• 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.

Opinion on low cost spotting scopes = (1 Viewer)

A

aeajr

Active member
My wife and I have been into bird watching for about 18 months and having fun.

We do a lot of bird watching by water where there are birds on an opposite shore, several hundred years away, that we can't identify. We have a selection of binoculars. Her favorite are Nikon 10-22 zoom binoculars. But now she wants more reach, more magnification.


So we are looking at spotting scopes.


I would put the budget at $300 or less. Not looking for top of the line. Something with a zoom around 20-60. Nice if it can take my astronomy eyepieces but that is not required.


I have two that I have been considering and curious if anyone has experience with these:


Celestron C70 Mini Mak. Under $100

I did not expect to see a 70 mm Mak in this price range. Main interest in this is small size and no CA issues. Also has an adapter to take 1.25" eyepieces in place of the included zoom. 25 to 75X. Not really concerned about the mini tripod as I will put this on a full size tripod. One concern is that it is not waterproof.

https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-52...pID=31-j0dkxHOL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

C70 manual

https://s3.amazonaws.com/celestron-site-support-files/support_files/1220558461_spotterinstc705.pdf




Celestron Trailseeker - 65 ($250) or 80 mm - $266

The 65 got a pretty good review at Audubon.
http://www.audubon.org/news/good-value

Standard eyepiece seems to be the same Celestron zoom I use in my telescopes. I can use my astronomy eyepieces in this one too.

https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-52...pID=31WHiy6-LiL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Celestron site
https://www.celestron.com/collections/spotting-scopes


So, any experience with these?

What else would you suggest, under $300.
 
Hi aeajjr.

For a start, I think you should forget the Celestron 70mm Maksutov.
The one I have is rather poor.
A Skywatcher or maybe Celestron, as they usually come from the same source, 90mm Maksutov is good but long focus and mainly for high power work.
Mine is good in strong sunshine but contrast is usually low. Excellent astro scope though.

I'd go with a refractor.
Skywatcher ones here, some take astro eyepieces.
I think they may be heavier than some?

Others here are more expert at spotting scopes. I am mainly an astro user.

If you wait you will probably get good advice.
 
Thanks for the response. I am an Cosmic Tourist myself. 3 telescopes, 20 eyepieces, 2 zooms, and all that go with it. Birding is still pretty new to me.
 
Does your wife use the bins on a tripod? If not, you'll be able to see more through a scope because of the tripod stabilized image, not just potentially higher magnification.

I'm not a fan of today's cheap scopes, especially their cheap zoom eyepieces. In the old days, most birders had scopes with ~25x magnification which they used for almost all bird ID at normal birding distances. So I'd suggest finding an old 60 mm with 25x eyepiece, such as an old Bushnell Spacemaster, B&L Balscope, or similar old Kowa. You might find a good one for under $100. Most important when buying scopes like this is to make sure that they aren't fogged internally, e.g. by fungus. I have several fancy scopes, but I very often use a Nikon 20x60 Fieldscope (original model, which dates to ~1981) since I keep it handy on a car window mount. I like it so much that I couldn't resist buying another recently in like new condition with eyepiece, case, and all original materials for $180. These scopes go surprisingly cheap because many buyers are deterred by the "low" magnification.

--AP
 
Thanks for the advice Alexis.

I use Opticron 8X32 binoculars. My wife 10-22X50 Nikon Aculon binoculars on a monopod. I am going to put them on a tripod to let her try them that way before we go buy a spotting scope. It will help but it still won't be enough.

I won't be considering a fixed magnification scope. She wants a zoom and she wants at least 45X and I am looking for 60 because I KNOW my wife. 45 won't be enough.

She is not looking to identify birds at "normal" birding distances, whatever that means to you. The 22X binoculars can do that. If she can see the bird with her eyes she wants to be able to identify it. She wants to be able to identify the birds on the other side of a lake, or across the bay 500 to 1000 yards away. For that I need higher magnification and a stable platform. Thus the spotting scope.

I am not sure if a 60 mm scope will have enough aperture for 60X for this purpose, so I may need to go to an 70 or an 80.

I have an 80 mm short tube refractor telescope that I use for astronomy. I will be taking it out with her to use it as a test case. I have a correct image 45 degree for it as well. I have a Celestron zoom that will give 33 to 100X in that scope. I will limit it to 60X for a more realistic test. This will let me see if that will satisfy her.

This particular scope would not make a good general purpose spotting scope but for this test it will be adequate.

Happy wife, happy life. ;)
 
Last edited:
I have Celestron f/5 80mm and 100mm refractors also, with Televue 45 deg upright prisms for daytime views.

The ED small scopes are probably better for terrestrial work.

For 1000 yards even a 100mm ED might be more useful.

A colleague just bought a 120mm Esprit triplet but hasn't commented yet on performance. Should be good.
 
Thanks for the responses. Very helpful.

If this was just for me I would use my Meade ETX 80 telescope with the 45 degree correct image. I am not too concerned about a little CA. This is for identification purposes not the study of subtle differences between a peach, pink or salmon feather.


I am looking that the Celestron C90 and the C5 as they would not have CA issues. But I think they may be more complex than she will want to deal with and likely too high power.

