Edward woodwood
Member
pduxon said:
Yeah Pete n Steve
sounds light doesn't it. I got it of a spec on the internet. I realy ought to go and weigh mine.....they are plastic remember but it can't be right can it?
-
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.
New scope and tripod from scratch (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Malcolm Onley
- Start date
Yeah Pete n Steve
sounds light doesn't it. I got it of a spec on the internet. I realy ought to go and weigh mine.....they are plastic remember but it can't be right can it?
Edward woodwood
Member
you're right chaps
27 ish ounces
27 ish ounces
Edward woodwood
Member
Oi!
I do keep myself fit with copious amounts of football but seven stones I aint Steve
I did measure it precisely with old fashioned balance scales so it should be close to correct......
I do keep myself fit with copious amounts of football but seven stones I aint Steve
I did measure it precisely with old fashioned balance scales so it should be close to correct......
Edward woodwood
Member
Hi Steve
I never take offence anyway. Life's too short. I like to think I punch above my weight in the midfield though (metaphorically of course!)
I never take offence anyway. Life's too short. I like to think I punch above my weight in the midfield though (metaphorically of course!)
wizard
Well-known member
well you have very sound advice above and we have all been in the same boat. all i can add is, do your home work and try them all is you like.
myself i went for the Swarovski ATA 80 HD with 20-6- zoom. Swar stay on case becasue the Skau are crap for that scope, manfr tripod and filter on the front objective which will protect the lens etc. i am very, well just say over the moon!!!!
fantastic setup & would not change a thing. not heavey like some i have seen & stable enough for all my needs. if anyone is daft enough to leave a scope setup in a gale & it blows down more fool them, heavy is not the best just makes it more draining as the day goes on.
go for the best you can afford or leave it until you can afford dont just rush at a cheap one & regrete it.
i am now set for life.
good luck
myself i went for the Swarovski ATA 80 HD with 20-6- zoom. Swar stay on case becasue the Skau are crap for that scope, manfr tripod and filter on the front objective which will protect the lens etc. i am very, well just say over the moon!!!!
fantastic setup & would not change a thing. not heavey like some i have seen & stable enough for all my needs. if anyone is daft enough to leave a scope setup in a gale & it blows down more fool them, heavy is not the best just makes it more draining as the day goes on.
go for the best you can afford or leave it until you can afford dont just rush at a cheap one & regrete it.
i am now set for life.
good luck
Scott Crabtree
Member
This is yet another interesting thread, and I know my comment will be off of Malcolm's topic, but since the topic of a shoulder-mount scope was raised, I'll mention the set up I have, for what it's worth.
When I know I'm going to use a scope intermittently, or a great distance from the car, I carry a Nikon Sky and Earth 60mm (I believe they're also called RAII) with a 20x eyepiece. The scope is mounted on a BushHawk shoulder pod, and I can sling the whole kit over my shoulder or strap it to a back pack.
The 20X eyepiece yields a pretty nice view, and with practice, I can hold it quite steady. It works nicely for hawk watching. It also travels nicely - it will go with me to Arizona in May, even thought the security inspectors at the airport do look a bit askance at it!
The whole set-up cost me just under $300 US. The big Nikon travels with me more and more, now that I lug it around on a Tri-pack, but for real light-weight travel the little scope and a shoulder pod can't be beat. It's also nice to have a back-up or second scope when I'm leading bird trips here in Maryland - I can loan it to the "telescopically-disadvantage!"
Scott Crabtree
When I know I'm going to use a scope intermittently, or a great distance from the car, I carry a Nikon Sky and Earth 60mm (I believe they're also called RAII) with a 20x eyepiece. The scope is mounted on a BushHawk shoulder pod, and I can sling the whole kit over my shoulder or strap it to a back pack.
The 20X eyepiece yields a pretty nice view, and with practice, I can hold it quite steady. It works nicely for hawk watching. It also travels nicely - it will go with me to Arizona in May, even thought the security inspectors at the airport do look a bit askance at it!
The whole set-up cost me just under $300 US. The big Nikon travels with me more and more, now that I lug it around on a Tri-pack, but for real light-weight travel the little scope and a shoulder pod can't be beat. It's also nice to have a back-up or second scope when I'm leading bird trips here in Maryland - I can loan it to the "telescopically-disadvantage!"
Scott Crabtree
Geoff Brown
Well-known member
Scott I have a setup similar to yours plus the digiscoing attachments for a coolpix 4500. As you say it is an ideal lightweight go anywhere outfit.
dogfish
Well-known member
fiacha said:
Interesting point that. Does anyone have any experience of adding a filter to a top-of-the-range scope? The attractions of protecting your expensive objective lens are obvious, but does it make anything other than a theoretical difference to the quality of the view?
Last edited by a moderator:
scampo
Steve Campsall
Well it certainly is unlikely to improve the view because it's an extra medium through which the light has to travel; but it might help cut through haze as most plain filters are U/V and have a slight pinkish tint. A good filter should be fine, though, I would say.
There was a thread about this a while back where someone had a problem with a Jessop's filter attached to a Leica ApoTelevid 77 and in the end bought a Leica filter for, I think, around £70!
My advice would be to buy from a local photo dealer and explain the use you're putting it to - I have always used Hoya SMC myself for photo use and never had any problems. Generally, I would say that Jessop's filters are highly regarded but can only deduce that their quality control is more variable than the best makes.
There was a thread about this a while back where someone had a problem with a Jessop's filter attached to a Leica ApoTelevid 77 and in the end bought a Leica filter for, I think, around £70!
My advice would be to buy from a local photo dealer and explain the use you're putting it to - I have always used Hoya SMC myself for photo use and never had any problems. Generally, I would say that Jessop's filters are highly regarded but can only deduce that their quality control is more variable than the best makes.
Last edited:
