Monarch Fieldscope 60ED-A Review (1 Viewer)

[scissortail666]

Alright! I think I am finally ready to post a (non-technical, ~vibes only~) review of my trusty little scope, now that I've had it for almost eight months.

The Monarch is an absolute delight to use and a purchase that I will never regret. It encourages me to get out birding every weekend, has sharpened my skills considerably, and has allowed me to ID distant birds that would otherwise pass me by. More than that, it's immersive, addictive and a totally different experience than birding with binoculars. It's like having the birds right in your lap, or watching them in a documentary - the image is so clear, the colours so vivid, the patterns of every feather visible. You can see what the bird is eating, observe the way it behaves and moves. Magic!

My prior experience with scopes was limited to a cheap Gosky scope off Amazon, and the occasional brief glimpse through someone else's scope on guided bird walks. The cheap scope was only marginally better than binoculars, so it never seemed worth the effort to carry it around and spent most of its time gathering dust at the back of the closet. The Monarch on the other hand, despite being rather hefty, offers such spectacular views that I am reluctant to ever leave it behind.

My motivation for buying the 60mm over the 82mm was primarily financial, though I also considered portability as a factor. I live on the coast and use the scope for watching sea birds and shorebirds, so of course there are times when it would be nice to have a larger lens with more reach, but everything is a compromise. For my purposes, the 60mm works better than fine, and it's manageable to carry around for the 5 km or so I usually walk. I bird in all seasons and it's often very rainy and overcast where I live, but I haven't found low lighting to have too much of an effect on my viewing even with the smaller objective lens. I suspect my tripod is probably overkill (Vanguard Veo 2 Pro 233AO Aluminium Tripod with 2-way Pan Head) but it is reassuringly sturdy and I never have to worry about the scope falling over.

The Monarch came with a 20-60x zoom eyepiece, which on the 60mm I believe is 12(?)-48x. The details are sharp, but as a glasses wearer the eye relief is not ideal and the image itself appears rather small and narrow (not sure if there is a technical term for that). I found that at the highest magnification, the image was difficult to get perfectly in focus and was fairly dark. That, in addition to atmospheric disturbances such as wind or heat, made the higher mags less appealing so I also purchased the 30x fixed eyepiece, and prefer the more expansive view and bigger, brighter image that this eyepiece offers over the additional magnification of the zoom. If I could afford the 30-60X wide then I suppose I could have my cake and eat it too, but the cost is a bit too dear. I'm still hanging onto the zoom eyepiece for now, in case I ever want to swap it out for the fixed, but so far I haven't had any urge to.

I had a look through another birder's 82mm Swarovski (possibly an older model) the other day just to see what I was missing. We watching very distant shorebirds, too distant to ID with my scope, so I assumed it might be possible with this larger, higher end scope but still nope! Some birds are just too far away.

I could go on and on about this little powerhouse of a scope, but suffice to say that it has been a life changing investment for me that has enhanced my birding in every way. I'm grateful to the other Monarch Fieldscope reviews on this website, in particular KaterinBortle9's reviews of the 60mm, for giving me the confidence to make this purchase!

(My only real complaint is that I have had NO success whatsoever with digiscoping, but that might be the fault of my phone.)

 

[Hermann]

First of all, congratulations to your new scope! And thanks a lot for a very nice report.

A few comments

My motivation for buying the 60mm over the 82mm was primarily financial, though I also considered portability as a factor. I live on the coast and use the scope for watching sea birds and shorebirds, so of course there are times when it would be nice to have a larger lens with more reach, but everything is a compromise. For my purposes, the 60mm works better than fine, and it's manageable to carry around for the 5 km or so I usually walk. I bird in all seasons and it's often very rainy and overcast where I live, but I haven't found low lighting to have too much of an effect on my viewing even with the smaller objective lens. I suspect my tripod is probably overkill (Vanguard Veo 2 Pro 233AO Aluminium Tripod with 2-way Pan Head) but it is reassuringly sturdy and I never have to worry about the scope falling over.

I fully agree. You analysed the way you bird and you drew your own conclusions. That's perfect, and that's the way it should be done IMO. One suggestion: You may want to look at different tripods at some stage. The Vanguard looks pretty good, but I think there are better tripods (and heads) on the market.

The Monarch came with a 20-60x zoom eyepiece, which on the 60mm I believe is 12(?)-48x. The details are sharp, but as a glasses wearer the eye relief is not ideal and the image itself appears rather small and narrow (not sure if there is a technical term for that). I found that at the highest magnification, the image was difficult to get perfectly in focus and was fairly dark. That, in addition to atmospheric disturbances such as wind or heat, made the higher mags less appealing so I also purchased the 30x fixed eyepiece, and prefer the more expansive view and bigger, brighter image that this eyepiece offers over the additional magnification of the zoom. If I could afford the 30-60X wide then I suppose I could have my cake and eat it too, but the cost is a bit too dear. I'm still hanging onto the zoom eyepiece for now, in case I ever want to swap it out for the fixed, but so far I haven't had any urge to.

