Opinion on low cost spotting scopes = (1 Viewer)

I use an old William Optics 66mm scope with 45degree erecting diagonal and either the baader zoom or a 13mm Nagler, I got a case that fits quite well from Teleskop Service in Germany. Does a good job. Wondering about larger scopes looks like I need a spotter as astro scopes are made “good” (Read made of lead!) and so get less portable fast (I have an 80mm refractor that weighs 3kg… don’t fancy lugging it anywhere!)
80 and 100mm spotters with OK/good optics that can definitely take 1.25” astro eyepieces would be good to know about. Something to really go after the small/far away stuff, but that I can put a long focal length super wide eyepiece in to enable me to find stuff without too much trouble.
I did wonder about binoviewing with a scope, but gave up (either need a Barlow or a Mak to reach focus thus limiting it to high power which is not ideal).

Good luck

PEterW

jring said:

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...

Click to expand...

I never did a side by side comparison of the ETX 80 to the TrailSeeker. But the ETX is larger, heavier and really intended for astronomy. Not likely to ever be put side by side, but if I do, I will post the results.

If you're looking for today's best spotting scopes, better check out this site https://outdoorempire.com/best-spotting-scopes-reviewed/

aeajr said:

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.

Click to expand...

Well in my opinion, for a 1000 yards any scope under 300$ WON'T cut it.. Your gonna have to save up big bucks I don't even see the Red feild rampage spotting scope reaching farther than 350 yards. Even most scopes at 600$ can't reach 1000 yards but IF you are thinking about saving up over (1300-1600$) then i have a suggestion. The one I recommend THE MOST is the nikon monarch ED82-A 20-60x82 this one is pretty good all the way up to 60x one of the finest scopes on the market. Once you have this you won't ever need to upgrade in the next 10 years.

I have a C5 that I use mostly as a spotting scope. It is really heavy at about 13 lbs or so, hence it requires a heavy duty tripod. Then you have to put it together before use, which can of be kind be a hassle. On the other hand, it outperforms even top end Alpha spotters in terms of raw optical performance. It is better with magnification, brightness, and resolution, and it has really good edge to edge performance. It has what other high end spotters don't and that's huge aperture. Where high end spotters best it, is with color fidelity as the Schmidt-Cassegrain design washes out some of the color, but not too bad. I still find the scope brings out the beauty of birds very well. I have a Bader zoom eyepiece on it which gives it the ability to zoom from about 52X up to 156X, though optical quality starts to degrade at above 105x. Though its nice to have that extra reach. One note about that, is that at higher magnification, the atmospheric movement can limit the views. But on clear still days, even 156x is usable. If I am going somewhere where I need to ID birds at distances where binoculars can only tell they're birds, I take the C5. At close distances I can see every exquisite detail. I have an adaptor that I can fit a Cannon camera onto and take close up, detailed pictures of birds. It is not a practical scope in terms of ruggedness, waterproofness, nor packability. But from the vehicle, it has few rivals. I can easily view the details of elk antlers at more than 3 miles away with this scope. If you want or need to id birds at very long distances from the vehicle, the C5 at about $500 is really tough to beat. I picked mine up used for about $200. On the other hand, the conveniences of spotting scopes have an advantage over the C5.

I also have a light weight 60mm inexpensive scope that weighs less than 2 lbs. It is the Alpen 728 angled spotter that I picked up for about a $100 back in 2007. I use it with a light weight carbon fiber tripod. It is my packing scope and works marvelously for that use. It's really only good up to about 30x even though it goes up to 45x. It does most of what I need a scope to do when I'm hiking on foot. It probably has similar performance to many scopes on the market for around that $300 or less price point. It's a really nice little scope to have for that use.