I have a Celestron travel scope 50 that she tried. It is a piece of junk but what she disliked was fumbling with diagonal and eyepieces. A built in zoom eyepiece is probably the path I want to take. Having the option of removing it and putting in one of my astronomy eyepieces is a + for me, but not something she will want to deal with.

For my wife it has to be compact, light and simple so it is going to be some kind of a purpose built spotting scope, something like the Celestron Trailseeker. I would prefer to stay around 60 mm for size and weight, but based on what I am reading, a 60 or 65 is going to top out at around 35 to 40X based on light gathering. So, it looks like I am going to have to go to an 80 mm of some kind if I want to push to 60X.


I very much appreciate people sharing what they are using and suggestions of what I should consider.


I will continue to monitor the local used market for some higher end bargains but so far I am not finding much.
 
Last edited:
Although some people have had good C5s, I haven't found really good ones.
I had an f/6 that I took to La Palma in the 1980s, it wasn't great.

I used an early 1970s C8, which was only good on one exceptionally superb night, otherwise not so good.

I have a Skywatcher 127mm Maksutov. It is O.K. but not that good at high power.
With main mirror focus, erect image prism etc. the focal lengths increase especially in the smaller Maksutovs.
My Skywatcher 90mm is 65x to 190x in daylight viewing with a Japanese Vixen 8-24mm eyepiece.

I think present day lower priced Maksutov quality may be better than earlier ones.

One only needs a big scope for long distance work at higher powers.

A higher end secondhand bargain is probably best, although it needs careful inspection.
 
aeajr said:
...She is not looking to identify birds at "normal" birding distances, whatever that means to you. The 22X binoculars can do that. If she can see the bird with her eyes she wants to be able to identify it. She wants to be able to identify the birds on the other side of a lake, or across the bay 500 to 1000 yards away...
Click to expand...

All of that seems very normal to me. Wanting to ID what you can see with your eyes is the definition of normal birding, and as a consequence, larger distances are usually only involved when it comes to ID of correspondingly larger birds. I use a 30x78 (or 82) scope for almost all scope birding. I find 30x plenty of magnification for ID of ducks at 500 to 1000 yards. For discriminating between many sandpiper species, it would not be enough, but neither would 60x (which is, after all, only 2x larger than 30x).

--AP
 
Last edited:
For a bit more I would recommend the Celestron Regal M2 65. I own one and it's really good for the price. Of course it can't compare to a Swarovski at higher magnifications but it's pretty good.

The next Celestron Regal model, 80 mm, reaches 60x with the same zoom. Although of course it's bulkier and heavier.

With the provided zoom it gives 16-48x. A couple of months ago I upgraded it to a Baader Hyperion zoom and got quite an improvement.

Make sure it's the M2 version of the Regal. The body is made of Magnesium and it's quite light.
 
Really appreciate all the responses.


Here is my current checklist:

  • Trying to stay under $300 US (we will see if that holds)
  • Included zoom eyepiece
  • 45 degree angle
  • 60X magnification - She wants to identify birds up to a mile away, across a lake or bay. I expect we will use 20 to 40 most of the time, but if that 60x isn't available I don't think she will be happy.
  • Waterproof - we have observed from the car in the rain using a window mount
  • leaning toward 80 mm but might pull that back to 60 or 65
  • Leaning toward two speed focuser but not sure how important that would be


Lead option, if buying new, is currently the Celestron Trailseeker 80 mm 20-60X 45 degree

https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-52...rds=celestron+trailseeker+spotting+scope&th=1


  • Has the ability to rotate the scope on the mount which could be helpful for window mount use of a 45 degree eyepiece.
  • Meets all of the above
  • In my price range
  • Can take astro eyepieces though I doubt I will be doing much of that.
  • Gets generally good reviews - have read/viewed several reviews and comparisons
  • Got a good review from Audubon - that was how I found it

If you have comments, they would be welcome. If you have specific alternatives, that would be welcome too. Not buying today, but likely within the next 60 days, as spring approaches.


The Celestron C90 and C5 are out of consideration. Their long FL/lack of low power, lack of included zoom and lack of water proofing knocks them off the list. I love that there would be no CA issues but wife will not like them. They look great for target shooting but I want to be able to get down to at least 25X for the low end and they are not practical with a zoom for our purposes.


C70 looked promising but I have received too many negative comments on that one. And the narrow FOV is a concern for acquiring targets.


For now I will be doing some testing with a Meade ETX 60 and ETX 80 with correct image diagonals to get a feel for mag and aperture needed to do what she wants to do. Will use my Celestron 8-24 mm zoom for the testing. Will also see if chromatic aberration is an issue for us in these short tube (350 and 400 mm) scopes.


I will continue to watch the local used market for used higher end scopes and will continue to read and benefit from all of your input.
 
Last edited:
One has to realise that there is sample variation with scopes and binoculars.
If a scope turns out to be poor it may be that another sample will be good.

I used to test 6 binoculars or 3 scopes before buying the best ones.

Often the dealer demonstrator is a good one, and I would buy that after viewing with it, rather than a new boxed one.
 
