Celestron 100 ED Question (1 Viewer)

Pardon the post in this folder, but I didn't find a thread pointing to the Celestrons.

I have been using an adequate inexpensive scope, but wish to step up to a scope with apochromatic correction. My goal is to improve the color and viewing in low light. I had a chance to look through a Celestron ED, with the 80 mm objective when observing the Yellowstone wolves. It was very impressive to have a much improved color contrast.

1) I would value comments about the Celestrons 80 ED or 100 ED.
2) I would value suggestions on where to shop.
3) If I should have posted in another folder, please let me know.

I was an amateur astronomer before I was a birder, and my first hobby is still astronomy. The Celestron scopes you mention are both designed primarily for astronomy, although the 80 ED can better be adapted to terrestrial purposes more efficiently than the 100 ED. The latter is longer and heavier and harder to lug around. Both, because of their focal lengths, will have rather narrow field's of view and it will be harder to fit them with low power eyepieces, especially if you can't fit a 2 inch Amici diagonal to them. Good 2 inch widefield eyepieces are expensive, as are 2 inch Amici Prism diagonals, if you can find one. Both scopes are excellent and reasonably priced, but if you want to use them primarily for birding, they aren't the best choice.

If you want a nice inexpensive birding scope, check out Orion's "Express 80 Terrestrial (AZ) package." Oriontelescopes.com. You get a semi-apo 80mm, f6, (480mm F.L.) optical tube assembly.
You also get a 45 degree correct image diagonal; a 15mm, 1 and a quarter inch eyepiece (32x) and an excellent tripod to mount it for a very reasonable price. You can also build on it from there, adding a zoom eyepiece if needed or a lower power wider field eyepiece.

If money isn't a prime consideration, you can always look at Zeiss, Leica and Swarovski scopes; they are all optically superb, and are exclusively designed for birding. They are light, portable and easily set up. Swift and Eagle Optics offer less expensive scopes.

Finally, Televue, a manufacturer of top end refracting telescopes, is selling an outstanding 60mm APO, 350mm FL scope designed primarily for birding. You custom fit it to your requirements, like the Orion, but it costs a few bucks. www.televue.com.

Hope this helps.

Bob

Ceasar, I think the 80 and 100 ED are purpose built spotting scopes....portable, waterproof and erect images. I assume he is referring to the Ultima 80 / 100 ED

I have looked through the 80 ED and found the image to be quite good. However, I am not very familiar with scopes in general, so others will be better placed than I to give you guidance in comparing brands.

Here's a link to the 100ED:

http://www.binoculars.com/products/Celestron_Ultima_100ED_22-66x100_25827.html

This is probably quite heavy, but this is to be expected with a 100mm scope

|=)|

I am indeed considering the Ultima Celestron using the ED glass.
During the brief time I was using another person's Celestron it appeared to be rather specific as a spotting scope. It's weight seemed reasonable, but not as light as the Swarovski. I think the Celestrons are relatively new on the scene, but was hoping to hear from anyone with extended experience.
They are advertised as waterproof, but I'd like to hear from anyone with their experience around adverse weather.
I seem to do some of the most exciting view during low light situations, hence the 100mm.
Thanks to all for the advice.

birdeast said:

Ceasar, I think the 80 and 100 ED are purpose built spotting scopes....portable, waterproof and erect images. I assume he is referring to the Ultima 80 / 100 ED

I have looked through the 80 ED and found the image to be quite good. However, I am not very familiar with scopes in general, so others will be better placed than I to give you guidance in comparing brands.

Here's a link to the 100ED:

http://www.binoculars.com/products/Celestron_Ultima_100ED_22-66x100_25827.html

This is probably quite heavy, but this is to be expected with a 100mm scope

|=)|

Click to expand...

