• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Celestron Regal M2 ED Series - 2013 (1 Viewer)

I just found Lost Arra's photos from this thread on a British shop's website

http://www.microglobe.co.uk/celestron-regal-m2-65ed-xlt-waterproof-spotting-scope-p-10060.html?#image

I was researching the 65mm M2 and found them.

Can anyone tell me how well the e/r on the M2 scopes works for glasses wearers?

The M2 zoom has a larger than average ocular lens for a zoom eyepiece as well as having very nice eye relief. I have no problem with glasses at all the power ranges while using this zoom. I have owned two M2 scopes & I believe the zoom is why the overall scope package works so well. I sold both scope bodies & kept one of the M2 zooms. I had the current vixen (click stop) zoom eyepiece & when comparing both on the Pentax EDAII , I thought the M2 zoom was just as good optically as well as being more user friendly regarding the eye relief. I do not know why celestron does not sell the M2 zoom alone, I think it would do well competing with any of the zooms now selling in the mid to upper $200 dollar price range. .... gwen
 
Sounds like a good zoom e/p, Gwen. Thanks for the response. I am tempted to try the 65mm M2. How does it compare to the Pentax with the M2 zoom on it? That is to say, the MZ with its zoom vs the PF-65 with the M2 zoom on it.

Can the M2 compare well to the Pentax. I like the PF-65 and think it's a great little scope. At least with fixed e/ps but I never tried it with a zoom of any kind. The Pentax SMC zoom is so big and heavy it never appealed to me.
 
Sounds like a good zoom e/p, Gwen. Thanks for the response. I am tempted to try the 65mm M2. How does it compare to the Pentax with the M2 zoom on it? That is to say, the MZ with its zoom vs the PF-65 with the M2 zoom on it.

Can the M2 compare well to the Pentax. I like the PF-65 and think it's a great little scope. At least with fixed e/ps but I never tried it with a zoom of any kind. The Pentax SMC zoom is so big and heavy it never appealed to me.
I have always liked the Pentax 65 EDAII more than the Regal 65 scope. What makes it such a nice scope is the fact that so many different eyepieces work so well on it. The Regal is a great scope given the fact that now I see it discounted here in the states for under $400 US. & it comes with a very nice zoom. The Regal & Pentax perform so close optically. When you try different eyepieces, that's when you will see the difference. They both handle different, also one is heavier & larger. Having said all this , I like the view with the M2 zoom on the Pentax more than with the Regal. I am sure some will disagree, but that is what my eye's see. .... gwen
 
I just got an original Regal 65 ,Goodold Grey body (with Celestron signature Orange accent..much better looking than the new green IMO)..Cherry copy I guess, (If they are all this well corrected then Celestron knows something about QC)..Nice scope ,Im impressed..YES ITS HEAVY..HEFTY BEAST,,but really well made ..The coarse focus has a point of friction,or a "bump" but is not bad and doesnt seem to affect the view creating any image jump or else,so its just that..the fine focus is very nice..the dual knob feels very solid . More solid for instance ,than the ZEN ED82 MkI focusser,that always felt a bit flimsy .This one is compact ,well positioned and thightly fitted to the body and you can see the metal core in the knob being thick enough ..Massive SOLID tripod foot with multiple holes ,for balancing the scope(definitely back heavy)..The solid tripod mount is important in dampening vibrations more than I thought..I realized this after using the Helios/saker ED60 for a while ,featuring the flimpsier/shakier foot ever in a decent scope..Image quality is very good,worth to mention the Zoom performance..good zoom indeed..I have been looking at pictures of the M2 zoom and seems exactly the same as the one I have.Interesting that is marked 18x-24x-32x-40x-48x specifically for the 65 mm,and not in a generic way for all three Regal sizes.This zoom seems to offer a bit wider FOV than other zooms I have used,definitely wider than the one in the Helios/Saker .It seems to reach 60º at 48x but I think opens to that AFOV in the 20-30X..Not much difference when comparing the FOV with the BST 12mm (32x)or the Flat Field 16mm(25x) ,both featuring 60º AFOVs...
at 48x ,In the morning light, I got a lot of detail looking at my new neighbor the female Kestrel @ 250 feet ..The Helios at 45X was ok,but the Celestron was delivering real fine detail...Star-test shows good correction,.No astigmatism,almost no coma,great color correction,and UNUSUALLY LOW Spheric aberration showing rings before focus as clearly as in the past focus area ..anyway if the M2 has the same optics,same zoom and is lighter is a killer scope for the price.To bad they changed the color scheme!!!!The scope comes with good accessories,IN A BOX WITH EXCELLENT CUSTOM FOAM INSERTS,real quality padding (this is nice when you see it) It also includes a T-mount adapter that goes on the eyepiece threads(under the eyecupthat needs to be unscrewed to expose them),and a very unusual eyepiece cover..this is an aluminum tube with a removable threaded cap ,that probaby can do duty as a primary focus camera adapter..And then another reminder
.Bear in mind that for more than a year now Celestron DOES NOT offer the fault-free warranty on scopes anymore..I think they offer ONE MONTH to return scopes with collimation issues or optics defects though..
 
