Chris Galvin
Well-known member
The easiest thing for you to do would be to email the Opticron USA Office at [email protected] and ask Kyla who has stock in the USA of the straight
Chris Galvin
Opticron
-
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.
Opticron's new Travelscope (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Moocher
- Start date
The easiest thing for you to do would be to email the Opticron USA Office at [email protected] and ask Kyla who has stock in the USA of the straight
Chris Galvin
Opticron
rollingthunder
Well-known member
Agreed Niels - i was out and about over the weekend, in superb weather. Took out the scope and used it in a range of conditions including heat haze (a rarity in itself over here
) and the fine-focus certainly is useful at 30x or above imo.Laurie:t:
mooreorless
Well-known member
Hi Stephen,
I just received a copy of Time & Optics catalog and they show the Opticron MM 3 50ED straight version in this catalog. 1-866-308-0727
12-36 eyepiece is not cheap, almost as much as the scope, but unlike Nikon at least you can get them[Fieldscope].
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
I think the Befree might be worth considering if you can't afford to spend more and are wanting to use the tripod for double duty as a support for still photography (e.g. with an SLR camera). Otherwise, I'd be inclined to get something slightly larger, more stable, with lightweight pan head for scoping (or ballhead for double duty), and, in order to keep the weight similar, more expensive carbon fiber.
If all you want/need is a compact flimsy for scope viewing, and you've already decided you are OK using a ball head for scoping, I'd go for the Velbon Ultra Luxi with retrofitted light weight ballhead. The Velbon is more compact, lighter in weight, quicker to deploy, and covers a wider range of heights than the Befree.
--AP
stuarta21
Well-known member
Thanks for the reply Alexis. I currently use a Velbon Sherpa 200r as it came in deal for the scope. I use it primarily for the scope but do sometimes use it with my camera in low light for bird pics. I'd like a tripod where I can adjust the angle of the legs so I can sit comfortably when seawatching.
Jonathan Avery
Active member
Frank,
Your comments are very interesting. I saw a review of the Nikon 50 ED that says: It’s so good, in fact, that I’d even suggest it would make an excellent main scope if you’re looking for maximum flexibility in a portable, lightweight package.[/I] The link to the article is here: http://www.irelandswildlife.com/nikon-fieldscope-ed50-review/
As the consensus in this thread seems to be that the MM3 ED is at least as good as the Nikon 50 ED I presume you would think that the same comments would apply to it? Also I have seen more than once comments to the effect that the Hawke 16 - 48 x 68 ED has a sort of niche position having a wider objective than most lighter travel scopes but being relatively light itself. Bearing in mind your comments about the MM3 hanging in there with the larger 65mm scopes how would you compare the MM3 and the Hawke x 68?
If you were going to get a first scope or just one main scope which would you go for out of the MM3 or the Hawke x 68 ED?
Not Frank, but I think that your question should be clarified a bit:
1 How much do you travel? if a lot, then even 100g difference in weight would make a difference
2 do you often bird near sunset or sunrise? if so, the largest objective possible would help. Notice that Frank's statement was about use in good light.
Niels
Chris Galvin
Well-known member
I really don't think that you can call a 68mm scope a #Travelscope. Opticron certainly would not call the HR 66 GA ED nor the GS 665 GA ED scopes #Travelscopes, neither would Swarovski call their ATS 65 HD a #Travelscope so I'm at a loss how you can call a scope with an OG of 68mm a #Travelscope
Rob Laughton
Bird, bird, bird...
I agree with both Chris and Sancho,
I have an MM3 50ED which I use regularly but in some instances like on my local patch at CVL travelscopes have there limitations just solely down to the magnification range, 12-36x is sometimes just not enough for when looking at Terns and Gulls in the middle of the lake.
On the Hawke 68mm ED, I don't think any manufacture would class this as a Travelscope just because it's light weight? If you are referring to the Endurance 68mm ED it's not really lightweight in any case see below.
Hawke Endurance 68mm ED - 1270g
Optcron GS665 GA ED - 1053g
Opticron MM3 50ED - 605g
So in comparison the Hawke is actually twice as heavy as the MM3 and therefore the same applies for the Nikon ED50 too.
On the comparison side of things I personally would not compare a 68mm ED scope to a 50mm ED scope, it would not be a fair test? A fairer test would be against a GS665 ED or equivalent.
As Neils said it's what you are going to use the scope for if it's walking and traveling a lot the MM3 at half the weight would be ideal, if it's the extra light something with a larger OG would be preferable.
Best Wishes
Rob
I have an MM3 50ED which I use regularly but in some instances like on my local patch at CVL travelscopes have there limitations just solely down to the magnification range, 12-36x is sometimes just not enough for when looking at Terns and Gulls in the middle of the lake.