Thanks, I will stand corrected on this. I thought MTM was referring to Celestron's refractors. I believe Celestron discontinued the 100mm refractor but still has the 80mmED and a 150mm refractor for astronomical applications. I wasn't aware that they had come up with a line of Birdscopes. The prices quoted are very reasonable and well in line with the Orion terrestrial package I mentioned. The main difference is that the Celestron seems to have a fixed zoom eyepiece, whereas the eyepieces for the Orion can be changed. Also, Orion describes theirs as a "semi-APO," which I understand to mean the same thing as ED. I'm a bit partial to scopes that can be "customized." I was able to do that with my Televue 70mm "Pronto" in giving it the ability to be both a birdscope and a telescope. I obtained a Brandon 2 inch Amici diagonal for use in birding. I match it with a 32mm Meade superwide eyepiece for 15X and I also have a hybrid 20x to 60x Brandon zoom in a 2 inch format to use with it. It works just fine! It's a bit heavier than the average birdscope, but I can live with it.

MtnM said:

I am indeed considering the Ultima Celestron using the ED glass.
During the brief time I was using another person's Celestron it appeared to be rather specific as a spotting scope. It's weight seemed reasonable, but not as light as the Swarovski. I think the Celestrons are relatively new on the scene, but was hoping to hear from anyone with extended experience.
They are advertised as waterproof, but I'd like to hear from anyone with their experience around adverse weather.
I seem to do some of the most exciting view during low light situations, hence the 100mm.
Thanks to all for the advice.

Click to expand...

MTnM,
I don't want to appear pedantic or officious, but I thought it might help to point out that the "brightness" of the scope you will use will be determined by the "exit pupil" of the eyepiece used. That is, the 80mm could be just as bright as the 100mm. (In daytime applications-not in astronomical ones.) It all depends on the focal lengths of the scopes used and the focal lengths of the eyepieces. Using the Celestron 100mmED as an example, at twilight, the 22x will be brighter than the 66x when using the zoom. Do determine the size of each exit pupil, we need to know the focal length of the scope and the focal lengths of the zoom at 22x and at 66x.

Thanks Ceasar,
The exit-pupil was something I had not thought to examine, so that was a great suggestion. The discussion has helped me "focus" on some of the critical data. Just for reference the data shows: Celestron Ultima 100ED 22x-66x shows exit-pupils of 4.5mm and 1.5mm with a field of view of 32m at 1000m, Celestron Ultima 80ED 20x-60x shows exit pupils of 4.0mm and 1.3mm with a field of view of 35m at 1000m, & the Swarovski 80 20x-60x shows an exit pupil of 4.0mm and 1.3mm with a field of view of 36m at 1000m. The Celestron 80 actually weighs in at 60 grams less than the Swarovki 80. All have angled eye pieces.

I'm guessing quality of build will need to be something I'll need to examine carefully.
Weight is a factor, but I use a rather heavy Bogen tripod + head, so weight of the scope is less important than quality of build.

Again, thanks to all for your advice. It is great to have such a selection of scopes available. Like many I hope to buy a single scope, take the greatest care possible of the optics, and make it last for a long time.

MtnM said:

Thanks Ceasar,
The exit-pupil was something I had not thought to examine, so that was a great suggestion. The discussion has helped me "focus" on some of the critical data. Just for reference the data shows: Celestron Ultima 100ED 22x-66x shows exit-pupils of 4.5mm and 1.5mm with a field of view of 32m at 1000m, Celestron Ultima 80ED 20x-60x shows exit pupils of 4.0mm and 1.3mm with a field of view of 35m at 1000m, & the Swarovski 80 20x-60x shows an exit pupil of 4.0mm and 1.3mm with a field of view of 36m at 1000m. The Celestron 80 actually weighs in at 60 grams less than the Swarovki 80. All have angled eye pieces.

I'm guessing quality of build will need to be something I'll need to examine carefully.
Weight is a factor, but I use a rather heavy Bogen tripod + head, so weight of the scope is less important than quality of build.

Again, thanks to all for your advice. It is great to have such a selection of scopes available. Like many I hope to buy a single scope, take the greatest care possible of the optics, and make it last for a long time.

Click to expand...

The believe Celestron Ultima series scopes have a life time "No Fault" warranty!

I wanted to complete this thread. I did purchase and use the Celestron 100 ED. I am very happy with its performance: colors were clear and the majority of the field of view is very sharp.
Two drawbacks: there was no cap for the eyepiece which seemed wierd, but I did find an adequate cap. There was no hard case, so I built one to transport the scope.
It did very well in low light conditions, which is why I opted for the 100 mm objective.