I also have a tripod adapter that I use with my Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42 binos. I find that I prefer my binoculars on a tripod over the Alpen spotter at intermediate distances, say less than 500-1000 yards. I'm often amazed at the detail I can see with just the binoculars on the tripod. Makes me question why I even need a spotter in most birding distances. I use my binoculars way way more than any spotter. I think bang for your buck, I would probably spend the money on a high quality pair of bins and a tripod first rather than on an inexpensive spotting scope. Once you have that, a good spotter is a nice touch.

Hi Kevin,

are you sure about those 13 pounds for the C5 - I found that one at 6.5 or so for the OTA... C6 at 8,5 and C8 at 12 pounds...
You'll have to add a pound and half for the Baader zoom and a 1.25" diagonal...

Joachim

jring said:

Hi Kevin,

are you sure about those 13 pounds for the C5 - I found that one at 6.5 or so for the OTA... C6 at 8,5 and C8 at 12 pounds...
You'll have to add a pound and half for the Baader zoom and a 1.25" diagonal...

Joachim

Click to expand...

You are right, its 6 lbs weight. I'm sorry, I was going off memory there. Must have got the wires crossed, memory isnt what it used to be. Six lbs is still heavy and requires a strong tripod. I use an old Star D professional tripod I picked up on ebay to put the C5 on.

The bright spark who thought up these snowflakes on the forum should think again when it comes to reading posts.

I also thought the weight of the C5 was too much..

I used a C5 f/6, and a C/5 f/10.
Also C90.

But my Custom Maksutov Cassegrain 150mm f/10 was superior to these for terrestrial views.

There are several astro refractors at $300 new that will outperform $3000 spotting scopes for distant terrestrial viewing.
But they are not waterproof and are longer than spotting scopes.

B.

Hi,

Binastro said:

There are several astro refractors at $300 new that will outperform $3000 spotting scopes for distant terrestrial viewing.
But they are not waterproof and are longer than spotting scopes.

Click to expand...

Could you suggest an example? Might be interesting for people who have a house with a view ...

Regards,

Henning

Skywatcher Evostar 90mm f/10 including AZ3 tripod and mount £175 plus VAT at 20%
£210 U.K.

Similar Celestron etc.

There is a good secondhand one in U.K. at £80, which is used at 180x often.

The Evostar 120mm f/8.3 OTA is £260 plus VAT in U.K.
I don't know how much in U.S.
Similar clones.

I don't think the Russian Tal 100mm f/10 refractor is still available new.
But this is a very good telescope.
Maybe only secondhand hand now.

There are others, particularly older Japanese 80mm f/15 refractors.

Secondhand Skywatcher 150mm f/8 refractors are found at £250 secondhand fairly often.
These have false colour but are seriously large and capable.
They need to be inspected for possible fungus and as to optical quality.
They have been used to make 150mm binoculars with two side by side.

Regards,
B.

Binastro said:

The bright spark who thought up these snowflakes on the forum should think again when it comes to reading posts.

Click to expand...

You can turn them off by going to your preferences, ticking 'Disable holiday styling' and hitting 'Save'.

Thanks Mono.

What a relief.

Regards,
B

I recently developed a new floater in my eye and I thought I was having vision problems when I notice the snowflakes. I like them.

There are also 102mm f/10 refractors listed here in the U.K. at £239 but only one eyepiece.

Although birdwatchers seem to be very concerned with chromatic aberration in their spotting scopes, I think at distances of over a mile, and with average $3,000 spotting scopes not appearing to be all cherries, I think the average doublet long focus non ED refractor will show more deail.
It is also less likely to be affected by temperature problems and tube currents.

To be an achromat a 100mm telescope should be f/12 and a 125mm f/15.

But, for instance, the Harvard 9.5 inch observatory telescope is only f/12, when it should be f/28.
It performs well.


The 90mm f/10 refractor secondhand at £80 produced beautiful Mars drawings, more like colour paintings at about 180x.
The observer is skilled.
It may be sold now.

I have had marvellous views with 120mm f/8.3 doublet refractors.
At long distances I doubt that a $3,000 spotting scope would get near the detail seen in the 120mm f/8.3.

B.