• 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.

ATX/STX rumor (1 Viewer)

litebeam said:
Congrats for being right here, JT.

I laughed out loud thinking about this posting when I saw this 115mm advertised at Europtic, thought of you thinking about deleting your 'rumor.'
Nailed it.
Click to expand...

I was the first that responded to JT first post, but eventually deleted my post when I heard from Swarovski birdie that it was true and still under embargo. He was right on.
 
jan van daalen said:
Hi Henry,

You are right about the 110mm for the BTX.
The response of Swarovski is as follows:

The effectiveness of the lens diameter is limited in the 115 by the BTX eyepiece module, as the prims used in the BTX were ‘designed’ for a 30-70x95 system. The 115mm has a larger aperture ratio and the prism system is therefore too small for the beam in the center of the image. With the smaller lens modules (65mm, 85mm, 95mm) the BTX prisms can take up the entire beam. ATX and STX can completely get the bundles of rays with all lens modules, which is the reason for why the lens diameter is not reduced here.
Larger prisms would have the disadvantage for the 95/85/65 models, they would be too big and too heavy. The 110mm for the BTX is therefore a little “trade-off” due to our modular system.

Here goes my "wet dream" for a 150mm BTX........

Jan
Click to expand...

At first I didn't noticed the "effective objective lens diameter" and considered the 110 an error at the BTX chart. After reading Joachim and Henry's replies I went to BTX 115 web-page and the same info was available, so...
BTX users can gain all 115 potential "only" with the extender... It's when the 115mm are more needed...:t:

With a 150mm objective module the focal length would most probably be longer, so the "effective objective lens diameter" would be >110mm...

Jan, do you ever looked through a >90º AFOV ep? As with bino-viewers, is also another dimension of birding...;)

As BTX aren't compatible with my CR-birding use/conditions and I still didn't found a good quality solution with a binoviewer on my X95, I will concentrate on >90º solutions...3:)
 

Attachments

  • X95_Omegon_ES92_12.JPG
    X95_Omegon_ES92_12.JPG
    462.7 KB · Views: 57
DRodrigues said:
At first I didn't noticed the "effective objective lens diameter" and considered the 110 an error at the BTX chart. After reading Joachim and Henry's replies I went to BTX 115 web-page and the same info was available, so...
BTX users can gain all 115 potential "only" with the extender... It's when the 115mm are more needed...:t:

With a 150mm objective module the focal length would most probably be longer, so the "effective objective lens diameter" would be >110mm...

Jan, do you ever looked through a >90º AFOV ep? As with bino-viewers, is also another dimension of birding...;)

As BTX aren't compatible with my CR-birding use/conditions and I still didn't found a good quality solution with a binoviewer on my X95, I will concentrate on >90º solutions...3:)
Click to expand...

Hi David,

The Kowa Highlander is a beast and value for money.
The Fujinon 150 series are way out of the financial reality.
The BTX 115 and (I assume never) 150 would be in reach for a lot of people.

Jan
 
Thanks for the information Jan. The thing that surprises me is that apparently right from the start Swarovski made the clear apertures of the ATX/STS prisms at least 20% wider than they needed to be to accommodate the 95mm module. It's almost like they knew a 115mm objective module with the same focal length as the 95 was coming eventually.

Henry
 
henry link said:
Thanks for the information Jan. The thing that surprises me is that apparently right from the start Swarovski made the clear apertures of the ATX/STS prisms at least 20% wider than they needed to be to accommodate the 95mm module. It's almost like they knew a 115mm objective module with the same focal length as the 95 was coming eventually.

Henry
Click to expand...

Sometimes, when reading between the lines, one could discover some strategic insight;)

Jan
 
Swarovski could make a 150mm module with folded refractor optics that used the full 150mm on the BTX.

I suppose it would cost $6,000.
Weight perhaps 4.5kg.

I have the Yukon 6x to 100x Spotting scope.
It works well at 100x.
However, it is plastic, but only weighs about 1.5kg from memory.
Also it is lacking in good coatings both on the mirrors and lenses.
I don't think it is robust, but a high end robust folded refractor could be made.

There are several military folded refractor units, but these are very expensive.
Some are very large.

Regards,
B.

