ATC or STC? (2 Viewers)

[GF99-99]

Hi All,

I was hoping to get some input/opinions on the dilemma I am in. I have my eye (no pun intended) set on the nice and compact 17-40 scope but I am torn between the angled or straight version. I have always owned angled scopes so I have little to know experience with a straight one but I really like the idea of it.

Reason I am getting this scope is for a couple uses. I want something that is more compact, lightweight and easy to hike around with. Also easier to travel with as well, I do a lot of wildlife sight seeing holidays. Aside for glassing birds and animals I also do quite a bit of bow hunting and spend ALOT! of time behind my binoculars but always wish I had something more but just could not be bothered to pack around a full size spotting scope. I really like the straight version as it seems like it would pack down alot easier and be very nice to use from a car window (im thinking about my holiday wildlife trips when I do big road trips through Africa) but at the same time I really like angled scops as it seems like they are just easier to use from a tripod (but maybe that is because that's what I'm use to)

What are others opinions on angled vs. straight and what have most people bought and are you happy with it?

 

[Hermann]

Actually you explained the advantages and disadvantages of angled and straight scopes very well. In the end you'll have to decide which scope suits your needs best. So the ball is back in your court ...

I used both straight and angled scopes over the past 40+ years. In the beginning I used straight scopes simply because there were hardly any angled scopes on the market (my first scope was a Nickel Supra 15-60x60), and I hadn't learnt about the Kowas (TS-1) at the time. I then switched to a Kowa TS-1, only to switch back to a straight scope when I got hold of a Zeiss Jena Asiola 63/420, simply because it was optically so good. Years later I switched again to an angled scope when the Leica Apo-Televid 77 came onto the market. Ever since then it's been angled scopes all the way - with one exception: I got a Nikon EDIII cheaply years ago when Nikon phased out the Fieldscopes that I use exclusively when observing from a car. But even from a car I find using an angled scope quite easy.

The reasons are simple: Angled scopes make observations from a tripod (or monopod) a lot easier, especially when you're tall. You need a shorter (and lighter) tripod. It's also more stable in windy conditions, and, because it's lower, it doesn't get in the way when you use your binoculars. Sharing your scope with others (" Want to have a look?") is easier, you don't have to adjust the height of the tripod quite so much. Finding birds in the scope, the main reason why people prefer straight scopes, is easy if you use Kimmo's cable-tie trick (Make your own simple sight (aiming) device for telescopes: illustrated instructions), even for flying birds. That trick actually works better on angled scopes.

Hermann

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

Hi All,

I was hoping to get some input/opinions on the dilemma I am in. I have my eye (no pun intended) set on the nice and compact 17-40 scope but I am torn between the angled or straight version. I have always owned angled scopes so I have little to know experience with a straight one but I really like the idea of it.

Reason I am getting this scope is for a couple uses. I want something that is more compact, lightweight and easy to hike around with. Also easier to travel with as well, I do a lot of wildlife sight seeing holidays. Aside for glassing birds and animals I also do quite a bit of bow hunting and spend ALOT! of time behind my binoculars but always wish I had something more but just could not be bothered to pack around a full size spotting scope. I really like the straight version as it seems like it would pack down alot easier and be very nice to use from a car window (im thinking about my holiday wildlife trips when I do big road trips through Africa) but at the same time I really like angled scops as it seems like they are just easier to use from a tripod (but maybe that is because that's what I'm use to)

What are others opinions on angled vs. straight and what have most people bought and are you happy with it?

Get the straight as per your explanation because you are used with angled scope in the past. I have both and used it on different occasion. But will stick with straight mainly for easier viewing and also for digiscoping...

 

[twitcherf]

Angled every time for me - I find looking through an angled scope far more comfortable than the heads up posture required for a Straight through. THis is particularly true if spending decent time sea-watching.

 

[Ignatius]

I have both. The BTX85 is angled, the AZF 30x75 S is straight. Much as I love the BTX, and much as @Hermann 's remarks are coherent, I wish to add that observing over longer periods of time with an angled scope tends to give me a neckache or a pain in my upper back (maybe C5 to Th3). This is from experience of watching 'my' owls sometimes for hours at a time. YMMV of course.

 

[Hermann]

Much as I love the BTX, and much as @Hermann 's remarks are coherent, I wish to add that observing over longer periods of time with an angled scope tends to give me a neckache or a pain in my upper back (maybe C5 to Th3). This is from experience of watching 'my' owls sometimes for hours at a time. YMMV of course.

Indeed it does. I find observing with an angled scope much more relaxing. Can do it for hours ...

Hermann

 

[kimsrk]

One thing I've noticed is that I prefer a straight scope if I am sitting while using it, but if I'm using it mostly while standing angled is much more comfortable, easier to share, and doesn't require as much tripod height.

I don't hunt but it seems like a lot of hunters prefer straight, I think at least partially, for the reason I mentioned above.

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

One thing I've noticed is that I prefer a straight scope if I am sitting while using it, but if I'm using it mostly while standing angled is much more comfortable, easier to share, and doesn't require as much tripod height.

