-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ED50 compared with Kowa 553 ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jcwu88
- Start date
Boogieshrew
Well-known member
I think the problem with the kowa is that the eyepiece is fixed. One eyepiece, that's it. No choice.
With the ED50 there's a selection of eyepieces to choose from.
With the ED50 there's a selection of eyepieces to choose from.
jcwu88,
I have an ED50 but I haven't compared it to a Kowa TSN-553. I wouldn't consider doing that because of the high price of the TSN 553 compared with an ED50. In the UK it's around £1500 which is at least double the price of an ED50 with an eyepiece. The lack of responses to your post perhaps indicates that other ED50 owners have reached the same conclusion ! However, the best judge of value-for-your money is you. Only you can decide if the increase in optical quality is worth the extra cost.
The other problem, as Boogieshrew has pointed out, is that I believe the TSN-553 has a fixed eyepiece. This makes the scope a non-starter for many, particularly those who don't like zoom lenses ! Kowa is also missing a trick here because there may be many Kowa 60mm and 80mm scope owners who might be interested in a 50mm body as a travel scope if they could use their existing eyepieces. All-in-all I think Kowa has screwed up, but the sales figures may say the opposite.
I have an ED50 but I haven't compared it to a Kowa TSN-553. I wouldn't consider doing that because of the high price of the TSN 553 compared with an ED50. In the UK it's around £1500 which is at least double the price of an ED50 with an eyepiece. The lack of responses to your post perhaps indicates that other ED50 owners have reached the same conclusion ! However, the best judge of value-for-your money is you. Only you can decide if the increase in optical quality is worth the extra cost.
The other problem, as Boogieshrew has pointed out, is that I believe the TSN-553 has a fixed eyepiece. This makes the scope a non-starter for many, particularly those who don't like zoom lenses ! Kowa is also missing a trick here because there may be many Kowa 60mm and 80mm scope owners who might be interested in a 50mm body as a travel scope if they could use their existing eyepieces. All-in-all I think Kowa has screwed up, but the sales figures may say the opposite.
Ratal
Well-known member
I've compared an Opticron MM4 50-ED to the Kowa 553, and handed the Kowa back with a shrug after 30 minutes of side by side use. Is it worth 1500 UK sterling? In my opinion and to my eyes, absolutely not. No way. 800 UK sterling, at a stretch. The MM4 50ED is a cracking scope.
I also noticed that the zoom on 553 is fixed. It lets 553 less flexible.
On ED50, I really enjoy the wide, bright and vivid image using 16x DS eyepiece; also I found the 13-40 MC II zoom has better sharpness, contrast and color rendering among current fieldscope eyepieces. It’s a pity for short eye relief for this excellent MC II zoom. I wear glass and feel struggling when using zoom at 25-40 range.
On ED50, I really enjoy the wide, bright and vivid image using 16x DS eyepiece; also I found the 13-40 MC II zoom has better sharpness, contrast and color rendering among current fieldscope eyepieces. It’s a pity for short eye relief for this excellent MC II zoom. I wear glass and feel struggling when using zoom at 25-40 range.
MMcD
Active member
Old post, I realize, but I’m on the market for a scope. Gweller, what about the Kowa makes you prefer it?
I just preferred the image from the Kowa over the ED50. It seems brighter and crisper to my eyes, with little or no CA and a wider FOV. Handling is also very nice for a small scope with fine and coarse focusing wheels, although I find I have to sometimes adjust the eyecup height when zooming between low and high magnification to avoid the occasional eyepiece blackout. I would like to compare it alongside the new Swaro - although from what I have read maybe there is not be too much difference between the two scopes.
I am OP who asked the question. I finally bought a 553. The image of 553 is definitely an upgrade from ED50. Resolution and color is top notch.
The 553 zoom eyepieces does have narrow FOV at 15x as others said. But it doesn’t bother me since I like zoom for convenience in the field. Besides 553 zoom with nice 18-20mm eye relief lets 45x comfortable to use.
MMcD
Active member
Thanks for taking the time to respond. It’s such a head-spinning undertaking, yet a big enough purchase that you don’t want to just say ’screw it’ and buy whatever. I’m currently vacillating between the 553 and the Opticron MM4 60.
I heard MM4 is pretty good. If possible try side by side comparisons. Scopes at these prices range don’t vary too much so sometimes only side by side can tell. Everyone has different eyes and preference so find one fits you.
The new Swarovski is interesting, especially because the zoom EP is quite wide (60-77° AFOV). The price seems insanely high though.
I tried the TSN-553 and the optics, and especially the build quality, is a step above the ED50. I can't get on with that narrow AFOV though (40-60°).
I wish that the ED50 was Made in Japan and had the build quality of the other fieldscopes, because it's sort of a flimsy little thing, but you can use the absolutely superb fixed MC/DS eyepieces.
I tried the TSN-553 and the optics, and especially the build quality, is a step above the ED50. I can't get on with that narrow AFOV though (40-60°).
I wish that the ED50 was Made in Japan and had the build quality of the other fieldscopes, because it's sort of a flimsy little thing, but you can use the absolutely superb fixed MC/DS eyepieces.
Hermann
Well-known member
The eyepiece also works nicely with glasses. The price, however, is plainly ridiculous.
I think the build quality is alright. Better than the Nikon ED50, but not brilliant. The fixed eyepiece is a joke though. Narrow for a modern eyepiece, and it doesn't work very well with glasses. At that price point they should have done better.
Agreed. The zooms OTOH are pretty outdated by tonday's standards. But the MC and the DS eyepieces are really, really good. Still, I'd like a good wideangle zoom.
Hermann
The MCII zoom is optically still among the best zoom eyepieces ever made, I use mine in my telescopes with a custom made thread to 1.25" adapter. You are definitely right though, super narrow AFOV with tight eye relief isn't acceptable in today's high end market.
I think the biggest miss with both the EDG and the Monarch fieldscopes is not releasing them with a true wide AFOV EP that also has 18mm ER through the whole range. The market really demands that nowadays.
No argument, but is that even possible?
I've great respect for the Nikon opticians and have often wondered why they never went to wide FoVs.
It surely hurt sales of their scopes and binoculars, so there must be a reason why Nikon stuck to the narrower FoV designs.
It is certainly possible, but not with the small form factor EPs of the old Fieldscopes. When they brought out the EDG series they went with a modern bayonet, large form factor EP lineup. Completely inclusive of a bunch of fixed focal length EPs, but still the only zoom option had a very narrow AFOV.
The EDG series had so much potential, clearly Nikon spent a bunch of money on the R&D. Completely new spotting scope lineup, mated it to a VR unit, no less than 7 all new eyepieces, new prism designs etc. All that money and R&D and they made something that no one wanted. They made the bulkiest and heaviest spotters in their class, took away the full size prisms that the former fieldscope series was loved for, gave us a VR unit that was super expensive and that no one asked for and failed to give us a modern wide zoom.
With the Monarch series they gave us a wide eyepiece finally, but the ER is on the short side and in North America you have to buy it with the narrow zoom and buy the wide zoom as an add on, increasing cost.
temmie
Well-known member
isn't much of the difference in perceived quality due to the eyepiece, comparing the ED50 with competitors in a zoom configuration (at which, as far as I know, Nikon isn't really shining as the zoom eyepieces suffer from a small FOV)?
I use the ED50 with a 27x MC eyepiece, and can't think of any 50mm scope that could be significantly better.
I use the ED50 with a 27x MC eyepiece, and can't think of any 50mm scope that could be significantly better.