P.S.
On the current price for the 115mm module I make the cost of a possible 150mm module £4,850 in the U.K. at current prices.

Or £4,040 plus VAT.

I think that some would be prepared to pay this.
 
Last edited:
Binastro said:
I don't think it is robust, but a high end robust folded refractor could be made.
Click to expand...

Hi,

some guys from the astro club have aquired a historic Zeiss AS 200 f15 doublet and are currently building a folded refractor for the planned club observatory....

Can't wait to see first light...

Joachim
 
Hi Joachim,

I was offered an 8 inch folded refractor of good quality about 40 years ago, but I didn't buy it.
I suppose if it was at a lower price I might have had it, but I had Jim Hysom 10 inch and 14.5 inch Newtonians and my excellent 12.5 inch Dall Kirkham, so I really didn't need it.

There is also a British 8 inch folded refractor binocular.

I was also offered the Malta Ross 6 inch binocular, but £250 in 1968 was a lot of money.

There was a 34 inch aperture folded optic costing goodness knows what, but it vanished back into the 'doesn't exist' classified world.

Regards,
B.
 
Thank you for that, Joachim.

Amazing you found it.

It must have been 1966, and I was offered the binocular first by Arthur Frank, owner of Charles Frank, Glasgow.
He had one of the world's finest collections of historic optics, that were sold by auction when he moved to Jersey.

A a company rep I visited Glasgow frequently.

I begged him to make an 8.5 inch Newtonian as he only made 6 inch versions.
He made me the first one, £220 retail, but he charged me £180.
It took a year to make, and I got it in 1967 and collected it by car
As it turned out the primary was faulty and Dudley Fuller gave me a first class mirror totally free of charge.
He was a jazz pianist turned telescope maker.
Lovely man.

In 1969 the 8.5 inch f/6 scope was in Helsinki observatory for a year with a brick to increase the angle by 9 degrees.
I had almost half a ton of stuff in my winterised Austin 1800 with pumped up hydrolastic suspension.
The car was fine at minus 30C.
I observed all night at minus 15C and for an hour at minus 25C.

Arthur Frank sold me a 10x70 Ross monocular from his collection.
People nowadays don't realise how difficult it was to get optics then.

The Keele observatory camera may contain a Dallmeyer 36 inch f/6.3 lens.
I had many and they varied tremendously in quality.
A few were hand aspherised, and a few coated.
They had spherical aberration that cleared at f/8.7.
Actually they weren't that good, but used yellow or red filters. Usually at f/11. there were three interchangeable shutters with different speeds.
Some of the filters contain uranium.
They were used on Williamson F52s. 8.5 inch x 7 inch film from memory.

There were also TTH 48inch f/8 and Ross 50 inch f/8 and 60 inch f/8 lenses.

The Zeiss cameras used Zeiss Telikon 75cm f/ 6.3 lenses with internal venetian blind shutters. Incredibly good quality, 30cm x 30cm format pressure backs.
Also 50cm Aero Tessar and 20cm wide angle 4 element lenses.
There are some of these survey cameras in the Science museum.
I had three of these cameras well used I gave one to a friend.

The Wray 36inch f/4 lenses were huge.
They were used for night photography.
Opticians bought these for £50 ex gov and took out the high quality 9.5 inch front lenses and reshaped them into long focus objectives.

Regards,
B.
 
ok whom else is going to be picking up one of these new 115mm Swarovski Spotting Scope Objectives besides me..? Should be easier for me to find then a new 12X42NL here in the USA...
 
jan van daalen said:
...
The Kowa Highlander is a beast and value for money.
...
Jan
Click to expand...

Interesting you mentioned the Highlander. If the BTX 115 didn't vignetted the amount of light collected would be similar. Being "only" 110mm the BTX 115 will have about 11% less light, that should be not much noticeable on most conditions, but the BTX wins on weight, dimensions, cost and practicability for birding - focusing both eyes at the same time is a huge advantage!
To be similar to an eventual Highlander 88, there would "only" need to be a BTX130 - 125 if there would be no vignetting...o:D

By the way, as reading my cr-telescopes page to see what I need to update due to the X115, I noticed that I asked for >=100 mm versions of the alpha producers but never thought that Swarovski would be the first and never thought would be a 115mm version. Better for all of us...;)

Interesting to note that my first scope was a Nikon ED60 with a 20-45x zoom... Within some time it will be a 115mm with a 30-70x wide-angled zoom, that result on 51-122x zoom with the extender! This within almost 29 years...:eek!:
 
Binastro said:
Thank you for that, Joachim.