On the Hawke 68mm ED, I don't think any manufacture would class this as a Travelscope just because it's light weight? If you are referring to the Endurance 68mm ED it's not really lightweight in any case see below.
Hawke Endurance 68mm ED - 1270g
Optcron GS665 GA ED - 1053g
Opticron MM3 50ED - 605g
So in comparison the Hawke is actually twice as heavy as the MM3 and therefore the same applies for the Nikon ED50 too.
On the comparison side of things I personally would not compare a 68mm ED scope to a 50mm ED scope, it would not be a fair test? A fairer test would be against a GS665 ED or equivalent.
As Neils said it's what you are going to use the scope for if it's walking and traveling a lot the MM3 at half the weight would be ideal, if it's the extra light something with a larger OG would be preferable.
Best Wishes
Rob
Last edited:
Jonathan Avery
Active member
Thank you Rob and everyone for their comments which I appreciate. I would not have normally thought of comparing a 68 mm with a 50 mm but a quick review in Bird Watching magazine's January 2014 edition in their "2014 gear guide" suggested that the Hawke 68 ED was "a little bit bigger than many compact or travel scopes and so can produce a brighter image...but its a bit lighter and more compact than a full size 80mm ...making it perfect for birders who do a lot of walking, or who need to pack their scope into luggage." It seemed to be suggesting that because of this it had found a niche in the market doing a role that was similar to travel scopes. I also picked up on Irish Nature's comment that a good 50 mm could be a very flexible main scope and then wondered if you were going to buy one which it would be. From what everyone is saying it seems that probably both articles are being very generous in their interpretation of the roles that the respective scopes could perform and really they are in two separate sections - i.e. mid sized scope and travel scope.
Chris Galvin
Well-known member
Jonathan I think that the Hawke 68mm has found it's niche and that it placed in a sector that has been there for as long as I have been birding and that is the 70mm market. 8-P
Rob Laughton
Bird, bird, bird...
Hi Jonathan
No problem. I always say that there is no substitute for trying out the models you have in mind for yourself preferably in field conditions. If you would like to find out where and when in your area you can try them out just PM me.
Best wishes
Rob
rollingthunder
Well-known member
Agreed - it's horses for courses it's not fair to compare the two different-sized objective lenses. I have a number of 60mm scopes but have decided to buy and use the MM3 because of its portability and, i have to say, crisp image and light-gathering for what is a very small scope. It packs away nicely and is extremely portable. This coupled with the fact that i seem able to hand-hold, certainly at below 20x very nicely.
Otherwise where will it all end.....Hubble?.....
Laurie:t:
Otherwise where will it all end.....Hubble?.....
Laurie:t:
FrankD
Well-known member
Sorry I did not reply sooner but the others certainly responded in kind.
Not much more I could offer unless you want to get into a bit of a discussion on what the definition of a travelscope is. From the comments above it would seem that it would focus strictly on weight. I would agree to an extent but one cannot dismiss length as well. There are many excellent 65-70 mm spotting scopes on the market but many of them are fairly long in comparison to the 50 mm class models. Two exceptions that immediately come to mind are the Pentax 65 ED II and the Promaster Infinity ED 65. Both are very compact. Not much longer than the 50 mm class scopes we are discussing. Yes, they weigh at least a third more but they would be a reasonable alternative for someone wanting slightly higher magnification and a slightly brighter image at those higher magnifications.
As for the Travelscope being a "full time" scope, tough call. As Rob stated above there are certain circumstances where you are going to want and need higher magnification than what the MM3 delivers. Like Rob the first situation that comes to mind is watching waterfowl at great distance down at the local quarry. During the winter I hit this particular quarry three or four times a week in search of rarities as it has produced in the past. Seeing them in detail at those distances would be extremely difficult for the MM3 not to mention taking documentation photos with my Iphone. An 80 mm class scope is much more appropriate for this type of application.
Not much more I could offer unless you want to get into a bit of a discussion on what the definition of a travelscope is. From the comments above it would seem that it would focus strictly on weight. I would agree to an extent but one cannot dismiss length as well. There are many excellent 65-70 mm spotting scopes on the market but many of them are fairly long in comparison to the 50 mm class models. Two exceptions that immediately come to mind are the Pentax 65 ED II and the Promaster Infinity ED 65. Both are very compact. Not much longer than the 50 mm class scopes we are discussing. Yes, they weigh at least a third more but they would be a reasonable alternative for someone wanting slightly higher magnification and a slightly brighter image at those higher magnifications.
As for the Travelscope being a "full time" scope, tough call. As Rob stated above there are certain circumstances where you are going to want and need higher magnification than what the MM3 delivers. Like Rob the first situation that comes to mind is watching waterfowl at great distance down at the local quarry. During the winter I hit this particular quarry three or four times a week in search of rarities as it has produced in the past. Seeing them in detail at those distances would be extremely difficult for the MM3 not to mention taking documentation photos with my Iphone. An 80 mm class scope is much more appropriate for this type of application.
