Has anyone seen the new Meopta spotting scope (1 Viewer)

[Binoseeker]

Another star test...indoors...

What can you do inside a house in a short time.....took a ball-bearing ball diameter 14 mm and lay on the floor approximately 10 m from the scope, took a powerful led flashlight with only one led in it, put it on the floor between ball and scope, ca 2m from the ball, activated it and let it shine on the ball. Turned off every other light source in the room, looked at the ball through the scope at 60x.

There were a lot of rings in the airy disk inside focus, nice and centered as it should be. Put the scope outside focus, i could also see a lot of rings but not as clearly, but centered as it should be. Every second ring seemed to have the same color in each airy disk. The center part seemed very small...hard to see.

Tried a magnifying glas, monocular at 5x, binocular at 8x but could not really get a nicer view, maybe i need another tripod and a bin to look at the scope ocular, it seems hard to get a nice view when holding them in my hands. When looking this way, on an unfocused image, through the scope a lot of eye floaters are disturbing the view....

Well, tried to look also at the focused image as suggested by meopta, i didn´t see any rings...how are you supposed to do that test?

Maybe someone on the forum has got the scope and an Iphone+MeoPix iScoping Adapter and could take photos of the airy disks and show us, that would have been nice.....i don´t own any of that stuff so i can´t do it myself....i think there is an app somewhere so you can get timer function taking photo to reduce risk of vibrations....blurry image...

The outer diameter on the rubber eye cup part on top is approx. 48,5 mm. Just below the eye cup, the ocular body outer diameter is 46,2 mm.

Anders

 

[Bitterroot Birds]

Anders, to me it sounds like your scope is pretty well corrected for SA by your description, if your simulated star is useable.

You would probably need to boost resolution quite a bit to see the in focus disc.

Keep in mind I am not the expert Henry is, however.

 

[Kammerdiner]

Anders' experience sounds a lot like mine, eye floaters, or whatever they are, included.

In addition, the Meopta I had looked a LOT better than that Vortex Razor Henry pointed out. A LOT better. When I could see the rings clearly they were nicely circular.

Overall, I think boosting and photographing is the way to go. But I don't have the wherewithal to do that.

I think it's important not to downgrade this Meopta by association with unrelated scopes. I know that's not Henry's intention either. As near as I can tell, the Meopta is a truly good scope.

Mark

 

[RJM]

...There were a lot of rings in the airy disk inside focus, nice and centered as it should be. Put the scope outside focus, i could also see a lot of rings but not as clearly, but centered as it should be. Every second ring seemed to have the same color in each airy disk. The center part seemed very small...hard to see...

Anders, I am going to be a little persnickety in telling you the Airy disk is only visible IN FOCUS at higher magnifications (1x-2x per mm of lens diameter) and is named for the scientist that studied it (there is nothing "airy" about it). In a perfect optic it consists of a central point of light and 1 BRIGHT diffraction ring that contains almost all the visible light energy. You can see it at the bottom center of the image I posted above. FYI, if you see more than 1 bright ring when focused, it is a indication the optic is not diffraction limited.

What you are describing in the out/inside focus views are the diffraction rings of the various wavelengths of light. If you can use a green filter over the eyepiece (or light source) the diffraction rings can become more distinct.

It is important to have and keep the point source centered in the view. The easiest way to do this is to defocus the point source until it fills the field of view when centered then refocus until you can "see" ~5 rings.

The primary characteristics you hope the rings will reveal is that they are ROUND, CONCENTRIC, and with identical in size/intensity on both sides of focus. The last is almost impossible for any fieldscope to achieve. The prism and internal focus can usually be blamed for this.

 

[Binoseeker]

Thanks all for your comments...i am total newbie in this, this is my first scope

RJM, that was good information, i tried to look at the focused image reflex, with binoculars etc but didn´t know what to look for, i will do a check again..to be continued... I sure needs another tripod now...

Mark, i think like you, we should investigate further.

Anders

 

[mayoayo]

The description You are making of the indoors Test seems to have granted good results..If the rings are not deformed, are well aligned ,round and concentric and you can see rings inside and outside of focus, Then ,the three defects you were looking for, Astigmatism,coma/misaligment and Spherical Aberration, seem pretty well controlled..

