• 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.

Eye-piece for longer reach (1 Viewer)

If it was me I would buy a cheap eyepiece of say 6.4 which would give you 84x in the 100ED. If this scope supports this ok and you can always get another better eyepiece. You should know that ER in this eyepiece is pretty short. If money no object go that direction.
540mm FL divided by 6.4 = 84.3x

I did read LM's review and I do understand what he is saying, but he lives in CA and might have more problems with heat haze, 100mm scope should be able to reach 60x with no problem, if pushed to 100x if perfect it would support that. I am not saying these scopes would support that, my Orion 100ED does easily.

http://www.adorama.com/MD64SP.html
 
Last edited:
Aer you sure its not just a case of needing a better quality spotting scope?

Seriously, Meopta S2 at 60X... is stupidly bright, sharp, crisp and wide, seriously wide field.... its actually insulting when you compare to others at that magnification. Swaro ATX 95 or Kowa 88 with its big zoom are the two others id say have a look at.
 
mooreorless said:
If it was me I would buy a cheap eyepiece of say 6.4 which would give you 84x in the 100ED. If this scope supports this ok and you can always get another better eyepiece. You should know that ER in this eyepiece is pretty short. If money no object go that direction.
540mm FL divided by 6.4 = 84.3x

I did read LM's review and I do understand what he is saying, but he lives in CA and might have more problems with heat haze, 100mm scope should be able to reach 60x with no problem, if pushed to 100x if perfect it would support that. I am not saying these scopes would support that, my Orion 100ED does easily.

http://www.adorama.com/MD64SP.html
Click to expand...

Heat Mirage / Haze ( 85 degrees / Wind N at 14 mph gusting to 21 mph: Range flags), dust in the air, did play some part with " Sharp / Clear Visibility ".
IMG_1152_zps7aa34d49.jpg

I was providing my honest opinion, under actual field conditions.

L.M.
 
Last edited:
Hi L.M., I understand what you are saying about field conditions and that can control how much magnification and how good the scope is as well, as you found out with the 100mm Optolyth spotter.
 
Naturelvr,

It would be easier to give suggestions if we knew what the setup is you currently use and in what kinds of conditions do you wish for extra reach. 20-60x zoom can mean all sorts of things depending on the size and quality of the scope.

Kimmo
 
kabsetz said:
Naturelvr,

It would be easier to give suggestions if we knew what the setup is you currently use and in what kinds of conditions do you wish for extra reach. 20-60x zoom can mean all sorts of things depending on the size and quality of the scope.

Kimmo
Click to expand...

I have the Celestron Regal M2 80ED which has a 20-60x.

Since my posting I have consulted with an optics retailer. They pretty much said that 60x or a bit longer is what is practical. For more reach they suggest a telescope such as one made by Sky-Watcher (not the Celestron Sky-Watcher but a brand called Sky-Watcher). The Black Diamond 80 model sells for about $700. Buying an eye-piece will allow me to increase the zoom. He cautioned that if I am using a telescope at that focal length across land to see a bird, the atmospheric waves will be even worse than when viewing through a spotting scope.


This telescope: http://ca.skywatcher.com/_english/01_products/02_detail.php?sid=350

Any opinions on that setup for bird watching of a far away bird? On my Celestron M2 80ED at 60x the bird is still very far away which is why I am looking for longer reach.

What about a practical eye-piece for more than 60x (20-60x) on a spotting scope? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I have used both a 80 and 100 ED astro scope looking as far as 2.8 miles away on a mountain overlook from my home, if there was a deer up there I could tell if it was a buck or doe. You don't say how far you want to see.That 80ED will support more magnification than your spotter and probably why the salesman said what he said.
 
Last edited:
Any 1.25 inch astro eyepiece can be used in the Regal M2. I have had good experiences with relatively inexpensive eyepieces such as the the Celestron Xcel LX series. I mainly use their longer focal length eyepieces but I would be willing to bet that you would receive acceptable performance. They make a 7 and a 5 mm in that series. They sell a variety of places like Adorama, B and H Photo, etc....
 
I suggest you again my earlier post links.
I think it doesn't make much sense for you to purchase the astro refractor - image erectors are a limiting factor for high magnifications and these telescopes are so practical as a spotting scope.
Your scope with the 1.6x barlow cell will result in 32 - 96x with your zoom ep. The image quality will be not much reduced and the barlow cell is easy to transport in a pocket.
If you want to maximize image quality I second Frank suggestions. The 7mm will result on about 69x and the 5mm ep on 96x.
If you don't use eye-glasses and want wider fields (82º), you can choose a Celestron Luminos 7mm or a Meade 5000 Ultrawide angled 5.5mm, in this last case resulting magnification will be 87x.
If you have to use eye-glasses or want more comfortable eps (better eye-relief - 20-17mm, vs. 13-12mm), I suggest a 5mm Baader Hyperion or Astro-Tech AT70.
To maximize image quality, but about 3x the price tag of these last 2 eps, you have Pentax XW and TV Delos...
By the way, on my Optolyth 100 I use a 30-90x zoom. For higher magnifications I use a XW5 - 126x! Also can use a Baader zoom with the 1.6x barlow cell but as the zoom I have is a repaired one with dust inside (was offered so I can't complain...:-O), I don't use it so much as I would if hadn't this problem - I ended by never purchase a new Baader zoom since last version has less AFOV and I'm waiting for the new Nikon 30-60x wide zoom and/or trying to test if the Leica wide-angled zoom would reach focus on my Optolyth with the use of the 1.6x barlow cell...o:D
 
