swarovski ctc 30x75 vs meopta tga 75 (1 Viewer)

[iseegeorgesstar]

Hello,

I was wondering if there were anymore user reports on these two devices? I'm particularly interesting in the ergonomic, if any, difference between the two. As well curious if they can be differentiated optically through the eyepiece?

I saw a post on here that the suction from the drawtube of the CTC was catching flies? (Not sure if the post was intended to be comedic or not.)

The appeal of the meopta seems to be that it accepts a zoom eyepiece however unmounted this is probably impractical and fov is probably narrower. The con with the meopta is that the fixed EP only comes in recticle version, I believe, as the non-recticle is no longer available (?).

Which of the two scopes would you get and why? The scope is more for general purpose. I got my first swarovski bino this past year so I'm leaning towards the ctc however I don't like that I'm limited to a singular fixed EP. Thoughts?

Thanks for any and all comments.

 

[Mono]

I am wondering why the attraction of a drawscope?

 

[iseegeorgesstar]

Great question. The form factor has me spell bound. I'm attracted to the idea of being able to brace it with two hands or use the longer momentum arm to hopefully brace with one. The device seems very rugged. I think the meopta one you can wear with a shoulder strap. Honestly I have a 20mm monocular and sometimes wonder what it would feel like to have a much bigger version of that.

And lastly to be completely honest, there's an inner child aspect that just wants to feel like a pirate with a telescope searching for new land......

 

[forent]

I am wondering why the attraction of a drawscope?

I see your point:

• Draw scopes are not waterproof and hence prone to condensation, dust and fungus.
• The mechanics of the draw tube could wear out.
• The pull-push procedure might annoy the impatient.
• No angled versions available.
• Traditional constructions without technical progress.
• Modern 60mm scopes are smaller and lighter than even inserted draw scopes.

And so forth. But draw scopes have one decisive advantage: When extended, their long, slim shape with focusing near the eyepiece allows for leaning, resting or even hands-free use. Of course not for extended, enjoyable observation, but for quick identification. Try this with a full-size angled scope without tripod support! That's why I paired my angled Meopta S2 20-70x82 HD with a Meopta TGA 20-60x75 that I recently bought in mint condition for 600 Euros. It was worth it for me!

 

[Mono]

I have a drawscope, I use it when hiking when I don't want to carry a spotting scope and tripod. Whilst it allows for long range observation, if you have something to rest on, it is absolutely not a replacement for a "proper scope" on a tripod. I see drawscopes as a very much a niche product useful in only a tiny range of circumstances, made even smaller with the advent of carbon tripods and IS binoculars.

 

[forent]

(...) I'm particularly interesting in the ergonomic, if any, difference between the two. As well curious if they can be differentiated optically through the eyepiece? (...) The appeal of the meopta seems to be that it accepts a zoom eyepiece however unmounted this is probably impractical and fov is probably narrower. The con with the meopta is that the fixed EP only comes in recticle version, I believe, as the non-recticle is no longer available (?). (...) The scope is more for general purpose. I got my first swarovski bino this past year so I'm leaning towards the ctc however I don't like that I'm limited to a singular fixed EP. (...)

These two scopes are quite similar in their performance and practical use. However, in view of enthusiastic user reports, I suspect that the Swarovski CTC could be slightly ahead in terms of optical quality. But the Meopta TGA I own is really very satisfying although not quite up to the level of my excellent Meopta S2 HD.
I have tried and tested all three eyepieces available for the TGA (30x, 30x reticle and 20-60x). The zoom is in fact narrow compared to the two 30x wide angle oculars but optically absolutely equivalent and - for me, YMMV - more versatile than the fixed focal length alternatives. However, most users prefer the wide-angle fixed focal length.
Not only the 30x WA but the TGA itself and the other two eyepieces also seem to be out of production. Retailers only offer remaining stocks, I guess. But a call to Meopta could clear that up.

 

[forent]

I have a drawscope, I use it when hiking when I don't want to carry a spotting scope and tripod. Whilst it allows for long range observation, if you have something to rest on, it is absolutely not a replacement for a "proper scope" on a tripod. I see drawscopes as a very much a niche product useful in only a tiny range of circumstances, made even smaller with the advent of carbon tripods and IS binoculars.

I agree with you. Everyone has to decide for themselves whether they want to fill the niche. For me it's a welcome addition and worth its moderate price. But I would never consider a drawscope as the only spotting scope for bird watching. The situation is completely different for hunters, at least in Europe: a 30x75 drawscope is ideal for them.