Dutchbirder64
Well-known member
Those are really sturdy, 5 series Gitzo. You owe some good stuff.
-
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.
ATX/STX rumor (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jtc
- Start date
Those are really sturdy, 5 series Gitzo. You owe some good stuff.
The BulbMogul
Well-known member
The BulbMogul
Well-known member
HAH and quite honestly with so many tripods I have, I just put the Novaflex on the 5 Series for the heck of it... I do have some very interesting heads that can be put on the 5540's like this Arca Swiss..
good one
In Europe, Gitzo is a better choice for servicing; in the US, one is better off choosing RRS
- best matching for a Gitzo:Zenelli carbon fiber ZC Compact Gimbal Head
https://www.zenelli.it/en/product-category/products/
really very light, strong and works great either with dslr lenses or scopes - a bit pricey
going to wait for more reviews....and then decide if keeping the 85 or the 95 - no point for me of having three scopes this large.
Hopefully it will perform better than the 95mm with extender at full magnification (70x)
The BulbMogul
Well-known member
anyone yet with the new 115MM objective..?
steph.661
Member
I'm in the same situation. I'm very tempted by the 115mm but I'm lucky to have two razor sharp scopes (ATM80HD with astro eyepieces and an ATX95mm with extender). I will wait for independent reviews.
safaridreaming
Well-known member
I’ve just received mine yesterday. Will provide some comments once I hv it out today. I bought mine primarily to replace my APM 70mm ED binocular for stargazing. My 95mm BTX was too dim relative to the APM’s but the 115’s tested favourably enough for me to buy it.
vd Berg
Active member
first impression Swaro 95 vs 115mm objective module
Hello,
With thanks to mr. Riccardo Camusso:
-Facebook message:
https://www.facebook.com/riccardo.camusso/posts/10221438815553581
-Facebook video only:
https://www.facebook.com/riccardo.camusso/videos/10221438709030918
Regards, vd Berg
Hello,
With thanks to mr. Riccardo Camusso:
-Facebook message:
https://www.facebook.com/riccardo.camusso/posts/10221438815553581
-Facebook video only:
https://www.facebook.com/riccardo.camusso/videos/10221438709030918
Regards, vd Berg
Thanks
wow - it seems to be showing quite a difference in clarity and overall brightness.
now the question left is, do I sell the 85 or the 95mm scope....hmmmm?
vd Berg
Active member
Hello nwphil,
Before sell any scope. Is it an idea, is it possible, to go to a Swarovski retail partner with your 85 and 95mm scope and then digiscope compare them, if possible in poor light, with a 115mm objective module for example on (a) mammal(s), bird(s)? Remind that, by all respect, the (first impression) comparison by mr. Riccardo Camusso, is, in poor light at 300 meters, for a sched, car, hay bales.
Regards, vd Berg
Hi Berg,
Indeed more reviews and if possible a hands-on viewing are a must - getting it to a suitable place will be more difficult, as the local retailers I know of, are in very urban areas, and even bringing a scope outside the store might not be feasible.
Then we have the down-sampling image quality issues of Facebook....
In all and from other reviews - sample images and comments from "S" are bias loaded ofcourse, it seems that there is a considerable light gathering gain without loosing sharpness. Might actually become an issue in very bright situations, and then comes in question the lens performance in less than ideal atmospheric conditions - the 95mm with extender, at 70x does show some loss in IQ, and even without it at max zoom, humidity/haze becomes very obvious with so much reach power. To be seen how this 115mm performs with extender too..
In sum, no worries, I am not rushing to sell and buy anything yet
. It's looking promissing for sure
Anyone in the UK received their 115mm yet?
Message received from the courier company informs me that mine, along with the case, is to be delivered tomorrow (Wednesday 28th). Looking forward to trying it out over the coming days with the BTX and 1.7 extender.
Hoping it will prove useful on future winter wildfowl and wader wetland bird counts at high tide; can’t imagine I’d want to carry it too far!
Message received from the courier company informs me that mine, along with the case, is to be delivered tomorrow (Wednesday 28th). Looking forward to trying it out over the coming days with the BTX and 1.7 extender.
Hoping it will prove useful on future winter wildfowl and wader wetland bird counts at high tide; can’t imagine I’d want to carry it too far!
forent
Well-known member
My short experience with the new 115mm lens:
I own the ATX eyepiece with the 65mm and 95mm lens modules. Great combination. But when I heard of the new superlative 115mm module I could not resist and ordered one copy from a reputable dealer. If the 115 was a great step forward I would sell my 95 and use a 65/115 combo henceforth. The parcel arrived two days ago and I sent it back last night after two days of testing in various situations.
Why?
Well, the 115 is markedly brighter than my 95 and resolves a tad better, especially in dim light. Regarding CA they are nearly equal with a slight edge to the 115. (BTW, I am very pleased with my 95 copy in general.) But I expected the difference in weight and size - about 750 g and 1.5 cm in lenght - less extreme. In reality, the 115 is a monster! Fat, heavy, cloddish! Although I am tall, not too old, quite athletic and willing to suffer I could not imagine to carry such a mammoth several hours in the field, not to mention the then required heavier tripod and head. While I struggled with the 115 in our garden, my sweet-natured, diplomatic wife remarked: "It seems to be the perfect solution for stationary observations, dear." That's it. The best optical performance I have ever seen in a scope, easily up to 70x. But an ATX 30-70x115 is not a FIELD scope anymore, at least not for me. And the 95 is only slightly inferior IMHO. Hence I stick to my proved and tested 65/95 combination. Money saved. Doubts dispelled. Relief!