For what a MM3(50mm) Opticron with a fixed 18x or 24x eyepiece here in the states cost, what would be the reason not to own the compact Pentax EDII 65mm with the XW20/XW14 eyepieces instead of the MM3 ? Many places here in the states one can purchase the Pentax EDII 65mm with a XW20 or 14XW eyepieces at the same price point or less. I have not looked thru the MM3 but have owned/used the Pentax with the XW eyepieces. Any one that has owned the little Pentax with the XW eyepieces mentioned knows how good it is. Why go to a 50mm scope ?, so one can possibly carry it in a smaller knapsack. ...... gwen
Last edited:
For me, I switched from a 60mm to a 50 mm for my travel scope because most of my travels happen in the air with restrictive weight restrictions. I have a second scope (80mm) for home use. If you want to have a single scope for everything (or if you are traveling by car), then using a larger model (such as a 65 mm) makes sense. "horses for courses"
Niels
Niels
The-Wanderer
Well-known member
Gwen,
As no one seems to have responded to your post I thought I would jump in, although I have little experience to draw on!
Awhile back Wizard Chef wrote as follows on this forum ( http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=243386 )
"I very recently had the opportunity to compare the Vortex Viper HDa 65mm zoom scope with the Pentax PF 65 EDII zoom scope. Both were angled scopes. At high zoom there was no comparison. The Viper blew the doors off of the Pentax. The sharpness was much more apparent on the Viper and the light at maximum zoom was considerably brighter with the Viper. I was very impressed at how much sharper the Viper was when looking at details at 400 yards distance. Icing on the cake is the Viper is $200 less than the Pentax.
The side-by-side test was done on an overcast day.” The rest of the thread needs to be read.
In the UK the Pentax retails at about £440 with, say £270 more for an eyepiece. I don’t know how much better US prices are but here the Viper including eyepiece is about £650 including eyepiece.
"The 65mm Vortex Razor HD was clearly the best scope in our mid-sized and mid-priced category. “ according to:
http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2014travelscopes/review.html
A month or so ago the razor was selling at £800 but it is now £1,100!
it should, however, be significantly better than the Viper.
I have been investigating 60/65mm scopes for awhile. Unfortunately no dealer stocks these Vortex scopes in my area in the deepest UK.
I hope more opinions will be forthcoming.
Wanderer
As no one seems to have responded to your post I thought I would jump in, although I have little experience to draw on!
Awhile back Wizard Chef wrote as follows on this forum ( http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=243386 )
"I very recently had the opportunity to compare the Vortex Viper HDa 65mm zoom scope with the Pentax PF 65 EDII zoom scope. Both were angled scopes. At high zoom there was no comparison. The Viper blew the doors off of the Pentax. The sharpness was much more apparent on the Viper and the light at maximum zoom was considerably brighter with the Viper. I was very impressed at how much sharper the Viper was when looking at details at 400 yards distance. Icing on the cake is the Viper is $200 less than the Pentax.
The side-by-side test was done on an overcast day.” The rest of the thread needs to be read.
In the UK the Pentax retails at about £440 with, say £270 more for an eyepiece. I don’t know how much better US prices are but here the Viper including eyepiece is about £650 including eyepiece.
"The 65mm Vortex Razor HD was clearly the best scope in our mid-sized and mid-priced category. “ according to:
http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2014travelscopes/review.html
A month or so ago the razor was selling at £800 but it is now £1,100!
it should, however, be significantly better than the Viper.
I have been investigating 60/65mm scopes for awhile. Unfortunately no dealer stocks these Vortex scopes in my area in the deepest UK.
I hope more opinions will be forthcoming.
Wanderer
Sedgley Birder
Well-known member
I have just taken delivery of the MM3. Very happy with the scope, and I can see myself using more than the top of the range Kowa that I have. Because of the size, weight and portability and the incredible light gathering for a 50mm scope. Ideal for popping in the rucksack along with all the other bits and pieces for a 'field kit'. Will keep the Kowa for 'special' occasions! The MM3 came with the standard black case as I did not see the point in spending extra money on the green. The carrying strap configuration on the black case is not ideal, but as it will be carried around in a rucksack that is no problem. Having received the MM3, I have spent @ 2+ hours trying to get it to fit in the black case comfortably without success. The case is that tight that I cannot do the velcro and zips up properly. Has anybody else had this problem? I have contacted the supplier and they have informed me that no problems have been reported on the ones they have sold. So before I return the case, I would like some feedback I possible please. It is not rocket science to fit a case on a scope!
Thanks very much for any assistance.
Thanks very much for any assistance.