We ended up ordering the Celestron Trailseeker 80 20-60X with the 45 degree eyepiece. Amazon had one at a reduced price. New but the box was damaged. Full warranty and return privileges, so we could not resist.

I will let you know how it works out.
 
I second the Regal as a good option,..another good option is the Pentax PF65ED..especially if you own a good collection of astro eyepieces and can find a body-only used unit..You have a recent thread asking the limits of magnification for diurnal/birding use,and you mentioned that long distance viewing at high magnification is your main interest..I dont know if the Trailseeker is an ED model,but this is going to be a must for high magnification in an 80mm, 65mm or any magnification,unless you get something with a fairly long focal distance for its aperture,perhaps like the Nikon Fieldscope 60III,with an F:7 ratio
 
I know aeajr already made his purchase, but I wanted to comment on at least one of the things he mentions above since it may be helpful to other people making a scope purchase.

60X magnification - She wants to identify birds up to a mile away, across a lake or bay. I expect we will use 20 to 40 most of the time, but if that 60x isn't available I don't think she will be happy.
Click to expand...

From my experience, high magnifications, especially in lower cost scopes, are fairly useless. In most scopes I've looked through, anything past about 40x just makes things bigger without giving you any more details. This bigger blurrier image just gives you a headache as your eyes try to focus on it. I once looked through a Swaro scope that was fairly clear up to 50x+, but now we're talking something that costs several thousand dollars.

Additionally, atmospheric conditions will make IDing birds at these distances a mixed bag. On a good day you might be able to ID medium sized, well marked birds (such as ducks) from a mile away. But on a sunny day the heatwaves might make it tough to make out birds 1/3 of a mile away or even closer.
 
Josh,

I expect you are right. I will hopefully find out this weekend. If it was for me I would have been happy with a 60 mm 45X or 48X zoom. But if it wasn't enough she would have me out buying another with a 60X.

Don't get me wrong, my wife is great and I love her. She just wants to see the birds and she expects me to deliver. I am trying not to disappoint her without breaking the bank.

I went for the 80 mm instead of the 60 hopeful that the extra aperture would give that 60X a chance. Since 60 is about the highest most scopes go I have purchase insurance that I won't be going for another one to get to higher mag. ;)

I will be standing it next to my Meade ETX 80 with a correct image 45 degree diagonal as a comparison. Hopefully the spotter beats the telescope for terrestrial use.
 
Last edited:
Today we had a great day of bird watching starting around 10 am. Headed to the beach to test out the New Celestron Trailseeker 20-60 80 mm 45 degree.

In a range of about 400 to 500 feet, we were able to identify Buffel Heads in the bay, diving and feeding. (measured on Google Earth)

We visited a second beach. We tried to identify some birds about .4 miles away, over 2000 feet (google earth) but no luck. We could see them, even count them, but not well enough to identify them.

At a pond we were able to identify large turtles sunning themselves on a log in the water at about 400 feet (google Earth) across the pond.

I am not a qualified optics evaluator so I will simply say I am happy with my purchase. We were able to use it all the way to 60X with good effect. No noticeable CA. I am guessing it should be effective, under good conditions, up to about 600 feet for birds the size of geese. But time will tell. Remember, we are trying to identify them, not count their feathers. So we are looking at head shape, beak shape and color, body shape, feather color patterns and the like.

I would say we got very good views of individual birds the size of ducks at about 400 feet

We compared the view at 20X to the Nikon 10-22 X50 zoom binocular on a monopod. Mag was similar but the spotting scope was brighter and, steadier on the tripod.

No problem going up to 60X. No noticeable atmospheric issues other then some shake from the breeze which was hitting 10 mph.

I didn't have a Leica or similar to compare to but that's OK. The wife is happy and that is all I care about.

Since it will take astronomical eyepieces I may try to push it above 60X one of these days, but for now, it will be used as is.
 
Last edited:
Hi,

thanks for the review - good to hear you're content so far, how was the comparison vs. your ETX80 at high mag?
Hopefully you never meet a fellow birder with an expensive spotter and afterwards someone wants to upgrade...

Joachim, who likes to count feathers occasionally...
 
I am pleased to hear your scope is O.K.

I use my old cheap Acuter 80 45 degree prism at 95x, maybe just a Hughen eyepiece? False colour but I have seen 4 Jupiter belts through double glazing.

At 400 feet birds sitting on the chimney pots here are seen well with anything, binoculars or scope.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 2 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

L
Retired elementary teachers researching light weight spotting scope outfit
Replies
2
Views
956
CMB
C
Craig H
Spotting Scopes - Personal needs and perceptions vs optical ability
Replies
6
Views
2K
Craig H
Craig H
S
Quick positive review of Athlon Cronus G2 20-60x86 Spotting Scope
Replies
0
Views
622
sully6982
S
I
1.25" adapter for spotting scope zoom eyepieces ? (Nikon MEP 20-60 and Tract 27-55x)
Replies
1
Views
1K
wllmspd
W
K
Astro eyepieces for Vortex Razor spotting scope
Replies
1
Views
2K
henry link
H

Users who are viewing this thread

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