Swarovski vs Kowa - The focusing system

[Wyominal]

I have narrowed my spotting scope search down to Kowa and Swaro. I don’t have any shops nearby that carry Kowa. I have seen a lot of reviews and it seems that the Kowa dual focus is highly praised and the fine focus can eek out a just a bit more resolution. This seems to be both about focus and the ability to avoid introducing as much shake at high mag. I have only seen one review that suggests the Swaro “snapped” into focus faster - perhaps more depth of field. I am not going to be looking at optical charts but I am also more interesting in observing animals for long periods of time and iphone digiscoping than I am in hunting/finding applications. Anyone have any experience or thoughts on the focusing. Thanks

 

[realunlucky]

The dual system is no question better. Does it make a difference day in and day out? Guess that really depends on who you ask and what scope they are using.

Kowa has better focus system and better glass.

Swarovski has rubber armor and better resale value and a more proven customer service program.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[Wyominal]

Thanks. Do you think there is anything to the depth of field argurment?

 

[4th_point]

I have only seen one review that suggests the Swaro “snapped” into focus faster - perhaps more depth of field.

If the Swaro snapped into focus faster, it is due to better optical correction. And a well implemented focuser mechanism, as you can have a well corrected scope but poor focuser (not smooth, jumpy, etc.).

You can also have a poor or mediocre scope, in terms of correction, yet some people will clearly prefer the dual-knob focusers as it allows them to fiddle-fart around trying to achieve best focus. A simple test that you can perform is to use only the fast focus knob - can you achieve best focus with the course knob, or do you absolutely need the slow focus? That will tell you a lot, assuming the operator has decent dexterity - if you need to fiddle, I would suspect that the scope has optical issues regardless of the focuser design used.

Highest priority is a well corrected scope, regardless of focuser design. After that, it is personal preference assuming the focuser design is implemented correctly.

I prefer barrel or helical focus, mostly due to the fact that I can make adjustments with my gloves on and hand/wrist motion is easier to control than one finger when it's really cold out! That's assuming a well corrected scope and smooth focuser.

There has been speculation that barrel/helical is a more robust design compared to some dual-knob systems that use a belt system. But I have seen very few credible reports of a belt off track, jumping a pulley, etc. And not all dual knob systems have belts, as there can be something like a rack and pinion instead.

The knobs do stick out though, and people have bent the shafts - maybe stuffing the scope into a pack or light impact.

 

[realunlucky]

Here's a couple of Swarovski users trying out the Kowa 99. They share thier thoughts on the different focus systems

Tipsy Tuesday: Kowa 99 Review with Sal Soriano and Randon Timothy, Latest Draw News, Gear Reviews, Western Hunting News - Rokslide

Tipsy Tuesday: Seasoned guides Sal Soriano and Randon Timothy share their thoughts after comparing the Kowa 99 vs Swarovski 95 and Swarovski 115 head-to-head. These optics were tested using eye charts and actual scouting in the field. Josh Jensen from SKRE Gear tells us about the Hunt Club. This...

www.rokslide.com

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[Wyominal]

Thanks. 4th_point. Good insight. I guess I have been assuming the Kowa and Swaro will both have top notch build quality but I have noted that some scopes are just off even at the top and need some help.

I did see one review where the guy was zooming and focusing with the swaro at the same time. I tried that in the store but it wasnt on a tripod and pretty cumbersome. I’m curious if that works. Speed to optimal focus is part of my consideration.

Thanks for the review realunlucky. I hadn’t seen that one.

 

[4th_point]

I guess I have been assuming the Kowa and Swaro will both have top notch build quality but I have noted that some scopes are just off even at the top and need some help.

Lack of sharp focus at max zoom is an indicator of optical aberrations.

As a rule of thumb, try 1x per 1mm of objective diameter. Minimum.

So a 60mm should have good sharp focus at 60x with more and more detail as you approach the max. If it doesn't, then I would walk away but it would help to have a known reference to compare against.

Just note that some scopes don't allow you to readily test the upper limit. For example 60x for an 88mm isn't really pushing it.

 

[particleman14]

I have a kowa 88 and prefer the dual system especially the fine adjust. With just a light touch of my finger I can easily dial in the sharpness on the kowa. When I barrel adjust in my other scope it tends to introduce some wobble in my view and I have to hold everything tight with both hands.

 

[JNDEER]

I have owned a few Swaro and only one Kowa. I have had some very stiff focus rings on the Swaro that really pushed to enjoy a dual focus system or small nob focus (ED50, vortex razor gen1, Kowa 88). However my latest Swaro is an 80 and it is butter smooth. No real issues getting things into focus compared to the Kowa 88. However, for overal viewing pleasure and detailed viewing I prefer the Kowa over the Swaro.