Last edited:
Well, picked up my new Celestron Regal M2 80ED. The esthetics look great. It's slimmer than my Alpen 786 (straight) scope. The case that comes with the scope is form fitting. It isn't too well padded. I checked the Celestron site and it doesn't appear that they sell any padded cases for the Regal M2 scopes. The Regal M2 does fit into the Alpen padded (45*) case. Will try it out tomorrow to see how much sharper it is over the Alpen. Although the Alpen is a very nice scope for the money, it does not have any ED coating so suffers from purple fringing....heavy when viewing water under a bright overcast sky. I do not expect that with the Regal M2. So, I now have a straight and 45* scope and will find use for both.

I noticed the scope dropped in price by $40 since I ordered mine earlier in the week. Will get them to make the price adjustment. $556 is a great price for a scope of this quality.
 
Last edited:
I just got our first scope, the Regal M2 80ED. Great experience buying from Opticscamp.com...very helpful guys in answering the questions I had. I haven't gotten the scope out yet and will give a more full review when we do, but the comments above are all accurate. Looks well made, great box/padding. My only issue is with the padded case, which to me looks like a carrying case only, not something you can use when the scope is strapped to a tripod.

Anyway, looks like a good scope (and scoop!) so far, and I can't wait to use it in earnest! Seems like lots of scope for your dollar... I appreciate all the feedback I have gotten from the good folks on this site, very helpful to a scope newbie such as myself.

I hope everyone has a great holiday season!!
 
Just curious, has anyone tried these scopes (M2 65 or 80) with the Explore Scientific 82° eyepieces? Is the entire FOV viewable? Can focus at infinity be achieved?

If it works it might prove to be a killer combo, esp. at the price these EP's go for.
 
I decided I'd take advantage of the OpticsPlanet 10% off + $100 instant rebate so I pulled the trigger on the M2 80mm for $540 w/ free shipping. Upgrading from a Konus 7120, which has served me surprisingly well for the $175 I paid for it. I'll run it through its paces and post my thoughts, although I'm far from an expert.

Now that I'll have a scope with support for multiple eyepieces I'm trying to educate myself on what I should look for in a fixed eyepiece. Anyone have any good resources they can recommend other than searching this forum?
 
Wish I could suggest something like that John. The only other suggestion I could think of would be Cloudy nights. They have a dedicated eyepiece forum but it is with astronomy in mind.
 
Just curious, has anyone tried these scopes (M2 65 or 80) with the Explore Scientific 82° eyepieces? Is the entire FOV viewable? Can focus at infinity be achieved?

If it works it might prove to be a killer combo, esp. at the price these EP's go for.


Eye relief is very short in that series,averaging 14mm...That would not be very comfortable with eyeglasses..Plus dont expect sharp edge performance with a 82º eyepiece in an f/5.9 scope,so you might giving away the FOV gains and getting the short eye relief and few degrees of blurrrrr for your money ....
I am using the BST explorer ED and the Extra Flat series on the Regal with excellent results..The Extra flat is the choice of Vortex ,for their High End Razor scopeexcept that they sell it for 200 plus $ and the astro version sells for 60 $ on Ebay....
 
Last edited:
I am using the BST explorer ED and the Extra Flat series on the Regal with excellent results..The Extra flat is the choice of Vortex ,for their High End Razor scopeexcept that they sell it for 200 plus $ and the astro version sells for 60 $ on Ebay....

Is BST Explorer out of production? I see a few on eBay from the UK and that's about it.

Who makes the other EF eyepiece you mentioned? I see a few when I search for '"Extra Flat" eyepiece' and they're all located in the UK as well.

I'd love to find something available in the US in case I need to return it.

It's interesting that you mention the discrepancy in price from an eyepiece aimed at spotting scope owners versus one aimed at telescope owners. I assume that spotting scope owners, who rarely own more than a couple eyepieces, are seen as easier "marks" than an astronomy aficionado who may have many more.
 
BST Explorer is the same as Astro_Tech Paradigm and is readily available from Astro_Tech. Also available in another guise from Agena Astro.

rmel66.
 
BST Explorer is the same as Astro_Tech Paradigm and is readily available from Astro_Tech. Also available in another guise from Agena Astro.

rmel66.