I cant go further than that in my tests,because I dont know more..but I have tested ,in this way, many mid and hig end scopes, in the last couple of years,and I find consistent good results,in terms of resolution at high power,with the scopes that showed better results on those three basic variables..
Although at low power most images created by a bright,ED scope,seem very similar,the differences are visible already..at 60X there is a real chance of your scope not performing to its potential,even if moderate astigmatism,coma or SA are present..that means loosing detail in targets that ,otherways would show detail..for instance letters considerably smaller than a license plate,maybe half the size on average aprox., can be clearly read at one Km ,across reasonably clear air,at 60X..If you cant get that detail,the scope is not good.
I am looking forward to Kamerdiner 2ond scope results to see if the good quality is consistent...
Congratulations guys on your new scopes,..Happy for you they are good!!!

 

[mooreorless]

As long as the scope seems to be able to have a good view at the highest power, with a snap into focus and no hunting for focus all the time, you should be ok with it.

 

[mayoayo]

As long as the scope seems to be able to have a good view at the highest power, with a snap into focus and no hunting for focus all the time, you should be ok with it.

Steve,,I disagree with your statement in a basic term :"seems".." "As long as the scope Seems..."..I would not buy a High end,Expensive Brand new scope only to have a high power image that seems OK...t'is to vague a term to define qualities that are actually,pretty much, measurable..I had a number of scopes, namely a few PentaxPF65 units,that seemed to have a good view at high power..But star test showed aberrations in all of the units and compared with better scopes I had later,the Image didnt seem that fine..Same with the ZEN ED..Seemed nice but could not resolve things I resolved with a Kowa 823 that I had afterwards or the Swaro AT80HD I have Now..Star test of all those scopes were consistent with the quality of the view when put in perspective
My advice is to buy a scope as long as is positively able to have a good view at high power,and resolves clearly fine detail at high power / long distance...
To buy a scope that seems OK,I would buy a 500$ celestron regal or similar,but not a 2K plus model

 

[Binoseeker]

Meopta meostar S2 82 HD star test in house…short distances (maybe too short :eek!: …)

White single LED Light source shining on ball ( 14 mm diameter, from ball bearing) at 4 m distance. (lights source between scope and ball)
Ball to scope distance 10 m. Scope at 60 x, Camera at 3x optical zoom. No perfect line, tried as good it gets by hand, no digiscoping adapter etc…
Well, I am not sure this is the correct way to do things so take it with a grain of salt…images would probably be a lot better with correct digiscoping adapter, longer distances, more centred circles etc… Maybe someone who has the right stuff to make these tests could give it a try.

See attached word-document...

Anders

 

[mooreorless]

Manuel it "seems" I had a poor choice of words. I mean it should snap into very good/excellent focus at highest powers, in this case 70x esp. at this price.

 

[kabsetz]

Anders,

Your inside and outside focus images look pretty good actually, and their symmetry is not bad at all. The best focus image is probably very overexposed, showing an excessively bright central spot and more than one rings around it. If what you see in best focus is more rings than just one, then that would be an indication of too much spherical aberration, but in a photo it might just be overexposure.

I have seen one Meostar scope that I could view glitter points through, and they looked much better than average. The image also looked respectably sharp at 70x.

Kimmo

 

[henry link]

Anders,

Excellent photos! I agree with Kimmo. This looks like a very nice scope. The focused image may be both overexposed and perhaps not quite perfectly focused. A little defocus would spread extra light from the center into the first couple of rings. I find that the exposure time for the focused star point has to be much shorter than the out of focus diffraction patterns of the same star since the very same amount of light is concentrated into a tiny area.

Henry

 

[Binoseeker]

Kimmo,

It was very hard to get a good photo of the airy disk in focus due to over exposure, the reflex was too strong compared to the background. I took a lot of "focus" photos and the one in the attached document looked best.

Maybe i didn´t manage to focus on the ball exactly...could that be why there are some thinner rings outside the first "fat" one closest to the center point ?
Thinner rings are seen when image is out of focus.

Thanks for your reply,

Anders

 

[Binoseeker]

Henry,

The camera i used doesn´t have manual settings for exposure time nor aperture, it is a simple automatic camera...

You posted when i was writing my reply to Kimmo, great, then i thought right about image beeing a bit out of focus

Thanks for your reply,

Anders

 

[Binoseeker]

I managed to look with binoculars on the ocular and saw the airydisk. It looked as a small ring at center with a big fat ring around...as it should look i guess.