 

[Corkboard753]

I have narrowed my spotting scope search down to Kowa and Swaro. I don’t have any shops nearby that carry Kowa. I have seen a lot of reviews and it seems that the Kowa dual focus is highly praised and the fine focus can eke out a just a bit more resolution. This seems to be both about focus and the ability to avoid introducing as much shake at high mag. I have only seen one review that suggests the Swaro “snapped” into focus faster - perhaps more depth of field. I am not going to be looking at optical charts but I am also more interesting in observing animals for long periods of time and iphone digiscoping than I am in hunting/finding applications. Anyone have any experience or thoughts on the focusing. Thanks

What did you end up with?

 

[TedO]

Kowas focus design is so much easier/better for getting a digiscope system finely focused quickly.

Glass is about the same quality.

Swaro armor is a plus.

 

[Corkboard753]

Kowas focus design is so much easier/better for getting a digiscope system finely focused quickly.

Glass is about the same quality.

Swaro armor is a plus.

I just picked up a Kowa 883 and I get the form factor of the barrel focus but the dual focus of the Kowa is super tight. So much easier to use without rattling the scope at high mags.

 

[IdahoJoe29]

Lack of sharp focus at max zoom is an indicator of optical aberrations.

As a rule of thumb, try 1x per 1mm of objective diameter. Minimum.

So a 60mm should have good sharp focus at 60x with more and more detail as you approach the max. If it doesn't, then I would walk away but it would help to have a known reference to compare against.

Just note that some scopes don't allow you to readily test the upper limit. For example 60x for an 88mm isn't really pushing it.

I’m in the market for a spotter and am kinda new to this whole thing but are you saying that you could have 5 scopes of the same make and model say a kowa 55 and 4 of them be awesome and have 1 that is not so awesome? Is that a thing in the optic world that you could get a scope that just isn’t quite as good as others in the same product lineup?

 

[Spiral Horn]

After comparing the Swarovski ATX with the Kowa side-by-side I ended up coming home with the Kowa. I prefer the both the focuser and overall easier / more color accurate view of the Kowa.

 

[4th_point]

I’m in the market for a spotter and am kinda new to this whole thing but are you saying that you could have 5 scopes of the same make and model say a kowa 55 and 4 of them be awesome and have 1 that is not so awesome? Is that a thing in the optic world that you could get a scope that just isn’t quite as good as others in the same product lineup?

Sample variation is definitely a thing. Sometimes it'll be very obvious, other times you'll only notice under certain conditions or by doing optical tests.

You can also have a design that is not optimized for resolution, but maybe other characteristics like OAL or weight. For example, I looked through several of the newer Kowa 55mm, and none could achieve sharp focus at 40x even with the dual focuser which is supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread. Were they all bad samples? Maybe. If I saw, say one 1 out of 5 that was good and 4 that were bad, that would lead me to believe that the design is sound but control of manufacturing poor. However, I haven't seen any Kowa 55 yet that I would actually buy. I'm not an optical designer, but maybe Kowa is trying to do too much with such a compact body and 55mm objective.

On the other hand, every ATC and STC I have tried recently was sharp at 40x, and they have the barrel focus which is supposed to be harder the use! That's an example where I don't care about the type of focuser, assuming it is usable, but more about optical quality. The first ATC/STC I tried was shortly after introduction, and I wasn't impressed but I didn't spend much time with it. However the ones that I have tried recently have been great.

FYI - All the Kowa 66mm that I have tried were great at 60x. Just a reminder not to get hung up on "brand A vs brand B" or type of focuser, but individual models and individual samples?

FWIW, I don't own any of the scopes mentioned and don't intend to buy them either. So I don't have a dog in any Kowa vs Swaro matchup.

 

[PredatorX]

I have found atmospheric conditions really affect my optic quality which I guess is to be expected.

Has anyone tried a star test to help evaluate? I don’t know how valid this test is but I’ve been poking around the birding forums lately and those guys really use their glass.

 

[PredatorX]

Sample variation is definitely a thing. Sometimes it'll be very obvious, other times you'll only notice under certain conditions or by doing optical tests.


FWIW, I don't own any of the scopes mentioned and don't intend to buy them either. So I don't have a dog in any Kowa vs Swaro matchup.

What scope do you use?

 

[4th_point]

What scope do you use?

I've had 5-10+ scopes on hand for the past few years. I think I've got 8 right now, but I've gotten away from recommending any make/model due to bad samples from different brands.

That stated, I prefer a 50-ish mm for just in case, a 60-ish for most uses, and 80+ mm for longer distance viewing. And if I could only have one, it would definitely be 80+ mm.