Keep the zoom! Once you get more familiar with the scope you may need the higher magnification it provides from time to time. Using a scope with small exit pupils (<2mm) needs some getting used to. And I'm sure there are plenty of occasions when the atmospheric conditions allow the use of higher magnifications.

(My only real complaint is that I have had NO success whatsoever with digiscoping, but that might be the fault of my phone.)

Practice, practice, practice. Try handholding the phone for a start, and vary the distance between your phone and the eyepiece by extending the eyecup. I find my phone(s) don't work well with the eyecup screwed down. And use the zoom of the phone (if the phone camera is decent) to get the frame filled.

Hermann

 

[Ruff-Leg]

Practice indeed! My Android phone sits fairly well (handheld) on the fully extended eye cup. I have the Monarch ED-82a, and was using the 38x WF eyepiece yesterday. This would be the 30x on your scope. This is an uncropped, unedited digiscoped photo of a Cassin's Kingbird.

Close range - maybe 15m. Image does degrade with distance, obviously.



The brighter halo is a product of just handholding. If I use the PhoneSkope adapter, the lens sits a bit further off, and the halo disappears.

 

[scissortail666]

First of all, congratulations to your new scope! And thanks a lot for a very nice report.

A few comments

I fully agree. You analysed the way you bird and you drew your own conclusions. That's perfect, and that's the way it should be done IMO. One suggestion: You may want to look at different tripods at some stage. The Vanguard looks pretty good, but I think there are better tripods (and heads) on the market.

Keep the zoom! Once you get more familiar with the scope you may need the higher magnification it provides from time to time. Using a scope with small exit pupils (<2mm) needs some getting used to. And I'm sure there are plenty of occasions when the atmospheric conditions allow the use of higher magnifications.

Practice, practice, practice. Try handholding the phone for a start, and vary the distance between your phone and the eyepiece by extending the eyecup. I find my phone(s) don't work well with the eyecup screwed down. And use the zoom of the phone (if the phone camera is decent) to get the frame filled.

Hermann

Thanks very much for the thoughtful reply Hermann! These are all good points. Are there any tripods you would recommend? Are other tripods better because they are lighter, or for other reasons as well?

I won't jettison the zoom eyepiece just yet. Admittedly there was a situation when I wished I had it with me, the other day when I had a lovely view of a red-necked phalarope in great lighting, and just wanted to get even closer.

 

[scissortail666]

Practice indeed! My Android phone sits fairly well (handheld) on the fully extended eye cup. I have the Monarch ED-82a, and was using the 38x WF eyepiece yesterday. This would be the 30x on your scope. This is an uncropped, unedited digiscoped photo of a Cassin's Kingbird.

Close range - maybe 15m. Image does degrade with distance, obviously.

View attachment 1603735

The brighter halo is a product of just handholding. If I use the PhoneSkope adapter, the lens sits a bit further off, and the halo disappears.

Wow! Thanks for sharing this photo Ruff Leg. If I could achieve anything like this with my scope, I'd be extremely pleased! You have convinced me to give it another try.

If you don't mind me asking, what kind of android do you have? Mine is a Motorola Razor with like four cameras on the back, and as a result there's no way to position it to look through the scope and it usually ends up taking photos of the eyecup.

 

[Ruff-Leg]

Yeah, the jumping lens is an issue. I have a Pixel 8 Pro which has a mode that allows me to manually select which lens to use. I don't know if a Razor has that option, but it's worth a Google.

 

[Hermann]

Are there any tripods you would recommend? Are other tripods better because they are lighter, or for other reasons as well?

Well, the Vanguard looks be to be a sort of "beginner's tripod": It's quite short, so I think you'll have to extend the middle column quite a bit. That's not ideal, especially in windy conditions, because you'll get more vibrations. Also the whole setup may topple over. The head is from what I can see a straightforward two-way head, not a video head. Video heads are usually better provided they're decent. And so on.

I think you'll notice how well the Vanguard works for you in your environment quite quickly and what its weaknesses (if any) are. If you're unhappy about something or believe a different tripod or head may serve your needs better, then start looking at different tripods and heads. There are plenty of threads on various questions related to tripod and heads in the appropriate subforum. But beware, some of the makes discussed there aren't cheap. However, a good tripod lasts many, many years. My oldest tripod is well over 30 years old and still going strong. Doesn't look nice though, more like it has been through a war.

Hermann

 

[Hermann]

If you don't mind me asking, what kind of android do you have? Mine is a Motorola Razor with like four cameras on the back, and as a result there's no way to position it to look through the scope and it usually ends up taking photos of the eyecup.

The first thing to do is to find out which camera is which (you want the longest focal length and the highest resolution in most cases) so you know which camera you want to put in front of your eyepiece. Then you need to find out how you can choose this particular camera.

If your phone doesn't allow you to select a camera manually, you might try a different camera app. Open Camera is open source software and lets to choose which camera you use. It's available in the playstore. But beware: Open Camera has so many options and so many things you can configure that you'll need some time to just play with it. For instance, you can even change the UI so that it works better for lefthanders ...

Hermann