 15x45 would be more practical. Often scan at 20 but 15 would be better, then zoom into 60 and heat waves and distortion play havoc on the intended target...

[GoatGuy]

Have leica 20x60 and I am thinking 15x45 would be more practical. Often scan at 20 but 15 would be better, then zoom into 60 and heat waves and distortion play havoc on the intended target...

turn off the truck

[eastkoot]

Nothing but shit and abuse!!! Quit pickin on the old retired guy:)

[Timberjack]

Thanks for the thoughts guys. My local shop guy says he's never had anyone ask for the 25-50... The two scopes I've ever owned go to 40 and 45, so maybe the real question is how useful 60 is for the most part. I understand the heat wave issue just fine, so as long as the conditions are right all is fine. I just wonder how dark things get at high magnification other than on the days with ideal conditions...

I'll be headed to the store over the next few weeks to test as best as one can in the stores... I'll report back. Thanks for the info!

TJ

[BiG Boar]

They both have their advantages and disadvantages. The one advantage you'll have with the 60 power is to be able to count rings possibly a little bit better. This is going to happen once or twice a year, and only when hunting stones. Other than that, most of the day long, those last 10x are useless because of the mirage.

I do a lot of glassing through the scope itself. I can work over a whole mountain side for a bedded sheep or deer using a grid pattern. With a wider field of view you will see more animals. Its just covering more ground. This you will use on mule deer, moose, big horn, or many other animals. If you spot an animal or movement with your binos, you will be able to acquire the animal faster in the scope with a wider angle of view also.

IMO those 10 power are hardly necessary on the 20-60. The glass is better in the 25-50 which is why its more money to begin with. If someone wanted to buy my 20-60, I would gladly sell it and change it for a 25-50.

Go test them both out, side by side in low light. You will notice the difference. Most of the guys commenting on here anyways bought the 20-60 before the 25-50 even came out, so you can discount their opinion too.

[Jagermeister]

The glass is better in the 25-50 which is why its more money to begin with.How did you make that determination, just by the price?

[BlacktailStalker]

Your 60 will be useful at closer ranges where you can count rings... if you need to.

[Jagermeister]

There are exactly the same number of elements (9) in either eyepiece.
Spherical lens cannot converge parallel light rays at a single focal point completely and this distortion is more pronounced in wide angle lenses. It takes a greater degree of grinding and polishing of one lens to correct the distorted image in WA lenses. This lens is called an aspherical lens and they exist in most all quality scopes. The cost of correcting is greater for the wider angle is greater.
Mirage is not an aberration of an increase in power. Mirage is a phenonemon of optical illusion created as light rays bend (refraction) as they pass from a cold air into warm air.
Low light is known as the twilight factor and twilight factor is.......

A number used to compare the effectiveness of binoculars or spotting scopes used in low light. The twilight factor is found by multiplying the size of the objective lens (in mm) by the magnification and then finding the square root of that result. The larger the twilight factor, the more detail you can see in low light. A twilight factor of 17 or better if usually required for reasonable low light use.

The twilight factors for the STM/ATM 65 using the 20-60X are 36-62 and for the 25-50X are 40-56.5. In the STM/ATM 80 the t/f numbers are 40-69 using the 20-60X and 44-63 using 25-50X. Nothing really outstanding IMO. If you are considering of becoming a professional birding photographer looking for the super duper bird of paradise shot, then buy the 25-50X. If not, save the $200+ difference and stick with the 20-60X at the lower cost.
That's my 2¢.

[knockturnal]

I have the ATM 80mm with the 25-50wa and love it. If you are around kelowna and want to check it out to compare to another, I'd be more then happy to show it.