 

[Spiral Horn]

I have found atmospheric conditions really affect my optic quality which I guess is to be expected.

Has anyone tried a star test to help evaluate? I don’t know how valid this test is but I’ve been poking around the birding forums lately and those guys really use their glass.

The “star test” is most often used to assess the absolute precision of how light presents through an individual optical device including the minimization of stray light. It doesn’t usually lend itself to assessing brand quality, unless one would perform the test on a large sample of say a specific Swarovski Model vs a specific Kowa Model against some preset measurable outcome. Then a statistically valid outcome might be generated. But don’t think I’ve ever seen that done.

To add some perspective, a healthy percentage of those on BirdForum are also astronomers, with a number of engineers and even a few physicists thrown in. As a group they are very adept at identifying even the tiniest imperfections with the images produced by binoculars and scopes. This can sometimes be very helpful to the novice or folks inexperienced with a specific brand. However, sometimes the imperfections noted can only really be appreciated by folks with their level of experience and discernment.

To me, what it boils down to is taking the effort of driving to a well-stocked optics store and viewing through several individual samples of the optic under consideration. Then going home with the one that looks like the “cherry.” But most folks will just buy from Amazon or somewhere on the internet where we get what we get (have done it myself).

 

[jvon2011]

Came across this thread a year late, but I'm sure it could help someone else out in the here and now.

A work contact of mine found out I was a hunter, and brought up the Swaro BTX he owns. He insisted that I borrow it for the season, and how could I say no?! He also lent me the STX eyepiece with his 95 mm main body. Last night, I decided to give it a look, reaching out about 10.4 miles, into an area where I glassed up a very nice buck only a couple days before. Mind you, I was just over 1 mile away at that time, but I thought it would still be a fun exercise. I only looked through the BTX on this particular evening, but decided to break out the scopes again this afternoon for a few moments. This time, looking through the STX 95 and 66A, and only for a short period of time.

I should also note that I've owned the Kowa 66A for a bit over a year, and have put a fair amount of time behind the scope looking for mule deer. I've really enjoyed the scope, and don't really have any complaints to date. Perhaps that will change as I put more time behind the Swaro, but only time will tell.

First thing I noticed between the two was the zoom mechanism. With my copy of the 66A, I've always struggled to get that scalpel sharp focus everyone talks about. Don't get me wrong, the "glass" is fantastic, but I struggle getting it perfect. Every once in a while I nail it, and boy, is there a difference! Something about the fine focus wheel just doesn't jive with me, despite my original thoughts that I'd like it way better than the more common barrel style. The focus wheel on the STX 95 is much easier for me to fine tune. And unlike many people out there, I get more shake when focusing with the Kowa than I do with the Swaro. And thats even with the Swaro mounted to an UL Sirui T-024SK and a cheap Small Rig pan head, while the Kowa is on a Tricer AD with the LP pan head. Its not the tripod either. Each time the Swaro is on the Tricer tripod, I find it even easier to focus without a ton of shake. Perhaps that just personal preference, or may even a focusing technique thing on my end.

I know this wasn't part of the OPs original inquiry, but zoom equivalent was quite interesting as well. I will admit upfront that my "test" isn't apples to apples, but the copy of the STX that I am in possession of seemed to be VERY different than my Kowa. I had the STX 95 backed down to 50X, and it still seemed to still have a slightly larger zoom than the Kowa 66A at 60X. Perhaps this is due to the difference in objective lens size, but I am far from an optics expert, and can only speak about my observations, not why they are so. I didn't spend a ton of time analyzing the associated field of views, but a quick seemed to show they were nearly identical at the 50X and 60X as mentioned.

The last thing I came across was cutting through mirage. Given the short observation duration this afternoon, it likely could have been the focusing issue that I covered above, but after observing a fallen tree at the 10.4 mile mark, the Swaro seemed to be a touch sharper than the Kowa. Again, they are very different objective lens sizes, but the log was just a tad sharper through the STX. After a tiny bit of fiddling with the Kowa, I did narrow the "gap" by about half, but the Swaro still came out on top. Perhaps I got one of Kowa's lesser copies, or even one of Swaro's superb copies, but there definately seemed to be a difference in my eyes.

I plan to continue my evaluation when I have more time to due a comparison justice, and under better glassing conditions, but figured my findings here might help someone in the meantime. Will you be using them at 10.4 miles? Probably not, but maybe. And I'll also mention that I was hoping the Kowa would come out on top. I could even go as far as saying I was a tiny bit disappointed that the Swaro edged out my 66A, but maybe thats just me hoping my 500 HP Nissan could edge out the 700 HP Mercedes AMG; not a perfect analogy, but you get the idea.