I own the ATX eyepiece with the 65mm and 95mm lens modules. Great combination. But when I heard of the new superlative 115mm module I could not resist and ordered one copy from a reputable dealer. If the 115 was a great step forward I would sell my 95 and use a 65/115 combo henceforth. The parcel arrived two days ago and I sent it back last night after two days of testing in various situations.
Why?
Well, the 115 is markedly brighter than my 95 and resolves a tad better, especially in dim light. Regarding CA they are nearly equal with a slight edge to the 115. (BTW, I am very pleased with my 95 copy in general.) But I expected the difference in weight and size - about 750 g and 1.5 cm in lenght - less extreme. In reality, the 115 is a monster! Fat, heavy, cloddish! Although I am tall, not too old, quite athletic and willing to suffer I could not imagine to carry such a mammoth several hours in the field, not to mention the then required heavier tripod and head. While I struggled with the 115 in our garden, my sweet-natured, diplomatic wife remarked: "It seems to be the perfect solution for stationary observations, dear." That's it. The best optical performance I have ever seen in a scope, easily up to 70x. But an ATX 30-70x115 is not a FIELD scope anymore, at least not for me. And the 95 is only slightly inferior IMHO. Hence I stick to my proved and tested 65/95 combination. Money saved. Doubts dispelled. Relief!
DRodrigues
Well-known member
Forent,
Don't be tempted to purchase a BTX and/or the 1,7x extender...
With those, I expect the X115 will shine...
Will see when I will get one but might take some time.
Don't be tempted to purchase a BTX and/or the 1,7x extender...
With those, I expect the X115 will shine...
Will see when I will get one but might take some time.
Jason Bugay Reyes
Well-known member
My short experience with the new 115mm lens:
I own the ATX eyepiece with the 65mm and 95mm lens modules. Great combination. But when I heard of the new superlative 115mm module I could not resist and ordered one copy from a reputable dealer. If the 115 was a great step forward I would sell my 95 and use a 65/115 combo henceforth. The parcel arrived two days ago and I sent it back last night after two days of testing in various situations.
Why?
Well, the 115 is markedly brighter than my 95 and resolves a tad better, especially in dim light. Regarding CA they are nearly equal with a slight edge to the 115. (BTW, I am very pleased with my 95 copy in general.) But I expected the difference in weight and size - about 750 g and 1.5 cm in lenght - less extreme. In reality, the 115 is a monster! Fat, heavy, cloddish! Although I am tall, not too old, quite athletic and willing to suffer I could not imagine to carry such a mammoth several hours in the field, not to mention the then required heavier tripod and head. While I struggled with the 115 in our garden, my sweet-natured, diplomatic wife remarked: "It seems to be the perfect solution for stationary observations, dear." That's it. The best optical performance I have ever seen in a scope, easily up to 70x. But an ATX 30-70x115 is not a FIELD scope anymore, at least not for me. And the 95 is only slightly inferior IMHO. Hence I stick to my proved and tested 65/95 combination. Money saved. Doubts dispelled. Relief!
I have the same combo. 95mm for digiscoping and for paddy fields, marshes and coast and the 65mm for hiking and longer walk in the rainforest etc The 115mm for me will provide better resolution and shutter speed hehehe
Last edited:
My short experience with the new 115mm lens:
I own the ATX eyepiece with the 65mm and 95mm lens modules. Great combination. But when I heard of the new superlative 115mm module I could not resist and ordered one copy from a reputable dealer. If the 115 was a great step forward I would sell my 95 and use a 65/115 combo henceforth. The parcel arrived two days ago and I sent it back last night after two days of testing in various situations.
Why?
Well, the 115 is markedly brighter than my 95 and resolves a tad better, especially in dim light. Regarding CA they are nearly equal with a slight edge to the 115. (BTW, I am very pleased with my 95 copy in general.) But I expected the difference in weight and size - about 750 g and 1.5 cm in lenght - less extreme. In reality, the 115 is a monster! Fat, heavy, cloddish! Although I am tall, not too old, quite athletic and willing to suffer I could not imagine to carry such a mammoth several hours in the field, not to mention the then required heavier tripod and head. While I struggled with the 115 in our garden, my sweet-natured, diplomatic wife remarked: "It seems to be the perfect solution for stationary observations, dear." That's it. The best optical performance I have ever seen in a scope, easily up to 70x. But an ATX 30-70x115 is not a FIELD scope anymore, at least not for me. And the 95 is only slightly inferior IMHO. Hence I stick to my proved and tested 65/95 combination. Money saved. Doubts dispelled. Relief!
In your opinion would the 115 be a good option for astronomy if one wanted a rugged/waterproof instrument with its very large objective ?
forent
Well-known member
Sorry, I am completely ignorant to astronomy and have never used my binos and scopes for stargazing.
What I can say is that the 115 is made to the same high quality level known from the other Swarovski *TX components, including watertightness. Moreover, by first-hand experience I can reassure their robustness also. But the larger and heavier the front element, the more prone to damage (especially by downfall) a lens module *might* be. Therefore, I *expect* the 115 to be more delicate than e.g. the 85.
By the way: I called the 115 "cloddish" (because it is so bulky - the 95 is a dwarf in comparison) . That's not really fair. Actually, it is nicely designed with beautifully shaped curves. I was slightly puzzled that they have changed the Swarovski lettering from the familiar black-silver plate to a discreet imprinting in the armour. And also that armour seemed to be slightly different: marginally brighter green, a little bit more tarnish. It reminds me of the EL series somehow.
