Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Kowa vs. Zeiss |
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Author | |||
trigger29
Optics Master Extraordinaire X = 180 Y = 90 (X+Pyro)+(Y-Pyro) = ? Joined: September/29/2007 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 4353 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Thank you Ted. Thats the answer I was looking for. I still don't have the luxury of looking through them, but at least I know they somewhat compare.
Edited by trigger29 - December/11/2008 at 18:10 |
|||
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." |
|||
trigger29
Optics Master Extraordinaire X = 180 Y = 90 (X+Pyro)+(Y-Pyro) = ? Joined: September/29/2007 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 4353 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
They acutally claim it to be flourite glass. Maybe they are the same now.
Features
Prominar Fluorite Lens For the highest optical performance and optimum color fidelity. Highest Level of Optical Performance The 66mm diameter objective lens has more than 120% light gathering power of the 60mm objective lens. All optics are fully multi-coated for brighter, clearer and sharper viewing. Prominar ED models are also available for even better optical performance with optimum color definition. |
|||
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." |
|||
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The difference is Kowa claims the 88mm Prominar has an objective lens of pure fluorite crystal, whereas the XD lenses of the remaining Prominar series has "glass containing fluorite."
Here is Kowa's explanation:
|
|||
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|||
trigger29
Optics Master Extraordinaire X = 180 Y = 90 (X+Pyro)+(Y-Pyro) = ? Joined: September/29/2007 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 4353 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Gotcha. Called Kowa today, and they confirmed your findings. Now, I still got to figure out which is going to be the nicer scope. Even the sales manager at Kowa said he would have a hard time choosing, and he should be biased.
|
|||
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." |
|||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Too bad the Swaro 65 HD wasn't so expensive, it would've made your choice a lot easier. Edited by mike650 - December/12/2008 at 17:02 |
|||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|||
lucznik
Optics Master Joined: November/27/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1436 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I don't know about that...
I think I just might pick the ED Kowa 600 or 660 series over the 65mm Swarovski. A hunting buddy of mine has an 80mm Swaro HD and I've not been super impressed. I can't imagine the 65mm would prove to be better.
I would definitely pick the 88mm Kowa over any other spotting scope on the planet - if I could only afford it. Edited by lucznik - December/12/2008 at 14:27 |
|||
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
|
|||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The tests findings from the link supplied earlier on this thread tend to disagree. They rate the 65mm Swaro as number four but they also don't list all scopes either. Funny, I've been playing with the 80mm Swaro HD this past hunting season and it's awesome. You know the saying.. "everyone's eye's are different". Edited by mike650 - December/12/2008 at 14:49 |
|||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|||
RHunter
Optics GrassHopper Joined: December/13/2008 Status: Offline Points: 1 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I have been reviewing the same scopes - Zeiss 65 and Kowa 664. From my research both are very good scopes. The 664 doesnt use pure flourite glass like the 88MM but it is the same glass as the 774(contacted KOWA to cofirm). In the Living Bird scope review in 08, they liked the 774 better than both the swarovski 80 and 65 ED Models and both Zeiss models. I have been speaking regularly with Joanie from competitor. She tests basically every scope that comes out. She has told me that the Kowa 663/664 would be her choice over the Zeiss and they sell both models. She rated the Kowa just a hair below the Swarovski 65HD, which scored higher than any scope she has ever tested. She still carries the 663. It must be pretty darn good if someone that (i assume) has access to any scope she chooses and still carries the 663.
|
|||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Here's the article I was referring to which is from Living Bird Scope Review '08. http://www.livingbird.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=272&srcid=265#top A link to a pdf copy of the results is below. I don't see the 663/664 mentioned but it would probably be challenge to list everything. The top three are so close it's splitting the splitting of hairs. http://www.livingbird.org/netcommunity/bbimages/lb/pdf/ScopeChart2008.pdf Edited by mike650 - December/13/2008 at 11:22 |
|||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|||
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Interesting. I definitely disagree with some parts of the review that pertains the scopes that I have seen. Traditionally, Cornell people always grade Pentax spotters poorly (somebody forgot to grease somebody's palm perhaps?). In this case am not clear which Pentax eyepiece they used for the PF65 and what happened to the 80mm Pentax scope. Also, they rate all scopes at 20x and at 60x. How exactly did they arrive at their 60x rankings for a number of scopes that do not go anywhere near that magnification? or 20x ranking for scopes that do not go that low? If they simply look at the amount of detail visible, then they punish the manufacturers who chose to go for a lower magnification range, for example 15-45x vs 20-60x (personally, if other things are comparable, I will go with 15-45x any day). Every time I see a review coming out of Cornell I tend to get increasingly more underwhelmed. Perhaps, that is just me being stubborn since every time I criticize a Cornell review there is a bunch of people with pitchforks and torches after me. On a more serious note, when looking at their reviews pick through them carefully. There is useful information there, but you have to make sure you are looking at an apples-to-apples comparison (something that the Cornell people seem to be organically incapable of doing in the first place). ILya |
|||
optik
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/02/2009 Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
To my knowledge the difference in standard ED and Flourite is as follows. The standard ED is the same as the german Apochromat lenses and the fluorite is the same as the superapochromat lenses. Wikipedia has excelent articles writen in detail that would be too great to post on a message board. It would be a good place to look.
|
|||
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Please point me to the articles you are referring to.
What is typically referred to as ED glass is glass doped with some heavy earth elements to improve its dispersion properties. FLurite is a soft calcium fluorite crystal, which is seldom used in sporting optics in its pure from due to being soft, fragile and subject to thermal stress. Fluorite glass is glass doped with fluorite ions which has some of the properties of fluorite crystal without having the physical deficiencies. It is however important to not that scatter characteristics of fluorite crystal are superior to those of fluorite-impregnated glass. In practical terms, presence of ED- or fluorite-glass, by itself does not do much. It all comes down to proper design. With such glass you can typically use fewer elements in the system which reduces weight and complexity, although the special glass elements themselves get a bit more difficult to manufacture. ILya |
|||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Though Wikipedia is very helpful, it's just a point of reference and is only as good as those updating it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About |
|||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|||
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
A lot of stuff on Wikipedia is very hlepful. I am not, strictly speaking, arguing with what optik said, I am just trying to educate myself a bit.
ILya |
|||
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |