|
Author
|
|
WriterCJ
Registered User
Registered: November 2010
Location: West Cork, Ireland
Posts: 40
|
|
Review Date: Thu June 14, 2012
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, comfortable, easy to use, robust
|
|
Cons:
|
Lack of adequate storage for other gear
|
|
The Scopac Lite is an elegant solution to the conundrum of how to carry your scope / tripod combo around when birding. I used to cart my scope slung over one shoulder, but that meant only one hand free to wield the bins, and a sore shoulder if going any distance.
With the Scopac Lite I can sling the scope and tripod on my back and forget about it until I need it.
The one downside: now that I'm carrying my scope on my back I have no room for a daypack to carry the rest of my gear, coat, hat, gloves, etc.
You'll find a more thorough review of the Scopac Lite and comparison with the Cley Spy Mulepack on the Ireland's Wildlife website.
------------------------------
Calvin Jones
Get closer to the wild side of Ireland.
Visit Ireland's Wildlife
|
|
|
|
Patchbirder
Registered User
Registered: January 2012
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 33
|
|
Review Date: Sun July 8, 2012
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Brilliant solution to major problem in carrying a scope
|
|
Cons:
|
If you are tall, watch those low hide doors!
|
|
Being someone with significant back, neck and joint problems, there was simply no way I could use anything other than the lightest scope set up under normal circumstances. But Scopac Lite meant that I could choose even a heavyish scope and a tripod tall enough for me to use and still carry it without problems. Lifting the scope on with the pack needs a little practise, but once on you half-forget it is there and your hands are free.
The Lite set up with Digipac means that I still have to be economical with what gear I bring (field guide, energy snack, waterbottle, notebook and lens-care stuff is about it, though a small camera would fit too), but that is a good thing, as far as I am concerned, as birders tend to bring along too much clutter, which would negate the load relief benefits the Scopac gives.
If it wasn't for Scopac, I may not have bought a scope at all, or perhaps a small one which would not have done the job.
Being tall means that I did struggle to duck successfully through a low door on a hide, but like all good things, they take practice to use properly and this is not a complaint.
|
|
|
|
|
colindye
Registered User
Registered: May 2009
Location: york
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Sun July 22, 2012
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light & comfortable
|
|
Cons:
|
Attached bag could do to be a little larger
|
|
..........................
|
|
|
|
|
Ghostbat
Zoologist and birder
Registered: September 2012
Location: Outback Australia
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Sat November 3, 2012
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Mesh back is comfortable when its hot. Keeps your hands free for bino's etc in the field when not using the scope
|
|
Cons:
|
Not enough storage space, slightly 'top heavy'
|
|
I've had one of these for over a year now and wouldn't dream of trying to carry a scope and tripod around without one. Essential birding kit. My sole gripe is the limited storage space. I like to have an audio recorder and a compact zoom camera and sometimes a video camera in the field, as well as food and water- the tiny digipac means I can only have two of these five on any one trip. (my gear is all of the ultra-compact variety so it normally all fits in even the smallest rucksacks.) For users in hot climates the digipack is just big enough to take a 2litre camelback bladder, but obviously you won't get anything else in there with it!
A future scopac design should look to providing much more storage- more weight at the bottom would make the whole thing less top heavy too. A waist belt would be good too to take some weight off your shoulders.
The only competitor scope backpack I've tried is the Viking effort I picked up in an RSPB shop. It has a bigger luggage section and a waist belt but is hot to wear in warmer weather and the build is poor quality- its fraying in places after only a few months of use. The Scopac is miles better.
|
|
|
|
|
Honolulu Walt
Registered User
Registered: September 2012
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Sun March 31, 2013
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 0
|
|
What are the internal dimensions?
Alternatively,what are the external dimensions, along with an estimate of how much padding will be needed?
I use my Tele Vue 85 primarily as a small refractor for astronomical observations. However, on occasion I use it for terrestrial observations and, wow, what a scope! Unfortunately, its relatively large size and weight (relative to dedicated spotting scopes) means that this scope is not used by me for bird watching, or any other terrestrial observing, where my scope will need to be set up any farther than 100 meters from my car.
But, now I am considering the best way to plug the gap between binoculars and astronomical refractor. The most straight-forward solution would be to buy a dedicated spotting scope. I have my eye on the new 88 mm Kowa, but am open to the possibility of buying the new 82mm Lieca, or maybe even the 85mm Zeiss (which I previously owned, but traded in for the TV 85).
However, a much less expensive alternative would be to find a way to transport my TV 85. This looks like a decent alternative. If my TV 85 can fit on the inside (preferred) or strapped to the outside of this product, then I could probably carry it more than the 100 meter current limit. With the diagonal removed, the scope is a bit less than 19". If I continue to use this as a spotting scope, I will use the 1 1/4 inch, Takahashi or Tele Vue 45 degree prism, or maybe the TV 60 degree mirror.
This product is not inexpensive (sorry about the double negative), but at 300 pounds, it is much less expensive than a spotting scope from Zeiss, Swarovski, Lieca, or Kowa (or, any other spotting scope that would perform to the same optical and durability standards as these scopes). Hence, my question regarding the interior (preferred) or external dimensions of this product is asked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to BirdForum.