NatureLvrCanada said:
...Any opinions on that setup for bird watching of a far away bird? On my Celestron M2 80ED at 60x the bird is still very far away which is why I am looking for longer reach...
Click to expand...

You can try the 5mm option for 96x, but based on similar conversations with other birders in the past, I suspect there is no solution that you will find satisfying given the limits imposed by atmospherics and the diminishing return of magnification. If at 60x the bird is very tiny in the view but is identifiable, be happy you can identify it, and if that is your goal don't bother with 96x. If at 60x the bird is almost but not quite identifiable and the seeing is good (no obvious atmospheric limitations), the 96x may make the difference and if ID is your goal it may be worth getting. But I suspect you are wanting an aesthetically nicer view of the bird. That is a desire that is likely not to be satisfied because atmospherics are likely the limiting factor most days and because if a bird looks like a tiny dot at 60x it is only going to look like a slightly larger tiny dot at 96x. To illustrate my latter point, consider that when you look through a scope at 30-60x objects appear 375-750% larger than in 8x binoculars. The difference between 60x and 96x (60%) is trivial by comparison.

--AP
 
mooreorless said:
I have used both a 80 and 100 ED astro scope looking as far as 2.8 miles away on a mountain overlook from my home, if there was a deer up there I could tell if it was a buck or doe. You don't say how far you want to see.That 80ED will support more magnification than your spotter and probably why the salesman said what he said.
Click to expand...

I am still in the learning stages of optics. Can you explain why the 80ED on a telescope will support more magnification than say a birding scope?

I have been told that the telescope (US equivalent is the Celestron S11100 sky-watcher 80) eliminates pretty much all false colour while with the Celestron Regal M2 80ED you can still see colour aberration in some high contrast situations such as objects on bright snow.

PS. While looking through the Celestron Regal M2 at 60x the subject fills up say, 30 to 40% of the overall view of the circle. Not sure how far away in terms of miles or kilometers the subject would be.
 
Last edited:
I have been doing a bit of research comparing a telescope's basic and extended (with add-on eye-pieces) reach to that of a birding spotting scope. By research I mean asking questions to those knowledgeable in optics.

I do not even know what the focal length of my Celestron Regal M2 80ED was. I can understand mm as I am into digital photography. I relate to mm as in a 500mm lens, etc. I have been told it is 3,000mm at full zoom or 60x (the eye-piece on the Regal M2 zooms from 20-60x). So, a telescope would have to zoom farther than 3,000mm to have more reach than the spotting scope.
 
The focal length for your spotter is 480mm so a 10mm eyepiece would net 48x. Most 80ED refractors are 600mm focal length and the longer focal length can make a difference in QC of view. You could be limited by the prism in the spotter and IMO the optics as well. Using a 90 degree diagonal for daytime use is not real fun. I am talking 90degree mirror/etc. diagonal used for astro scopes. TeleVue makes a 60degree diagonal that would make it a lot nicer, but they are expensive. I use a 90 degree diagonal in both my 80ED and 100ED. Left to right reversed, this poses no problem for me.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/telescope_focal_length.htm
 
I have been a birder for about 40 years. My experience is that I like only scopes that provide true colors. Refracting type scopes don't. Reflecting types do. I have a Celestron 80mm, 125mm and a 200mm scopes. I use the 80mm, instead of binoculars. Besides providing true colors, they have a larger field than any binoculars, provide brighter images, and really get the birds in close. I use either 14X or 16X mostly. They are mounted on a lightweight tripod, so no straining holding them. Instead of looking up high into trees, you look down into a correct image diagonal. Much more pleasurable birding and because they bring the birds up so close, no wondering what you are seeing.
 
I read some of your other posts, so you are talking about C-5 and C-8 Cat telescopes. I am not sure about the Celestron 80mm you are talking about. I wondered about using a C-6 or C-8.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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.

Similar threads

N
Baader Hyperion zoom IV vs original zoom eye-piece on Celetsron M2 80
Replies
13
Views
2K
wllmspd
W
Passakorn
Better but smaller options than the Nikon Monarch 60/82ED that can reach 60X?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Tringa45
T
B
Slight modification to the zip tie scope sight
Replies
3
Views
436
BoldenEagle
B
S
Kowa 66a vs 773
Replies
14
Views
2K
StephenL
S
Sirpotato
Magnification differences?
Replies
7
Views
838
KaterinBortle9
KaterinBortle9

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top