I don't hunt but it seems like a lot of hunters prefer straight, I think at least partially, for the reason I mentioned above.

But the angled ATC do not have knob to rotate for sharing among different height of users...

 

[TheBlackGrouse]

When birding I cycle and/or hike, always.

For the last 15 years, my ATS 65 Swarovski scope was with me once a year. There was simply not enough space in my backpack for the spotting scope. And it was too heavy (tripod and video head are needed too).

This year I bought the STC, one monopod is enough, no video head.

Since that day the STC is always in my backpack.

The best scope is the one that's outside with you.

 

[AllanG]

I’m also considering the purchase of either an ATC or STC, and was wondering for those that own of these, how do you usually use it:-

ATC - tripod, monopod or hand held?
STC - tripod, monopod or hand held?

Also, if using a tripod or monopod, do you mount it directly onto the scope, or do you use a ball head or similar mount?

Cheers, Allan

 

[PatR]

I’m also considering the purchase of either an ATC or STC, and was wondering for those that own of these, how do you usually use it:-

ATC - tripod, monopod or hand held?
STC - tripod, monopod or hand held?

Also, if using a tripod or monopod, do you mount it directly onto the scope, or do you use a ball head or similar mount?

Cheers, Allan

Hi Allan

I have both angled and straight scopes and when I decided to get a compact scope, I decided on the ATC. Personal preference, tried both before purchase and I found the angled one more comfortable. Again both have pros and cons but the ATC suits me.

I can use it hand held at 17x but no further. Youth is not on my side!

I have both mono and tri pods and have found that a monopod with the ATC mounted direct is perfect for yomping around the hills. Plus, take the scope off and I have a walking stick.

The ATC/STC foot is not one of Absams finest designs (no locking pin and not ARCA compatible) and though it screws tightly direct to the monopod mounting plate there have been reports of it working loose. I haven’t experienced that as I wrap a bit of Plumbers PTFE tape around the screw thread. Perfik.

No need for a head, ball or fluid, as it adds weight and I can move up/down and around using my ancient body with consummate ease!

But, if I am static either at home or close to my MH then a lightweight tripod with a ball or fluid head is perfect.

The mono pod is a carbon Gitzo with a changeable rubber/spike foot and the tripod is a Gitzo Legende Traveler with the small ball head or the two way fluid head and I mount the ATC direct to either head with the supplied ARCA mounting plate.

 

[fazalmajid]

I find straight makes more sense in small scopes that may be used handheld or propped against a tree branch or other improvised support. They also take less space in a bag.

 

[AllanG]

Many thanks, Pat and Fazal, for your replies, which are most helpful👍

 

[GF99-99]

Hi All,

Thanks for the great responses.

Still have not fully decided what to get yet but I will take everyone's input into account.

 

[TheBlackGrouse]

For me, the straight version on a monopod is more stable since your head is an additional point of support, while your hand is at the same height resting on the top of the monopod. This limits the forward/backward movement. The T-shape of the combination gets an 'extra leg' with the straight version, it feels easier for your muscles to stabilize the scope when scope and head are in a straight line.

And this may be personal too: finding flying raptors is much easier with the straight version. My old ATS 65 was the angled version so I knew the difference.

Setting it up is very fast, I have an Arca-Swiss base plate directly mounted on the monopod.

And last but not least, the straight version simply glides into the camera insert of my backpack. For me this makes a huge difference since I have limited room in my backpack with a 10x42 Leica, a camera with tele lens, a macro lens, extra clothing, food, water etc.

 

[Leoninthecity]

I find straight makes more sense in small scopes that may be used handheld or propped against a tree branch or other improvised support. They also take less space in a bag.

100%.

On the other hand, if you are lying prone with the scope ahead of you resting upon a backpack, an angled scope is considerably less fatiguing to use. Too, a small angled scope like the ATC-17 is easier to use handheld whilst seated at a picnic table, with elbows propped on the table.

Both types have their pros and cons, but with a little ingenuity each one can be pressed into service without too much inconvenience; so I would say that the question 'which is better' is largely illusory. Like Fazal, I am influenced primary by the STC's slightly more compact layout.

 

[b_reynolds_ak]

A huge consideration that doesn't get enough attention imo is the aspect of switching between binos and spotter on a tripod.
I recently switched from the ATC to the STC for this very reason. When you are glassing with binos and then want to swap to an angled spotting scope, you have to completely change the positioning and height of the tripod. With a straight spotter, it is fluid and seamless to switch between the two without any fuss.

 

[Thrupenney Bit]

Just under a year ago I upgraded to a ATC65, a second hand purchase that happened to be angled.
My previous old scope was a straight, and to use it I had to extend all the tripod legs to bring it to eye level.
The angled scope has a great advantage for me. I carry it in a tripod backpack, scope attached and just one of the three legs extended and walk around with one leg in the extended position.
To use the scope I simply crank up the centre column of the tripod head to bring it to eye level, so no need to mess with extending then retracting the legs.
By sheer luck, with my height the angled scope works perfectly!