Yes....thats It...And the Extra Flat eyepieces are also sold by Astro-Tech ,available at the same site, and also in Astronomics..The Orion Edge-On Flat Field is another brand of the same model--
Here are a couple photos of the Flat Field 16mm astro and the Vortex branded version ,,,
 

Attachments

  • ;.jpg
    ;.jpg
    16.8 KB · Views: 192
  • 20596-1.gif
    20596-1.gif
    19.3 KB · Views: 162
Last edited:
Yes....thats It...And the Extra Flat eyepieces are also sold by Astro-Tech ,available at the same site, and also in Astronomics..The Orion Edge-On Flat Field is another brand of the same model--
Here are a couple photos of the Flat Field 16mm astro and the Vortex branded version ,,,

Thanks for the information.

Mayoayo, it sounds like you have the flat field 16mm and the Celestron zoom to compare and they're roughly similar in AFOV and my reading of the eye relief is that the celestron zoom is actually longer (15mm vs 20mm). What, if any, advantages did you see with the Flat Field? Sharpness? Brightness? Is the flat FOV helpful in birding? I'm really tempted by the price, but I just can't see what the advantages are.

I've been tempted to look into ordering fixed, high-power eyepiece. When scanning marine waters there are always those unknown dots that you know would be IDable with another little bit of zoom. I know its probably a foolish idea, but anyone have experience mounting something like a 5mm on this, or similar, scopes? Do you just get a dim, blurry image or something remotely usable?
 
Last edited:
Flat Field 6mm Vs Regal Zoom

,,the Celestron Zoom is not as wide as the Flat field..The Flat Field features 60º..A Zoom featuring a 60º AFOV in the mid of the range would be famous already!!!

In a fast comparison at close range,The Flat Fd 16mm shows 6 inches @ 12 feet aprox...the Zoom shows about 5 inches..You make the calculations now,.
. ..,But is not a narrow zoom either,this is evident to me without having really measured the FOV. I have compared the Celestron Zoom to the Helios/Saker zoom (a typical 8-24mm with a 40º-60º AFOV)..and the Celestron is wider at all powers..This Celestron Regal zoom can be going from 43º to 66º(like the Celestron DElux Zoom?)..

The Flat Field seems to have more than 15mm eye relief ..In anycase Eye relief is more than adequate for use with eyeglasses or DIGISCOPING..

So,,The advantages of this wide eyepiece are some degrees of AFOV, Size /weight (2-2/8 inch Vs 4-2/8 inch..see pic for comparison)and ,DIGISCOPING capabilities..
The Flat Field seems to be more forgiving with vignetting than the zoom..the Ff ,when using my old canon A590 ,gets free of vignetting with one point of zoom ,aperture 2.8... The zoom needs 4 points of zoom ,aperture 3.5 ,and by then It looks considerably dimmer in the camera screen ...

This said,and except for Sketching ,for what i feel more comfortable with a wider field/moderate power,I could live with the Regal Zoom as my only eyepiece..
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7321.JPG
    IMG_7321.JPG
    109.3 KB · Views: 215
Last edited:
Thanks Mayoayo, that's a very helpful explanation. I may have to pull the trigger on a used one for the cheap price they go for, but I should probably wait to make sure I'm going to keep the scope itself.
 
Last edited:
On Christmas morning, my butler appeared and presented me with a beautifully wrapped box. On opening it, I discovered the words "Celestron Regal M2 80ED Spotting Scope" printed down the sides. I can't decide wheather to give him a damn good thrashing and give it him back or keep it ;) Any comments or reviews on the above scope would be more than welcome.
The Rt Hon Lord Muck, O.B.E - M.B.E - K.F.C
 
Last edited:
Well, I received my Regal M2 80 yesterday. Of course I got home after dark so today was my first time out with it. Coming from a lower end scope (Konus 7120) it definitely is an improvement in build quality. Optics Planet lists them as nearly the same weight, but the Celestron is definitely way heavier. That is kind of a downer, but it feels solid as a rock. The screw on eyepiece cover is really nice. It's solid metal as well and with it on the scope feels bulletproof. Stay-on cover only barely qualifies as such, but is preferable to nothing.

I'll need some more time to evaluate optics. The zoom in nice, if unexciting. Eye relief was kind of a let down. I had to push my glasses against the eyepiece quite a bit to see the whole image circle. As I expected, the main difference from my cheaper scope is that the whole image circle is much bigger. You see just as much area, but it's considerably bigger. Today was very overcast and dark, but I was disappointed in how much darker the image got zoomed in. Not sure if they can do anything about this, but I don't recall noticing as much in the cheaper scope. Unlike the Konus, which gets very dull above 45x the Celestron seems to actually give additional detail as you zoom to 60x. I was watching a Prairie Falcon at .6 miles for a long time this morning trying to clinch the ID and I found myself only backing off to about 55x to get the sharpest image.

I have the 16mm Flat Field eyepiece talked about above on its way so I'll be curious to see how I like the scope with it on. Got it for $30 used which is an incredible deal and makes me want to keep my eye out for more eyepieces.

I really wish I had a lineup of scopes to compare it to.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top