Anders

 

[kabsetz]

Anders,

Good job. But the ring around the disk should preferably not be very fat. However, not having seen it myself I'll not try to guess how fat or thin it actually was, plus the precision of exact focus plays a significant role here.

Kimmo

 

[Binoseeker]

Kimmo,

Ok, i will look around after some photos here on BF that shows this as it should be, then i can relate to that and make a second statement

I do hope you will get the opportunity to test this type of scope.

Thanks,

Anders

 

[Kammerdiner]

Just a quick update. I got the correct angled Meopta S2 today and can confirm that, as near as I can tell, it's the optical/mechanical equal of the straight scope I had to return. Star-testing looks darn near identical--although my star test is seriously flawed at present (a glazed ceramic electrical insulator 60 yards away, and prone to all kinds of atmoshperic intrusions).

Based on all the uniformly good reviews, and my experience with these two samples, I'd say Meopta is doing an excellent job maintaining top-notch uniformity and quality control. They have a winner.

If you're in the market for anything less than a Kowa 88 or an 85 ATX try to check out the Meopta. Side by side I preferred it to a Swaro 80 ATM HD (see prior entry). Based on what I see today, I still do. Except it's heavier, and I don't like extra weight.

The 30-60x WA zoom is just a dream. Lots of very steady eye relief (I wear glasses) and an easy view. Sharp everywhere, but some real AMD at the lowest mag. Doesn't bother me though.

Anyway, I'll try to do a real star test in the coming weeks. Too much work for now, then too much birding (with the Meopta) in Florida.

Oh, if anyone comes up with a neat way to tether eyepiece caps I'd like to hear about it. I'll put my "inventors cap" on as well.

Mark

 

[Binoseeker]

I have been out birding two days with the Meostar S2 HD angled scope and I am very impressed with the scope. Yesterday, I compared the view briefly with a Swarovski 80mm-ish scope at 50X(max on his ocular), when looking at to white tailed eagles in a tree very far away and I thought the view looked the same :smoke: , (and I didn´t ask exactly what type of scope he had). When I increased it to 60X I saw some small disturbances in the view, like looking through hot air. It was a warm spring day.

I am impressed how far I can see at 60X, today, cloudy, little rain, not much “heat” in the air, I was at a lake and there was some barnacle geese on the opposite shore that I could ID…very impressed.
Well, I am hoping to compare it with other scopes in the future, and I hope some more experienced persons will test it ;-)

The focuser is still a bit stiff….hope it will move easier in the future.
The ER is fine with me. I need large ER…

Anders

 

[Kammerdiner]

I have been out birding two days with the Meostar S2 HD angled scope and I am very impressed with the scope. Yesterday, I compared the view briefly with a Swarovski 80mm-ish scope at 50X(max on his ocular), when looking at to white tailed eagles in a tree very far away and I thought the view looked the same :smoke: , (and I didn´t ask exactly what type of scope he had). When I increased it to 60X I saw some small disturbances in the view, like looking through hot air. It was a warm spring day.

I am impressed how far I can see at 60X, today, cloudy, little rain, not much “heat” in the air, I was at a lake and there was some barnacle geese on the opposite shore that I could ID…very impressed.
Well, I am hoping to compare it with other scopes in the future, and I hope some more experienced persons will test it ;-)

The focuser is still a bit stiff….hope it will move easier in the future.
The ER is fine with me. I need large ER…

Anders

I actually preferred the Meopta to the Swaro 80 ATM with 25-50x, but that was mostly middle-distance stuff where color and contrast would make a real difference. Eagles far off might equalize them somewhat, especially with haze and heat.

We've seen maybe 5-6 reviews/samples of the Meopta and all commented on the stiffer focus. Both of mine were, so far as I could tell, identically stiff. So it's safe to say that's part of the design. Considering how fast the focus is I actually like the resistance. I think you might overshoot the mark with less of it. As it is, you can go from near to far quickly, without all that focus knob twiddling you sometimes get, and yet come up on the focus as slow as you want to because you've got that big, well-damped, helical focuser. I could easily live with either the slower, buttery Swaro focus, or the faster, heavier Meopta.

I hope others get their hands on this one for a look. I think it's a winner. I'll be out with it for a week so I'll report back. :t:

Mark