Amazing you found it.

It must have been 1966, and I was offered the binocular first by Arthur Frank, owner of Charles Frank, Glasgow.
He had one of the world's finest collections of historic optics, that were sold by auction when he moved to Jersey.

A a company rep I visited Glasgow frequently.

I begged him to make an 8.5 inch Newtonian as he only made 6 inch versions.
He made me the first one, £220 retail, but he charged me £180.
It took a year to make, and I got it in 1967 and collected it by car
As it turned out the primary was faulty and Dudley Fuller gave me a first class mirror totally free of charge.
He was a jazz pianist turned telescope maker.
Lovely man.

In 1969 the 8.5 inch f/6 scope was in Helsinki observatory for a year with a brick to increase the angle by 9 degrees.
I had almost half a ton of stuff in my winterised Austin 1800 with pumped up hydrolastic suspension.
The car was fine at minus 30C.
I observed all night at minus 15C and for an hour at minus 25C.

Arthur Frank sold me a 10x70 Ross monocular from his collection.
People nowadays don't realise how difficult it was to get optics then.

The Keele observatory camera may contain a Dallmeyer 36 inch f/6.3 lens.
I had many and they varied tremendously in quality.
A few were hand aspherised, and a few coated.
They had spherical aberration that cleared at f/8.7.
Actually they weren't that good, but used yellow or red filters. Usually at f/11. there were three interchangeable shutters with different speeds.
Some of the filters contain uranium.
They were used on Williamson F52s. 8.5 inch x 7 inch film from memory.

There were also TTH 48inch f/8 and Ross 50 inch f/8 and 60 inch f/8 lenses.

The Zeiss cameras used Zeiss Telikon 75cm f/ 6.3 lenses with internal venetian blind shutters. Incredibly good quality, 30cm x 30cm format pressure backs.
Also 50cm Aero Tessar and 20cm wide angle 4 element lenses.
There are some of these survey cameras in the Science museum.
I had three of these cameras well used I gave one to a friend.

The Wray 36inch f/4 lenses were huge.
They were used for night photography.
Opticians bought these for £50 ex gov and took out the high quality 9.5 inch front lenses and reshaped them into long focus objectives.

Regards,
B.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Binastro, for these insights into these pioneering optics initiatives.
Creative design in large scale optics surely has lots of antecedents. What surprises me is that while the optics have become vastly more affordable, the mounts are largely unchanged, still as bulky and as heavy as ever. Solving that problem may be more beneficial to the sector than some gradual escalation in objective diameters.
 
Tripod and head for new 115MM

I already own the Swarovski CT Tripod Setup on my 95MM ATX and thinking this would be a good choice for a 2nd Swarovski Tripod Setup for the new ATX115MM I plan on buying..

8579A5C6-070C-478B-96F6-44D43F3CEACB.jpeg
 
Dutchbirder64 said:
Buy a Gitzo. Swarovski tripods are Gitzo but it will save you $500. I have the Mountaineer GT3542L with the 2720QR head.
Click to expand...

I also already have 2 Gitzo 5540LS's both with leveling bases that one has a Arca Swiss B1 Ball head on it and the other has a Novaflex Pan and Tilt head so my reasoning is for all the Swarovski to match I guess...

E94E13E0-C89E-41CE-A792-1A2C03E12DD8.jpeg
 
Warning! This thread is more than 3 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

S
ATX - 80. Then and Now.
Replies
4
Views
826
Sharpbill
S
L
ATX range 20x60 85mm or 30x70 95mm?
Replies
1
Views
336
grackle314
G
biowizard
ME 1.7x Converter - Image Quality
2
Replies
23
Views
3K
BoldenEagle
B
S
Hello all, resale question
Replies
7
Views
254
Steve Bonamo
S
W
ATX or BTX
Replies
6
Views
3K
safaridreaming
S

Users who are viewing this thread

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